ScreenFish

where faith and film are intertwined

OtherFish

21 Things You Forgot About Being a Kid: Learning from the Next Generation

by Leave a Comment

What can we learn from the generations coming up after us? Dr. Rick Stevenson shares what he has learned after nearly twenty years of interviewing children and adolescents.

21 Things book cover

I was introduced to Rick Stevenson through Greg Wright, a long-time internet friend and mentor. Greg was my boss for most of the time I was writing for Hollywood Jesus – somewhere back in the Dark Ages. (It’s hard to believe I left HJ nearly four and a half years ago.) Greg had introduced me to the Millennials documentary series which was shown on the Ovation network in 2016. Screenfish was kind enough to let us share my interview with Greg and my subsequent review of the documentary.

In 2001, Rick created the 5000 Days Project, which the website tells us

is a global organization dedicated to developing emotional intelligence (EQ). We apply the StoryQ method of deep inquiry combined with video journaling technology to bring a low-cost and easy-to-implement tool into schools and communities allowing all kids to self-reflect and process in a safe environment.

As of the book’s release as an ebook in July, Rick has “conducted over 5500 in-depth interviews” with school-age children up to high school. The Project stresses the importance of Social and Emotional Intelligence, and was developed in consultation with experts in the fields, including Stevenson’s friend Dr. John Medina, author of the Brain Rules series.

Coming from a conservative Christian environment, I have long been aware of the need to get a handle on my emotions so they do not rule me. Unfortunately, I think too many in conservative circles have misunderstood the role of emotions in our lives. Too often a stoic approach is taken, ignoring one’s emotions rather than dealing with them. What often seems to happen is that the hidden emotions are still controlling the person, largely because they refuse to acknowledge the effect emotions play in shaping our lives. For example, if you are making choices based on fear, and you refuse to acknowledge you have those fears, you end up making excuses for your beliefs and actions instead of honestly examining the role this emotion has played in shaping your beliefs and actions. Xenophobia can often be excused in this way. How often have we witnessed someone who has obvious prejudices insist they are not prejudiced?

Rick’s book helps us remember what it was like to be a kid, and that remembrance can be the start of understanding who we are. It can also help us better understand those around us. According to Jesus, our mission here on earth can be summed up in two commands: Love God, and Love one another. The agape love the Bible speaks about is not emotionless. It is more than an emotion, as it seeks the best for the one loved, but the concept does include emotion. Jesus’ mission on earth was to show us what God is like. The Gospels continuously tell us that Jesus was filled with compassion for for those around Him. His actions on behalf of others was not some kind of calculated stoic response based on some mathematical calculation of what is best for the person. His actions were precipitated by an emotional response to the need He witnessed.

We have gotten emotions exactly backwards. Some of us were even taught to make the brain the engine and the heart the caboose. That is not how it works. (See the animation video near the bottom of the page on The 5000 Days Project’s home page.) Putting the emotions in a “caboose” role causes us to ignore what our emotions are trying to tell us. Only by knowing what our heart is telling us can we examine who we really are. Certainly our emotions can be lying to us, but we cannot know that unless we are listening to them and examining them. As I asserted earlier, our emotions will still lead us whether we acknowledge them or not.

If any of the above has sparked an interest in Emotional Intelligence, or causes you to want to try to understand yourself and others better, Rick’s book would be a good place to start. Broken down into 21 quickly-read and easily-digested chapters, 21 Things You Forgot About Being a Kid is a delight to read. Be sure also to read the Foreword and Introduction, as these provide background and insight into what is to follow. 21 Things is available as an ebook on Amazon.com. (If you don’t have Kindle, you can download the PC or Android versions for free.)

Womanhood in Proverbs 31, Theopoetics – Your Sunday Drive Podcast

by Leave a Comment

Your Sunday Drive Podcast

Want to go past surface meanings of scripture to something deeper? Truer? Wiser? Ever thought about creativity as a vehicle for that?

In this special “anniversary” episode of the Your Sunday Drive podcast: Our first ever guest, Kindra Silk Kreislers, brings a new perspective on the Proverbs 31 woman and talks about theopoetics.

Also: Using context and genre in interpretation, other common places in the Bible to apply this line of thinking, Jesus the Word vs. God’s word, not making the Bible the “fourth person of the Trinity,” jokes about Kindra’s Russian husband, Matt and Nate both attempting not to mansplain to varying degrees of success, etc. 🙂 

Outrage Culture & Identity Politics, Black Mirror, Game of Thrones Finale

by Leave a Comment

Your Sunday Drive Podcast

TRIGGER WARNING: You might need a safe space for this episode of the Your Sunday Drive podcast.

What’s it about? Outrage or call-out culture. Identity politics. Our seemingly too-easily-offended age and how Christians might navigate it with some wisdom.

Other related topics come into it as well: Privilege, the influence of the internet and social media, etc.

We also do a quick plug for new Black Mirror and go in-depth on the Game of Thrones finale. What were the spiritual takeaways? Find out!

Check Out the Your Sunday Drive Podcast!

by Leave a Comment

Your Sunday Drive Podcast

Hey everyone!

I’ve been so proud to write for Screenfish over the years. Now I’m excited to share a new project I’ve been working on – one that very much fits into the mold of examining spirituality in culture:

The Your Sunday Drive podcast!

So what’s this podcast all about? Simple: Quick conversation about current events, politics, pop culture and more, all from the perspective of a couple of guys trying to follow Jesus.

Our most recent episode tackled the current abortion debate. Before that, we did episodes on the Avengers, faith and science, Easter, the Final Four and spirituality in sports, Sekiro and spirituality in gaming, and much more!

I hope you appreciate this new endeavor as much as I hope you’ve appreciated my previous posts. Look for more episodes to show up regularly here, and please subscribe to us on iTunes, Google Podcasts, Spotify, etc., and like, comment, review, share and all that!

Why I Love (and Fear) Jordan Peterson & Russell Brand

by Leave a Comment

Jordan Peterson and Russell Brand

tldr version

Jordan Peterson
and Russell Brand
both see a
current crisis
and both see it as
primarily “spiritual”

however, for each,
there are issues
when it comes to how
*truth*
and “spirituality” relate

and how they relate
is vital

bit longer version

fanboying

i love me some
Peterson and Brand

always generally dug
Brand’s flicks
and standup,
and have been a
fan of his podcast/YouTube
for a year plus

(fun fact:
the pic above is
from once when
Peterson went
on said podcast;
and don’t they look
smashing together?
🙂 )

Peterson came to
my attention
more gradually,
but then like a
hurricane recently –
seriously:
give him a Google
and marvel at the
moment he’s been having

i have Recovery and
12 Rules for Life
on my bedside table
(along with some more
explicitly Christiany books
and a tablet, upon which
i theoretically read,
but mainly just
obsess over guitar gear
i don’t really need)

both are excellent texts
and both feel
supremely plugged in
to a zeitgeisty sense
that something’s amiss,
in general,
with ppl rn

(i agree)

both also,
and both men
in their public lives,
propose something
like a
spiritual cause
for this
“something amiss” –
what might be called a
“spiritual crisis of meaning”
stemming from
God
(or something like God;
more on this later)
no longer holding
significant sway
for so many

(i agree for sure)

caveating

please note here
that these gentlemen
are obv far more complex
than i’m making
them seem, as is
this whole topic
(and i’m not
even addressing
their politics);
i’m attempting to
essentialize here;
i considered deep diving,
but am refraining
for the sake of brevity
and also because i’m
kind of lazy

in any case, here are
some decent articles
related to this post;
go ahead and Google –
there’s plenty more:

“Jordan Peterson vs. Russell Brand”

“The religious hunger that drives Jordan Peterson’s fandom”

“Is Dr. Jordan Peterson A Gateway Drug to Christianity, Or Just A Highbrow Joel Osteen?”

here are two of my own,
also related:

“Get Re-Enchanted: Stranger Things 2, Pop Culture & God”

“What IT Means (and How *Any* Good Story “Means”)”

problematizing

but here’s the problem:
as much as i *love*
Peterson and Brand’s
respective approaches
to the significance
of the spiritual,
i *fear* that
neither approaches
*truth* sufficiently

what do i mean?

well, with Brand,
the issue appears to be
lack of specificity –
many manifestations
of spirituality
might address the
problems he sees
(note that his book
is based on the 12-steps,
which speaks of “God,
as we understand him”)

and while this is
well and good to a point,
of course,
in the end,
truth commonly understood
is *specific* and *exclusive*
by its nature,
and not addressing this,
it seems to me,
is a problem

for Peterson,
the issue is confusing
*truth*
with something like
“what works”

he tells us to live by a
certain ethic
and seek a certain meaning
grounded in
certain Jungian archetypes,
not because it is true
or because the
archetypes are –
at least not in
the usual
historical/correspondence
way generally meant –
but because it
just happens to reflect
how things have gone
re: humans
when it comes to
our psychology
from an
evolutionary perspective;
it is what is and
therefore what “works”
and therefore “true”

again, all well and good
to attach some
functionality to truth,
of course,
perhaps,
but conflating the two,
it seems to me,
is a problem

also, this is why
Peterson kind of
dodges/ducks/complicates
the question he’s
often asked:
“do you believe in God;”
he may or may not,
but he definitely
does not think of
that question primarily
as it relates to *truth*
commonly understood

finning

and so:
when it comes to
Peterson and Brand,
i love them,
but i also fear them

i find them both
engaging and articulate
and brilliant, etc.,
and *correct;*
but, concerningly,
on this point,
only to a point

i want people to
hear their message(s) –
i know good can come
of it –
but i fear ill may too

i see them as
important,
*prophetic* even
in this current moment –
both have
cut through the mix
in a way that’s so
unusual anymore,
given the noise –
but probably only
“part way down the path”
to the true destination
they both seem to
have glimpsed
(or, better,
which has glimpsed them):

not God
“as we understand him,”
not a “God” that
simply works,
but the *true* God

the true God
as He really is

 

When the English Fall – Post-Apocalyptic Tale through Amish Eyes

by Leave a Comment

In post-apocalyptic fiction we are used to seeing the dystopian aftermath. Gangs, lawlessness, greed, violence. When the English Falls by David Williams has all that, but it is on the periphery of the story. At the center is a man of faith trying to understand what God is calling him, his family, and his community to be and to do.

The book is in the form of a journal kept by an Amish farmer and carpenter named Jacob. He and his family live in rural Pennsylvania. His daughter is troubled by seizures and dreams that may be prophetic. Jacob is uneasy about keeping the journal because it seems vain and prideful. However, he feels the need to continue to better understand himself.

When the journal begins, the only stress is his daughter’s illness. But one evening there is a massive aurora borealis and in the aftermath all electronics and most of the machines in the world are disabled. That is only a minor inconvenience for the Amish community, because they have so little of those things. But as the days progress life in the cities becomes very difficult. At first the farmers send food to the cities, but even that cannot keep up with the shortages. Soon there is news of violence—first in the cities, then working its way out into the country. Soon that violence comes very close indeed.

The Amish do not feel justified by their lifestyle—thinking how smart it seems now to have eschewed most technology. Rather they understand that they have responsibilities to the world around them. When the middleman who sells Jacob’s furniture shows up with his family, Jacob takes him into his home, even though it will cause his own family to have less. As the violence comes closer and closer, some of the non-Amish local farmers form their own militia to try to prevent looting and theft. They would surely protect their Amish neighbors, but the Amish feel uncomfortable in “safety” that is found in violence, even if they are not being violent.

Jacob often reflects his own questions about how this could happen, but it is always in the context of his faith. And it is a dynamic faith that calls him to act selflessly in the face of both violence and the needs of others. As the story progresses (it takes place over about three months), he and the others in his community will be faced with difficult decisions. The question they are most likely to ask is what is it God wants them to do in these troubled times. And they know from their decision to live the simple life of the Amish way that God does not make their life easy. But to live any other way would be to fail to live as they believe God has called them. In those actions they redefine what we may think of as heroism in a dystopian world.

The Dark Tower Ending Explained

by 1 Comment

screenfish matt hill dark tower
[there be SPOILERS ahead,
may it do ya fine]

yesterday i finished
sai Stephen King’s
The Dark Tower series –
entered the clearing
at the end of that path

it took me right around a year,
all told;
i think the longest extended
narrative i’ve ever read

by way of a mini-review:
i dug it 🙂

i’m a fan of King
and his style,
and the story here is
obv epic in scope,
full of wonders, adventure,
humor, tragedy,
characters you can relate to,
ones you wish you couldn’t,
and, ultimately,
it MEANS something
(more on that soon)

it was not perfect,
certainly –
many sections
and even entire books
got to be a bit of a slog
(like the characters’
journeys themselves),
there were build ups
to ultimate let downs,
promises not kept imo,
digressions, confusions, etc.,
much of which may be
due to the series’
long, fascinating
actual history
(which you can google) –
but in the end, for me,
it was worth the trip
for sure

saying more would only
hold up what i
mainly intend to say:

The Dark Tower Ending Explained

so what does the
series
and its ending
mean?

for such a long,
complex tale,
and such a
seemingly tricky question,
it’s surprisingly simple

The Dark Tower is
a story about stories

what about stories?

they end.

they themselves
inevitably reach
the clearing
at the end of the path.

to shoot straighter:
stories resolve.

King himself,
near the end of Book 7,
the last,
even cheekily
chides the reader
for needing
an ending,
basically daring us
not to read on;
but nevertheless,
he gives us the end
as he knows he must

and, also, as well,
the specific end he gives,
in context,
underlines the point:
stories resolve

see, The Dark Tower
is about how
“there are other worlds
than these;”
about, basically,
“the multiverse” –
the idea that
there are
different worlds,
and also that the lives
of the different
people within them
(including those of
King himself and
his decades-deep
cast of characters)
are somehow
actually happening together,
intertwined in space/time

sitting at
multiverse center?
the Dark Tower itself –
the nexus of all worlds

a knight errant –
Roland Deschain,
the gunslinger,
the main character –
is destined by ka
to seek this tower
and reach the
room at its summit;
the series tells
of this quest

at the end of Book 7,
the coda,
Roland reaches the
top of the tower,
only to walk through
a door
(and back in time)
to the opening line
of Book 1:

“The man in black fled across the desert, and the gunslinger followed.”

in other words,
the multiverse
is not only made
of many worlds,
it also apparently
runs in many cycles –
the “end” is
just the beginning

but, however,
most ultimately importantly,
just as the many worlds
of the multiverse
converge on the one spot,
one thing for Roland
is different
in this one new cycle
that begins at the end:
he has an item
(the Horn of Eld,
though the specifics
probably aren’t
what’s important)
which promises
the possibility
of a final and last cycle –
an actual end,
the inevitable resolution

So What?

great question 🙂

one this post
won’t address

but i encourage you
to ask more deeply:

why do stories resolve?

why must they?

why must we humans
tell them –
all of them variations
of the same
resolving tale,
over and over?

(for a bit of
my personal take, see:
“What IT Means (and How *Any* Good Story ‘Means’)”

here’s a hint:
it has something to do
with Gan (God),
commala come you)

in any case,
long days
and pleasant nights
to ya –
till you too
reach the clearing

 

A Wrinkle in Time: Madeleine L’Engle’s Wrinkled Theology

by 2 Comments

One of my biggest regrets is I did not read more “classic novels” when I was growing up. I was well into my adulthood before I read such books as Of Mice and Men and Watership Down. My first reading of A Wrinkle in Time was in 2009 when I was spearheading Hollywood Jesus’ LOST Library. The television show, LOST (remember the plane that crashed on an island and the enigmatic happenings there?), often alluded to novels and other literature, and there was an interest in those books on the internet because of this.

Madeleine L’Engle’s “theology” – especially her purported “universalism” – is just as controversial today as it was in 1962 when the book was first published. As I wrote in my review, “Love Covers All Wrinkles,”

A Wrinkle in Time was so controversial when it was completed in 1960 that it was rejected by over twenty publishers before it was published in 1962. Her belief in Christian Universalism resulted in her works being banned from certain Christian bookstores and schools. However, A Wrinkle in Time became Madeleine L’Engle’s most recognized and awarded work, and is the first of a series in her Time Quintet. I do not agree with her Universalism, but found the book profitable nonetheless.

It is easy to be critical. Disney’s new adaptation of the book is currently being lambasted by the press, garnering a “rotten” rating by critics on RottenTomatoes.com, and only a 37% audience rating. I have not seen the movie yet, so I cannot comment on how good it is. But I have a hint, from what I have read on the internet, I would be more approving than a former colleague who concluded,  “…the message it hammers you with is not only disheartening, but could truly prove to be quite confusing to younger viewers.”

It must be remembered that the movie, as well as the book, are meant for “younger” audiences. So, I am not too disappointed that on a second reading nine years later I find Wrinkle a bit shallow.  I was also surprised what a quick read it is. But these can be positive things which recommend the book for an audience of a certain age. The theme of love conquering the darkness may not be presented with much nuance or sophistication, but sometimes the obvious is what children (and often adults) need.

What I do find profound is L’Engle’s presentation of what Evil is. She could have shown a society torn by war. That, indeed, can result from Evil. She could have portrayed a world perverted by greed and vice. But she chose to show a world which is profoundly compliant – everyone doing exactly what they are “supposed to do” – to an extreme. It is the perfect Camazotz—a word I take to be a play on King Arthur’s Camelot. A world where all strife and differences are being eliminated. How could that be so bad?

Meg, the young protagonist, has an epiphany after she, in order to resist IT, recites the Preamble of the Declaration of Independence, including the words, “all men are created equal.”

As she cried out the words she felt a mind moving in on her own, felt IT seizing, squeezing her brain. Then she realized that Charles Wallace was speaking, or being spoken through by IT. “But that’s exactly what we have on Camazotz. Complete equality. Everybody exactly alike.” For a moment her brain reeled with confusion. Then came a moment of blazing truth. “No!” she cried triumphantly. “Like and equal are not the same thing at all!” [L’Engle, Madeleine. A Wrinkle in Time (A Wrinkle in Time Quintet Book 1) (pp. 153-154). Farrar, Straus and Giroux (BYR). Kindle Edition.]

God created us equal, but He didn’t create us all alike. He relishes diversity. Just look at his creation around you! The Apostle Paul put it this way:

Don’t let the world around you squeeze you into its own mould, but let God re-mould your minds from within, so that you may prove in practice that the plan of God for you is good, meets all his demands and moves towards the goal of true maturity. [Romans 12: 2 J.B. Phillips New Testament]

The method of governments, and often religion, is to put outward pressure on us to get us to conform. To all be the same – to all be alike. God wants to change our hearts from the inside, recognizing the diverse way He has made us, conquering the darkness – not by intimidation and fear, but through love. Let that wrinkle your theology a bit. (Please. Let it.)

The main complaint by conservative Christians through the years, however, has been the assertion L’Engle’s work promotes relativism. Because Jesus and Buddha are mentioned in the same passage as those who fought “the darkness,” many critics have gotten bent out of shape. It reminds me somewhat of the controversy over Ben Barnes’ statements during an interview in 2010. Barnes (who portrayed Prince Caspian in the second and third Narnia movies) was misrepresented by Britain’s MailOnline as saying Aslan “is also based on other religious leaders [besides Jesus Christ] such as Mohammed and Buddha.” What he actually said in that interview has been recorded elsewhere, including a report I did for HJ’s Narnia News:

Aslan symbolises a Christ-like figure but he also symbolises for me Mohammed, Buddha and all the great spiritual leaders and prophets over the centuries. That’s who Aslan stands for as well as a mentor figure for kids – that’s what he means for me. [Emphasis added. …]

Barnes knew where C.S. Lewis got the idea for Aslan. He was merely stating his own personal reflections. We Christians, especially those of us who write on such websites as Screenfish.net, often appropriate Christian ideas from films which the writers and producers did not intend. I obviously don’t have a problem with that, and I’m just as willing to let those of other faiths do the same with materials that have a Christian bent.

After discussing the “Emeth passage” from the last book of the Narnia series, I concluded Lewis was not a universalist, but that he would not deprecate an honest seeker who disagreed with him. “I don’t think that Lewis would be shattered because Neeson sees Mohammed and Buddha in Aslan. If Neeson finds other spiritual leaders besides Christ in Aslan, then perhaps it is because he sees something of Christ in them and someday will find what he is truly seeking.” (See my December 2010 article here.)

Barnes may well believe in relativism, but our hope should ever be the truth proclaimed, by however flawed the messenger, would be sifted by the Holy Spirit, eventually leading him to Him who is the Truth. But what about L’Engle? What did she mean by including Buddha and others in a list beginning with Jesus? Let’s try to understand by looking at the passage where this is found.

“And we’re not alone, you know, children,” came Mrs Whatsit, the comforter. “All through the universe it’s being fought, all through the cosmos, and my, but it’s a grand and exciting battle. I know it’s hard for you to understand about size, how there’s very little difference in the size of the tiniest microbe and the greatest galaxy. You think about that, and maybe it won’t seem strange to you that some of our very best fighters have come right from your own planet, and it’s a little planet, dears, out on the edge of a little galaxy. You can be proud that it’s done so well.” “Who have our fighters been?” Calvin asked. “Oh, you must know them, dear,” Mrs Whatsit said. Mrs Who’s spectacles shone out at them triumphantly, “And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not.” “Jesus!” Charles Wallace said. “Why of course, Jesus!” “Of course!” Mrs Whatsit said. “Go on, Charles, love. There were others. All your great artists. They’ve been lights for us to see by.”
“Leonardo da Vinci?” Calvin suggested tentatively. “And Michelangelo?” “And Shakespeare,” Charles Wallace called out, “and Bach! And Pasteur and Madame Curie and Einstein!” Now Calvin’s voice rang with confidence. “And Schweitzer and Gandhi and Buddha and Beethoven and Rembrandt and St. Francis!” “Now you, Meg,” Mrs Whatsit ordered. “Oh, Euclid, I suppose. …And Copernicus.” [L’Engle, Madeleine. A Wrinkle in Time (A Wrinkle in Time Quintet Book 1) (pp. 84-85). Farrar, Straus and Giroux (BYR). Kindle Edition.]

It is often said, “All truth is God’s truth.” This is not a relativistic statement that anything claiming to be the truth is just as valid as any other claim. It is the belief that whenever anything is found to be true, it is true because God has made it to be true. This has ever been affirmed throughout Christianity as early as Augustine, who said, “…let every good and true Christian understand that wherever truth may be found, it belongs to his Master…” [On Christian Doctrine, II.18] It is evident from the passage above this is one point the author was trying to make. Light is not only shed by religious leaders, but through science. God has used the enlightenment of science to bring us out of many dark places. Until very recently in modern history, scientific advancement was generally, with few exceptions, promoted by the Church.

With the exception of Gandhi and Buddha, the entire list of people mentioned as fighting the darkness are either scientists,* Christian ministers, or artists. Certainly the arts have moved many with a vision of beauty and the glory of God. And Gandhi and Buddha’s ideas certainly have brought a measure of enlightenment to their followers. No one mentioned – with the exception of Jesus – was perfect. But neither were Meg and Calvin and Charles. Yet they were enlisted in the fight.

And so are we.

Perhaps it is high time we learned to fight the darkness with love instead of fighting those we do not think are worthy of joining the fight.

Now John answered and said, “Master, we saw someone casting out demons in Your name, and we forbade him because he does not follow with us.” But Jesus said to him, “Do not forbid him, for he who is not against us is on our side.”
Now it came to pass, when the time had come for Him to be received up, that He steadfastly set His face to go to Jerusalem, and sent messengers before His face. And as they went, they entered a village of the Samaritans, to prepare for Him. But they did not receive Him, because His face was set for the journey to Jerusalem. And when His disciples James and John saw this, they said, “Lord, do You want us to command fire to come down from heaven and consume them, just as Elijah did?” But He turned and rebuked them, and said, “You do not know what manner of spirit you are of. For the Son of Man did not come to destroy men’s lives but to save them.” [Luke 9:49-55 NKJV]

____________________
*If A Wrinkle in Time were being written today, I am sure the list would include Stephen Hawking, who died yesterday. Whatever else you may think of him, he indeed added light to our understanding of the universe. You may be interested in a piece I wrote in 2009 about his A Brief History of Time. You can read it here.

Still Dark: Debut Novel Puts Innovative Bite Into Horror

by Leave a Comment

It’s not easy to be scary.

No really, take a shot.

We’ll wait.

And when you get done with that, try your hand at being funny. Or endearing. Or poignant.

Any luck?

How about trying to be all of the above?

A handful of actors can pull it off, maybe a few writers too.  But how many can do it on their first attempt?

Author D.W. Gillespie will be the first to admit his new debut novel, Still Dark, was not, in fact, his first rodeo in the wild world of the written word.  But bow howdy, it sure is one heck of a ride.

It’s a page-turning, action-packed roller coaster of fright and feeling that can make you gasp, laugh and cry—sometimes all within the same chapter. It’s a fresh new take on an oft-mined genre that delivers solid prose and imaginative twists.

Set in Gillespie’s beloved Tennessee, Still Dark opens with a bang (literally) when a mysterious shockwave stuns travelers at a mountain retreat. It isn’t long before deadly predators from the animal kingdom—species completely foreign to the Deep South—inexplicably start showing up. But as secrets begin to unravel, the bloodthirsty critters could be the least of our heroes’ worries. And it isn’t long before they realize that sometimes, the most dangerous animals are humans.

Gillespie was kind enough to share some insight into Still Dark, his writing process and just how a well-adjusted family man can spill so much macabre onto the page.

How did your writing career begin? What was the evolution to get Still Dark published?

While there could be plenty of official start dates for me, I usually consider around 2002 to be where it really got moving. I took a creative writing class in college, and my teacher, a published novelist herself, was very encouraging. I, like most young writers, had absolutely no clue how much of a grind it would be, and I sort of drifted in and out of writing for years.

Things really ramped up about six or so years ago when I started landing short stories in anthologies here and there. I took the Stephen King On Writing route of building up a little cred with shorts before jumping into novels. I had already written a few “practice” novels over the years, but Still Dark was the first swing for the fences.

Since then, I’ve written several more novels, landed a literary agent, and just tried my best to stay busy. I’m hoping that this is just the beginning for me.

Where did the idea for Still Dark come from?

It was all from a dream I had about a crocodile swimming under a frozen pond. It was such a weird, eerie image that I stumbled around the bedroom at 3 in the morning looking for something to write on, which my wife really appreciated. It was the perfect example of one of those little seeds that gets in your head and refuses to leave until it’s fully grown.

The characters are very relatable. Were they based on your personal experiences or relationships or were they characters who wrote themselves?

I’ve started getting the question about the characters a lot, particularly from people I work with.

“Hey, you’re like Jim, huh?”

“Well, I don’t know if it’s quite that simple…”

“Yeah, you’re Jim!”

The easiest way to answer that question is to say that there’s some of me in everybody. I just think that’s the way it works for writers. Nothing is ever a 1 to 1 comparison, but it’s impossible to ever truly divorce myself from my characters.

There is a lot about facing personal fears in this story.  Do you consider that the central theme or is there a larger message above and beyond just a good horror story? 

I wish I could say that this story had some overarching theme, but at the point I was at when I wrote Still Dark, I was just trying to make the best story possible. In a lot of my work that has come after, I’ve definitely injected more social commentary into it, but Still Dark was just a fun, gruesome little ride.

Now, that’s not to say there’s no meat on the bones. There’s some environmental messages that are right out front for any and all to see. I mean, any book where animals start killing everything in sight isn’t being too subtle. And the family dynamics are interesting, particularly with Laura and her dad.

There is some seriously gruesome stuff in here, a lot of which takes place amongst the human characters independent of the wild animals or the big shockers that we won’t spoil for readers.  How do you get to the place to write that type of subject matter?  You seem like such a nice young man…

You know, the deeper I get into writing, the more I think that people who read, write, and enjoy dark fiction might be the most sane people in the room. It’s just a natural thing for me, even if I’m not entirely sure why. I had a pretty good childhood. I’m happily married. My wife and kids are awesome. Why this stuff comes out of me is anyone’s guess.

Regardless of the reasons, I do think there’s a form of therapy here for me. Lots of people seem to struggle with an outlet for whatever they’re going through. Getting it out and onto a page helps keep me more or less normal, boring even.

Tell me about the importance of setting the story so close to your own hometown.

I love the setting. I knew I wanted to have the snow in place, which fits really well with the area. Gatlinburg is just one of those perfect little spots for people that grew up around Tennessee. It’s equal parts beautiful and kitschy, and it just makes for an awesome setting for a mayhem filled horror story.

If anyone ever makes a movie out of Still Dark, they better not change the city!

I feel it’s a bit cliche to ask about your writing influences, but if you could sit down and have a beer with anyone, who would it be and why?

Like every other horror writer in existence, I’d have to say Stephen King. He’s obviously a huge influence, and he seems like a really great choice to drink a beer with. I’d throw Joe Hill in too, just to make it a family affair.

Other good choices might be Cormac McCarthy, Richard Matheson, Shirley Jackson, and John Steinbeck. That would make for an interesting meal.

Do you consider yourself a man of faith, and, if so, did any of that show up in Still Dark?

That’s a big can of worms that we probably don’t have time to cover in a satisfactory way, but I will say this. I consider faith to be personal thing that affects everything you do whether you intend it to or not. Obviously, this isn’t a “Christian” book, but the themes of sacrifice and selflessness are definitely in there, just wrapped in a pretty gory package.

What scares you?

Every year of my life, the answer to “what scares you” changes pretty dramatically. I’d say Still Dark is a pretty good reflection of that, from the childish fear of spiders and bugs to the deeper, existential fears of death and loss. I’m reaching the age where my fears have less to do with myself and more with those around me, which is very prevalent in a handful of scenes in the book.

Still Dark is published by Sirens Call Publications and is available on Amazon and Smashwords.  Follow D.W. Gillespie on Twitter at @dw_gillespie.

The Impossible: Interview with Joyce Smith

by 1 Comment

Photo credit: Lori Straine via Hatchette Press

Skiing, sledding, snowball fights, mugs of hot cocoa—winter means different things to people.  In the case of Joyce Smith, it means something more.

Life.

In her book The Impossible (releases today via Hatchette Press), she tells the story of her son John, a child she adopted from Guatemala.  When he was 14 years old, an event occurred that is nothing short of miraculous.  I recently had the opportunity to talk with her about John and why he is receiving such large amounts of attention—all from a local news story.

Smith’s life wasn’t a perfect one.  As she put it, she had her own “littered trail of disasters.” Her first child was given up for adoption and she nearly committed suicide at one point.  But she adopted John from Guatemala and watched him grow up into a typical teenager who was pretty good at basketball. After one game in January 2015 where he scored the winning basket, he was asked by a friend to spend the night.  It just so happened that a cold spell caused the local lake to freeze over, so after throwing rocks to test the ice, they walked around on it.  The next day, they tried it again—but the ice gave way and both fell into the 40 degree water.  Nineteen minutes later, John was pulled from the lake completely lifeless (his friend made it out okay). Smith remembers telling God in a loud, demanding conversation, “You can’t take my son from me. We asked for him seventeen years ago.”

John was rushed to the hospital as doctors tried to revive him and increase his 88 degree body temperature.  Nothing was working.  He was, by all accounts, dead.  The doctors wanted to let Smith see John before they called the time of death, so she entered the room and continued praying. An hour later, one of the nurses picked up a faint pulse.  This was amazing in its own right, but there were many issues John was dealing with (multiple organ failure, no brain function).  Smith made it clear to the multitude of doctors and nurses that there would be no negative talk around him—even though he wasn’t expected to live through the evening.  “Life and death is in the tongue,” she told me.

Nineteen days later, John walked out of the hospital on his own as if nothing ever happened.  Three weeks after that (40 days in total), he was released from all of his doctors and given a completely clean bill of health.

At its essence, The Impossible is a story of miracles.  It is also a story of hope, prayer, and how a community rallied around one of their own.  A local news reporter covered the story, and it went viral quickly.  The whole series of events has been likened by Smith as a “tapestry of miracles,” from the specific doctors helping John to the local firefighters testing out cold weather retrieval gear four days before the accident in the exact same location John fell through the ice.

Of course, not every occurrence of drowning ends in a miraculous story like John’s. Smith said that God answers our prayers, but not always how we want.  In this case, he wanted to let people know that he has the final word in all situations.  It requires trust and faith akin to Abraham, who did whatever God asked without question—even to the point of nearly sacrificing Isaac (see Genesis 22:1-19).  He wasn’t perfect, but God called him a friend.

The Impossible comes out in book form today, but Smith mentioned having a conversation with a gentleman for 45 minutes while waiting to be interviewed on television. The gentleman turned out to be Devon Franklin, who is about to begin filming the movie version of the book through 20th Century Fox.  I’m sure we’ll take a look at that once we get closer to the film’s release date.

(Thanks to Roya Eftekari from Rogers & Cowan for setting up the interview)