You Must Love Comics...

I love comics. I love big two superhero comics and obscure biographies in comic form in equal measures. I have been reading and loving comics my entire life. My new column here on Crucial Taunt, Everything That Entertains Me, is going to focus heavily on comics and the comic book industry. I will be sharing my opinions on the industry news as well as reviewing the comics I think we should all be reading. There aren’t any comic reviews this week but there are a few stories I hope you will find interesting.

Where are the Kids?

If you love comics as much as I do, then you need to be concerned about the path the industry is following. The audience that the comic book industry has depended on is dying off. Kids do not read comics. Adults read comics. The comics meant for kids --Spider-Man, Batman, the X-men, and so on, all feature complex mature storylines that are just not appropriate for younger readers. This blasphemy cannot continue. We need to get our kids interested in reading comics and supporting our direct market stores. Too many of the kids that do read comics are content to await the arrival of the collected volumes at Barnes and Noble, or to order them from Amazon.com instead of actually venturing out of the house to Midtown Comics, the Million Year Picnic or another quality outlet. As these stores die, the industry grows weaker.

The even worse problem is that we have all known this for years. We have known about it and we have done very little to address the problem. What can we do as fans? Lots, we can teach the kids in our lives how to love comics. Buy them comics as gifts. Give away comics on Halloween to young trick-or-treaters. Sure, give them their video games and gadgets on Christmas and birthdays but also take them with you on Free Comic Book Day. Instead of treating your kid to a meal at McDonalds - take them to your favorite comic shop and let them indulge their mind in comics rather than McNuggets. If they are interested in the comic-based movies show them the comics that inspired the stories.

If you are a collector of comics, and not just a reader, teach your kids the love of caring for comics. Show them how you bag and board them. Let them help update your database. Take them with you to conventions and share with them the list of comics you are hoping to find so they can share your anticipation. Help your favorite seven-year old begin his or her collection, with Marvel Adventure Comics or even an older series geared towards younger readers. If a child shows interest in your comics than encourage it. I frequently carry comics around with me for reading on the bus and subway. If a kid is interested and the comic (or one that I have with me) is appropriate, I give it to him. If we do not teach our kids to love comics with the same passion that we do, then we do not love comics as much as we should.

Robert Kirkman’s Plan

Of course, the fans alone can only do so much. The publishers and retailers need to meet us at least halfway by providing more comics that are appropriate for our younger readers. This is why I was so excited to see Robert Kirkman, the writer of Invincible and the new publisher of Image Comics speak out to the top creators and publishers in the industry about this very issue. I have small quibbles with some of the details that he presents but the broad strokes are exactly what more publishers and creators should be thinking about.

Champions Online

If I had to pick out the one thing that has replaced comics for kids these days, it is, no doubt, video games. If I had more time and money was no object, I would probably be much more of a video game guy myself. As it is, I have bought exactly two video games in the last ten years: Metal Gear II and City of Heroes (a superhero MMRPG). By next April, there will be a third. I say April, because that is when Champions-Online becomes available to the public.

Champions began as a simple RPG back in the eighties when RPGs were exploding in popularity. My brother, our friends, and I would play this game continuously for months. Even when we stopped playing, we would buy the released guidebooks and adventure modules just because they were fun to read. Champions allowed us to participate in the super heroics that took place in our favorite comics. We used the game’s character creation system to recreate heroes like the Hulk and Wolverine (I actually managed to kill the Hulk once by jumping into a fight as Bruce Banner). The game grew so popular that a line of comics popped up based on the core characters of the world within which the stories took place. At some point that is not very clear to me, I lost track of Champions. I assumed that they had eventually gone out of business when the RPG boom died off. I was wrong.

It was with great joy that I discovered that Champions had in fact never died and was re-invented as an online video game. It took a few days, but I read every word on the game’s new website: Champions-Online.com. I was just as sucked in as I had been as a kid. City of Heroes was great, it just was not quite right for me. Champions-Online should be different. The gameplay should be smoother and far less aggravating if the reviews I read are accurate. The game action should actually be easier to follow. The screen shots look amazing, with crystal-clear action that makes it very easy to see who is doing what and how they are doing it. The threats that players will face seem less robotic with characters created with unique powers and quirks. Your character can go anywhere; explore any environment from skyscrapers to the bottom of the sea to the surface of the moon --just like your favorite comic book superhero. Rip up the sidewalk or knock down a building, whatever you need to do. The best reason to buy Champions is you can create the hero you want with the powers he has immediately. You do not have to complete seventeen missions before your flying hero can actually fly!

Champions-Online has roots in the comic book industry. City of Heroes was a great game but it was missing the comic book love that Champions-Online will clearly have. Next April every kid with a love of computer games with an older comics fan in their lives will have a reason to come together. Play Champions-Online together and our kids might just find a reason to love comics.

The Watchmen Movie Problems

Comic-based movies are a great way to increase interest in comics. We all rushed out to see the Dark Knight. Warner Brothers did some smart marketing by placing the first trailers to the Watchmen movie in the previews. The hype for the movie has been off the charts ever since, after all, we have been anxiously awaiting this movie for years, decades actually. If we are lucky, the movie will come out next year, as planned.

According to the Hollywood Reporter, 20^th Century Fox has sued Warner Bros (the company that produced the Watchmen comics in the first place) over the rights to develop, produce, and distribute the film. The legal battle began in February as the film was in production, but apparently, the suit did nothing to prevent director Zack Snyder from completing the film.

It is my hope that none of this will prevent the movie from hitting screens next summer. As many have pointed out Fox has nothing to gain by preventing the release. This is essentially Fox attempting to grab a piece of the action. Here is what I am taking away from this development: This movie is going to be even bigger than we thought.

Today's Reading

Today's Reading:

Get fantasy football info on your cell phone or mobile device

Where Did This Guy Come From?

Jon Heyman's Daily Scoop

How to be as successful as the NFL

Tony Harris at Midtown Comics

Wishing Upon a Favre

NFL Network to challenge ESPN in Sunday pregame huddle

Want an NBA job? Keep your mouth shut!

Mariotti: “I Feel Like I’m Working For the Titanic”

Fantasy Running Backs and Team Passing Efficiency

He's with Tom (Brady)

SPIDER-GASM: Slott talks "New Ways To Die"

There could be more later...

State of the Yankees

I used to be the writer of a blog called Bronx Pride. I probably still would be if the people heading the network had not been so insanely uninterested. It was writing about the Yankees that finally put me on the path to becoming a professional writer. I suppose I could have struck out on my own blogging the Yankees, but I never did. With Bronx Pride gone my Yankees rants and raves end up in the strangest places sometimes. The lucky readers of this post are about to witness the latest one.

It is Bill Madden of the Daily News who has sparked this rant. I'll provide you with a small samples of the uninformed ramblings of this so-called reporter, so you will not need to bless his column with your patronage.

Yes, it would certainly seem that this is the year where youth must be served - which brings us to the Yankees, who have not been served well by what little youth they have. Phil Hughes? Ian Kennedy? Shelley Duncan?

Yankees GM Brian Cashman has placed most of the blame for his team's failures on the bafflingly hapless offense that even with the losses of Jorge Posada and Hideki Matsui should not be struggling so mightily to score runs. But then, when the primary culprit is the $27 million-per-year cleanup hitter, to whom the Yankees are committed for another nine years, Cashman ought to be very concerned.

This is just the beginning of the youth movement, not the peak. A vital part of the change to a team built about player development is accepting that these players may struggle in their initial exposures to the majors. As for A-Rod, I thought it was common knowledge that his new contract was completed by the team ownership rather than Brian Cashman alone. He may not be the most "clutch" player in the game, but "clutch" stats are extremely overrated. If Alex Rodriguez does his usual damage, over the course of a season he will have done his job.

It would be nice if they had a couple of young position players like the Mets' Murphy and Evans coming in the system, but they do not. They do not have a first baseman to replace Jason Giambi, or an impact center fielder, or a shortstop to spell (and eventually replace) Derek Jeter, or a second baseman who could enable them to deal the enigmatic Cano while he still has value.

Is he seriously suggesting that the Yanks cannot match the Mets in prospects? Austin Jackson and Brett Gardner are both impact center field prospects. First baseman Juan Miranda has been tearing up Triple-A Scranton. They don't have any great infield prospects at the higher levels but they are more than deep enough in outfield and pitching prospects to trade for a longterm shortstop or second baseman should that prove necessary. In the meanwhile, Wilson Betemit is a more than competent fill-in for the 26-year old (and signed for three more seasons) Robinson Cano and the franchise staple (and not being replaced at short until he drops dead) Derek Jeter. The Yankees are also going to be swimming in cash with $80 million coming off the books and a new stadium (remember that?) providing bags and bags of cash. The Yankees could easily trade Cano and sign a free agent second baseman such as Mark Ellis or Orlando Hudson. I doubt either player would break the bank.

The reason they don't have any of these players in their system is because they continue to do a terrible job of scouting and developing. They spend millions more in Latin America than almost every other team and yet the only position players from there to make the big club over the last 10 years are Alfonso Soriano, Cano and Melky Cabrera. The draft? An even bigger disgrace. Jeter, in 1992, is the last player they drafted who became a regular.

He can't be serious. I think losing exclusive access to the Boss has addled his brains. The Yankees built this club with players they drafted or signed in Latin America. In fact the team has been so strong that until recently there has not really been room to add any regular players from the farm. The Yankees have sacrificed their best picks by signing players available in free agency such as Johnny Damon, Andy Pettitte, Roger Clemens, Kyle Farnsworth, Jason Giambi and a variety of other more bit players. They have used players from the farm system to acquire players such as Alex Rodriguez, Bobby Abreu, Wilson Betemit, Xavier Nady and lots of other players through the years. Or they trade a major leaguer such as Farnsworth for a star catcher like Ivan Rodriguez and replace him in the bullpen with quality pitchers like Jose Veras and David Robertson. The Yankees are loaded with pitching and outfield prospects. Ask someone from Baseball America if you won't take my word for it.

In this year's draft, the Yankees took pitchers with their first three picks: No. 1, Gerrit Cole, whom they did not sign because their scouts obviously didn't get to know the kid's makeup or his family situation; No. 2, Jeremy Bleich, who's going to need Tommy John surgery; and No. 3, Scott Bittle, whose arm problems were so severe they elected to pass on signing him.

After a while, you have to wonder what fatal attraction Cashman's player evaluators have with injured pitchers. Last year, they took North Carolina State righthander Andrew Brackman in the first round, knowing he was going to miss all of this season with Tommy John surgery. And, then, of course, there's the immortal Humberto Sanchez, purportedly the key return player in the Gary Sheffield deal with Detroit, who also underwent Tommy John surgery and is still rehabbing somewhere.

It seems silly to have to point it out because usually you can't get people to stop crying about it, but the Yankees have loads more money than most teams. Because of this financial advantage they are not forced to operate like a team such as the Atlanta Braves or Pittsburgh Pirates. Those teams have to draft players they know they can sign because this is the primary avenue through which they acquire players. The Yankees can take chances that other teams cannot. They draft high school players that have committed to colleges and high upside players that may need a year to recover injuries because they hope that they can throw far above slot money at the first class of pick, and their veteran laden team allows them the time to wait on the second class. Andrew Brackman, if he makes a full recovery may be the best player to come out of the 2007 draft. This seems worth the risk.

Madden should also realize that teams are not parting with unflawed prospects for short term, or expensive player acquisitions. That the Yankees were able to get three viable pitching prospects for an aging and expensive Sheffield is a credit to Brian Cashman, not the detriment that madden suggests. I wonder if the Tigers would rather have Sheffield or Humberto Sabchez right now. It might be a toss up, but toss in Kevin Whelan and it becomes a no-brainer in favor of the pitchers.

Cashman keeps stockpiling pitchers who come up hurt or fall on their face when they get to the big leagues. Enough! He is banking on the offense coming back next year, even though everyone will be a year older and there is nobody to step in when the inevitable injuries come. Off the way this season has gone, with young, homegrown teams such as the Rays and Twins giving their owners so much more bang for their buck, the Yankees returning to power would be an even bigger surprise.

The Tampa Bay Rays have been in rebuilding/prospect acquisition mode for more than a decade. The Minnesota Twins have long had a system (decades) in place where they replace veterans when they become expensive with younger players. Cashman has only entered their restructuring with youth project in the last year as it became obvious that expiring contracts and past peak players required it. Here is a prediction for Bill Madden, the Yankees will once again build a nucleus of young players (it may take a couple of years) when that project is complete they will concentrate more energy on supplementing with free agency to build a World Series contender. That team will eventually get old and the entire process will start over again. It is called a development cycle.

FSWA Draft Results

Well, I feel like I should have done a little better but that is always an easy decision to make in hindsight. But I won't dilly and dally over this, here are my round by round picks and my thoughts on the rounds.

Round One

My Pick: Reggie Wayne (11th overall)
J.Hebert: Steven Jackson

A fairly typical first round, Marion Barber was the only pick that stood out to me as too early. Though a lot of people are very high on him this year, I don't think much of Fantasy Football Empire's first pick.

Round Two

My Pick: Frank Gore (14th overall)
J.Hebert: Marques Colston

I feel like I received another first round pick with Gore falling to me in the second. Lawrence Maroney went with the 21st pick but this was high for me considering his poor track record. Yes, he did end last season (the playoffs more accurately) on a roll but I wouldn't bet such an early pick on the loaded Patriots suddenly leaning on him to the degree they would need to justify this pick.

Round Three

My Pick: Drew Brees (35th)
J. Hebert: Reggie Bush

I like Reggie Bush at this point in a PPR league, it may even be a major steal. Brees is my number one rated QB this season since the Saints acquired TE Jeremy Bonderman. I expect Bonderman to be a huge fantasy option moving from a poor passing Eli manning offense to a best in the league Brees operated one.

Round Four

My Pick: Earnest Graham (38th)
J. Hebert: Brandon Marshall

I loved Marshall before his suspension. Steve Smith also went in this round despite his two game suspension. Jerricho Cotchery was an extremely early pick but I do like him this season. It's just a bit early for a sleeper even with the giant upgrade from Chad Pennington to Brett Favre.

Round Five

My Pick: Jeremy Shockey
J. Hebert: Kellen Winslow

More proof that I picked the right guy as my season long rival. Winslow went first as he probably should but I love Shockey in this spot.

Round Six

My Pick: Kevin Curtis
J. Hebert: Kevin Smith

My first mistake. I had an inkling that Curtis' injury could be bad. I even googled him before I made the pick. Let this be a lesson for us all: If you have a gut feeeling, listen to it. Smith is one of my favorite picks this season and gives Hebert his first edge on me in this draft. Ricky Williams was a solid pick in this round. I wish I had made it.

Round Seven

My Pick: Hines Ward
J. Hebert: Nate Burleson

I think I made a great pick. ward has been slipping but the reasoning doesn't seem logical. Just because Holmes is improving does not mean that Ward is toast. Burleson is solid but I think I made the better pick. The same team that picked Williams also grabbed Ronnie Brown with back to back picks. Not what I would have done but it is a fairly safe route.

Round Eight

My Pick: Ray Rice
J. Hebert: Chris Perry

See? We think very much alike. We both grabbed running backs likely to start in the place of old or injured backs. I like mine better obviously since Perry is injury prone himself. I like Aaron Rogers more than most but I thought it was very early to select him.

Round Nine

My Pick: Anthony Gonzalez
J. Hebert: Sidney Rice

We both grab sleeper wideouts. Gonzalez should be a productive part of the Colt offense even if Marvin Harrison is healthy. Rice is just as good but has a lesser QB throwing him the ball. I love the Meachem and Bruce picks in this round but the Kitna pick was surprising.

Round Ten

My Pick: Maurice Morris
J. Hebert: Jerry Porter

Morris has been outstanding in exhibition play. This is a large reach on my part but one I don't mind making in the tenth round of a twenty round draft. Jerry Porter has had some injury issues in camp but should be a productive receiver this season.

We'll cover the next ten rounds tomorrow...

Sports Illustrated Link

My latest for RotoExperts has been linked to by Sports Illustrated. I'm pretty psyched. I hadn't even realized until I checked in and saw that my article had been clicked on hundreds of times in the last few hours.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2008/fantasy/08/21/jackson/index.html

More than a few fantasy titles have been won on the backs of players poached from the waiver wire. Jon Williams at RotoExperts.com takes a crack at figuring out which players plucked from obscurity this season have the tools to make a lasting impact beyond this year and which do not.

The New Season Of HBO's Entourage

I love this show.

Season Five of Entourage begins on September 7th, and I can hardly stand the wait. One of my favorite oarts of the show is the bumpin' soundtrack. At some point I'm going to compile a complete mix of all the songs used in the show but for now these playlists borrowed from the Entourage Wiki should get us over.

A Long Night and Free Draft Software

Just finished the FSWA draft. It was 20 very draining rounds. I'll address this in more detail later.

But for now go check out RotoExperts free Draft Software!

Moving Up, Moving Down - Future Sleepers

Moving Up, Moving Down, this is my weekly fantasy baseball column for RotoExperts.com. This week I examine some hot properties and evaluate their 2009 potential. I hope you'll enjoy a small sample, or even better head over to the site and check out the entire article.

Future Sleepers

Jorge Cantu, 3B, Florida Marlins - He came out of nowhere once before with the Tampa Bay Devil Rays (they still had the Devil in them back then) in 2005 when he hit .286/.311/.497 with 28 home runs. Injuries and a lack of plate discipline cost him the next two seasons. Now Cantu is back with the same great power and a more patient approach at the plate. Cantu is still just 26, so he should continue to progress as a hitter. Moving Up

John Danks, SP, Chicago White Sox - In most leagues, Danks was a late round selection or a single-digit buy at auction. His 5.50 earned run average essentially guaranteed easy acquisition. You will need a crowbar and a Saturday Night Special to pry him away from his owners now. He improved virtually every aspect of his game. He walks fewer, strikes out more, allows fewer hits, but the key was the increase in his ground ball rate, which has transformed his HR/9 from a disastrous 1.81 in 2007 to this season’s 0.66. The sad part for his owners is that the likeliness of Danks maintaining that HR/9 is very low, considering his career minor league rate was 1.30. Danks is worth keeping, but he will also be taking a slight step down in 2009. Moving Down

Carlos Gonzalez, OF, Oakland Athletics - He strikes out a lot. However, he has demonstrated acceptable patience at the plate, and in the minors he has shown the ability to hit home runs and steal bases. I place his ceiling squarely between Nick Markakis and Matt Holliday. He needs to get the loft back in his swing, but the breakout is coming in 2009. Moving Up

Matt Harrison, SP, Texas Rangers - He's been horrible in the majors when he hasn’t looked brilliant as he did on Saturday, when he pitched eight shutout innings with eight strikeouts. According to all the major sites, it was his birthday (August 16), but in the post-game interviews Harrison revealed that everyone had it wrong; his birthday was really September 16. Harrison is an extreme groundball pitcher with strikeout potential, an excellent combination. His problem in the majors has been the plummet in his strikeout rate from a career minor league rate of 6.37 K/9 to 3.09 in the majors. Draft him late next season or buy him for a song and you may have the next Cliff Lee on your hands. Moving Up

That Michael Phelps is a Popular Dude

Baseball HQ is Hiring

Writing for Baseball HQ would be my dream fantasy baseball job. My ultimate writing job would be doing a regularly published comic but HQ is a very close second. They are looking for a News Analyst, Team Analyst, Research Analyst and Columnist, Gaming Strategy Columnist, and a Forum Analyst. I feel I could do a credible job in any of those positions. I have a regular baseball column at RotoExperts.com and I've done work for TheTalentedMrRoto.com (a site that went away when Matt Berry was hired by ESPN), and I have had my work syndicated to NBA.com, The Sporting News, and Fox Sports.

I have no doubt i can do a great job. I just need to convince them of the same.

Another List of Rules: Kurt Vonnegut

I believe that all rules are just guidelines. The Elmore Leonard list was my favorite list of writing rules I found today. However, I have now come across this list twice today. I thought it might be cool to post.

How to Write With Style

by Kurt Vonnegut

Newspaper reporters and technical writers are trained to reveal almost nothing about themselves in their writings. This makes them freaks in the world of writers, since almost all of the other ink-stained wretches in that world reveal a lot about themselves to readers. We call these revelations, accidental and intentional, elements of style.

These revelations tell us as readers what sort of person it is with whom we are spending time. Does the writer sound ignorant or informed, stupid or bright, crooked or honest, humorless or playful-- ? And on and on.

Why should you examine your writing style with the idea of improving it? Do so as a mark of respect for your readers, whatever you're writing. If you scribble your thoughts any which way, your readers will surely feel that you care nothing about them. They will mark you down as an egomaniac or a chowderhead --- or, worse, they will stop reading you.

The most damning revelation you can make about yourself is that you do not know what is interesting and what is not. Don't you yourself like or dislike writers mainly for what they choose to show you or make you think about? Did you ever admire an emptyheaded writer for his or her mastery of the language? No.

So your own winning style must begin with ideas in your head.

1. Find a subject you care about

Find a subject you care about and which you in your heart feel others should care about. It is this genuine caring, and not your games with language, which will be the most compelling and seductive element in your style.

I am not urging you to write a novel, by the way --- although I would not be sorry if you wrote one, provided you genuinely cared about something. A petition to the mayor about a pothole in front of your house or a love letter to the girl next door will do.

2. Do not ramble, though

I won't ramble on about that.

3. Keep it simple

As for your use of language: Remember that two great masters of language, William Shakespeare and James Joyce, wrote sentences which were almost childlike when their subjects were most profound. "To be or not to be?" asks Shakespeare's Hamlet. The longest word is three letters long. Joyce, when he was frisky, could put together a sentence as intricate and as glittering as a necklace for Cleopatra, but my favorite sentence in his short story "Eveline" is this one: "She was tired." At that point in the story, no other words could break the heart of a reader as those three words do.

Simplicity of language is not only reputable, but perhaps even sacred. The Bible opens with a sentence well within the writing skills of a lively fourteen-year-old: "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth."

4. Have guts to cut

It may be that you, too, are capable of making necklaces for Cleopatra, so to speak. But your eloquence should be the servant of the ideas in your head. Your rule might be this: If a sentence, no matter how excellent, does not illuminate your subject in some new and useful way, scratch it out.

5. Sound like yourself

The writing style which is most natural for you is bound to echo the speech you heard when a child. English was Conrad's third language, and much that seems piquant in his use of English was no doubt colored by his first language, which was Polish. And lucky indeed is the writer who has grown up in Ireland, for the English spoken there is so amusing and musical. I myself grew up in Indianapolis, where common speech sounds like a band saw cutting galvanized tin, and employs a vocabulary as unornamental as a monkey wrench.

In some of the more remote hollows of Appalachia, children still grow up hearing songs and locutions of Elizabethan times. Yes, and many Americans grow up hearing a language other than English, or an English dialect a majority of Americans cannot understand.

All these varieties of speech are beautiful, just as the varieties of butterflies are beautiful. No matter what your first language, you should treasure it all your life. If it happens to not be standard English, and if it shows itself when your write standard English, the result is usually delightful, like a very pretty girl with one eye that is green and one that is blue.

I myself find that I trust my own writing most, and others seem to trust it most, too, when I sound most like a person from Indianapolis, which is what I am. What alternatives do I have? The one most vehemently recommended by teachers has no doubt been pressed on you, as well: to write like cultivated Englishmen of a century or more ago.

6. Say what you mean

I used to be exasperated by such teachers, but am no more. I understand now that all those antique essays and stories with which I was to compare my own work were not magnificent for their datedness or foreignness, but for saying precisely what their authors meant them to say. My teachers wished me to write accurately, always selecting the most effective words, and relating the words to one another unambiguously, rigidly, like parts of a machine. The teachers did not want to turn me into an Englishman after all. They hoped that I would become understandable --- and therefore understood. And there went my dream of doing with words what Pablo Picasso did with paint or what any number of jazz idols did with music. If I broke all the rules of punctuation, had words mean whatever I wanted them to mean, and strung them together higgledy-piggledy, I would simply not be understood. So you, too, had better avoid Picasso-style or jazz-style writing, if you have something worth saying and wish to be understood.

Readers want our pages to look very much like pages they have seen before. Why? This is because they themselves have a tough job to do, and they need all the help they can get from us.

7. Pity the readers

They have to identify thousands of little marks on paper, and make sense of them immediately. They have to read, an art so difficult that most people don't really master it even after having studied it all through grade school and high school --- twelve long years.

So this discussion must finally acknowledge that our stylistic options as writers are neither numerous nor glamorous, since our readers are bound to be such imperfect artists. Our audience requires us to be sympathetic and patient readers, ever willing to simplify and clarify --- whereas we would rather soar high above the crowd, singing like nightingales.

That is the bad news. The good news is that we Americans are governed under a unique Constitution, which allows us to write whatever we please without fear of punishment. So the most meaningful aspect of our styles, which is what we choose to write about, is utterly unlimited.

8. For really detailed advice

For a discussion of literary style in a narrower sense, in a more technical sense, I recommend to your attention The Elements of Style, by William Strunk, Jr. and E.B. White. E.B. White is, of course, one of the most admirable literary stylists this country has so far produced.

You should realize, too, that no one would care how well or badly Mr. White expressed himself, if he did not have perfectly enchanting things to say.

In Sum:

1. Find a subject you care about

2. Do not ramble, though

3. Keep it simple

4. Have guts to cut

5. Sound like yourself

6. Say what you mean

7. Pity the readers

Elmore Leonard's Rules

I try to learn something new about writing every day. I learned a lot about rules of writing today. This list is from a 2001 New York Times article that presented the writing rules of Elmore Leonard as written by Elmore Leonard. He is one of my favorites and one of the coolest writers that ever lived.

1. Never open a book with weather.

If it's only to create atmosphere, and not a character's reaction to the weather, you don't want to go on too long. The reader is apt to leaf ahead looking for people. There are exceptions. If you happen to be Barry Lopez, who has more ways to describe ice and snow than an Eskimo, you can do all the weather reporting you want.

2. Avoid prologues.

They can be annoying, especially a prologue following an introduction that comes after a foreword. But these are ordinarily found in nonfiction. A prologue in a novel is backstory, and you can drop it in anywhere you want.

There is a prologue in John Steinbeck's ''Sweet Thursday,'' but it's O.K. because a character in the book makes the point of what my rules are all about. He says: ''I like a lot of talk in a book and I don't like to have nobody tell me what the guy that's talking looks like. I want to figure out what he looks like from the way he talks. . . . figure out what the guy's thinking from what he says. I like some description but not too much of that. . . . Sometimes I want a book to break loose with a bunch of hooptedoodle. . . . Spin up some pretty words maybe or sing a little song with language. That's nice. But I wish it was set aside so I don't have to read it. I don't want hooptedoodle to get mixed up with the story.''

3. Never use a verb other than ''said'' to carry dialogue.

The line of dialogue belongs to the character; the verb is the writer sticking his nose in. But said is far less intrusive than grumbled, gasped, cautioned, lied. I once noticed Mary McCarthy ending a line of dialogue with ''she asseverated,'' and had to stop reading to get the dictionary.

4. Never use an adverb to modify the verb ''said'' . . .

. . . he admonished gravely. To use an adverb this way (or almost any way) is a mortal sin. The writer is now exposing himself in earnest, using a word that distracts and can interrupt the rhythm of the exchange. I have a character in one of my books tell how she used to write historical romances ''full of rape and adverbs.''

5. Keep your exclamation points under control.

You are allowed no more than two or three per 100,000 words of prose. If you have the knack of playing with exclaimers the way Tom Wolfe does, you can throw them in by the handful.

6. Never use the words ''suddenly'' or ''all hell broke loose.''

This rule doesn't require an explanation. I have noticed that writers who use ''suddenly'' tend to exercise less control in the application of exclamation points.

7. Use regional dialect, patois, sparingly.

Once you start spelling words in dialogue phonetically and loading the page with apostrophes, you won't be able to stop. Notice the way Annie Proulx captures the flavor of Wyoming voices in her book of short stories ''Close Range.''

8. Avoid detailed descriptions of characters.

Which Steinbeck covered. In Ernest Hemingway's ''Hills Like White Elephants'' what do the ''American and the girl with him'' look like? ''She had taken off her hat and put it on the table.'' That's the only reference to a physical description in the story, and yet we see the couple and know them by their tones of voice, with not one adverb in sight.

9. Don't go into great detail describing places and things.

Unless you're Margaret Atwood and can paint scenes with language or write landscapes in the style of Jim Harrison. But even if you're good at it, you don't want descriptions that bring the action, the flow of the story, to a standstill.

And finally:

10. Try to leave out the part that readers tend to skip.

A rule that came to mind in 1983. Think of what you skip reading a novel: thick paragraphs of prose you can see have too many words in them. What the writer is doing, he's writing, perpetrating hooptedoodle, perhaps taking another shot at the weather, or has gone into the character's head, and the reader either knows what the guy's thinking or doesn't care. I'll bet you don't skip dialogue.

My most important rule is one that sums up the 10.

If it sounds like writing, I rewrite it.

Or, if proper usage gets in the way, it may have to go. I can't allow what we learned in English composition to disrupt the sound and rhythm of the narrative. It's my attempt to remain invisible, not distract the reader from the story with obvious writing. (Joseph Conrad said something about words getting in the way of what you want to say.)

If I write in scenes and always from the point of view of a particular character -- the one whose view best brings the scene to life -- I'm able to concentrate on the voices of the characters telling you who they are and how they feel about what they see and what's going on, and I'm nowhere in sight.

What Steinbeck did in ''Sweet Thursday'' was title his chapters as an indication, though obscure, of what they cover. ''Whom the Gods Love They Drive Nuts'' is one, ''Lousy Wednesday'' another. The third chapter is titled ''Hooptedoodle 1'' and the 38th chapter ''Hooptedoodle 2'' as warnings to the reader, as if Steinbeck is saying: ''Here's where you'll see me taking flights of fancy with my writing, and it won't get in the way of the story. Skip them if you want.''

''Sweet Thursday'' came out in 1954, when I was just beginning to be published, and I've never forgotten that prologue.

Did I read the hooptedoodle chapters? Every word.

Comic Book Subscriptions Still Exist

I guess I knew it. I just had not been offered the opportunity to subscribe in so long. When I was a kid I used to dream that I could have a subscription to all of my favorite comics. My mother would never waste money on such a thing. By the time I could afford it myself I had become attached to my local comic book store, The Million Year Picnic.

I got an email this morning offering me 30% off of subscriptions from Amazon.com.

FSWA Industry Insiders League

The FSWA (Fantasy Sports Writers Association) Industry Insiders League is exactly what it sounds like: A fantasy football league for those in the fantasy sports industry. I have never wanted to win a league so desperately (okay, maybe I have), but I think winning this would be great for the reputation. I consider myself a baseball expert first and a football expert second, but I love fantasy football and I've played it just as long if not longer than I've been into fantasy baseball.

I have been scouting out my opponents and I think the most serious threat to me will be Joe Herbert of Football Diehards. It is not that I think he's all that special as a player (I have no idea) but rather because spying his rankings he seems to have a similar style and similar opinions on players. We both think Drew Brees is second only to Tom Brady (he might even be first) and in for a fantastic season. He drafts three spots in front of me and could be disrupting my plans all night. He has now been officially labeled The Enemy.

The draft is Tuesday at 9pm on RealTimeFantasySports.com. I will be certain to update this blog when the draft is finished.

Robert Kirkman is My Hero...

for releasing this video editorial on Comic Book Resources: