Talk:Charles Willeford

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Grimhaven Article[edit]

Hello, I added a separate Grimhaven article with an exhaustive synopsis. I know the synopsis is maybe a little long, but I figured it could be useful since it is really difficult to get ahold of a copy of the manuscript. Please feel free to edit and contribute as you see fit. --nathanbeach 22:34, 24 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Book titles, etc[edit]

I really don't think the links on the book titles are necessary -- most of them are to the wrong thing anyway. I think I'm going to remove them. Stop me if I'm wrong. Here I go... Nathan Beach 17:41, 23 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nareek: I am not attached to the bibliography format in any way. It's a little hard to read. I went down that path (like the Hemingway bibliography) and then just sort of liked it (rather than really liking it). Please change as you see fit... --nathanbeach 16:35, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for taking my suggestion on moving the years--I think it looks better this way, with more emphasis on the titles. Nareek 18:01, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Biography Expanded[edit]

Hey everyone -- I've started expanding the Willeford biography as best I can. Please correct any mistakes. I'm pulling from several different sources, but I haven't read much of his autobiographical essays or biography yet. --nathanbeach 21:43, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've got more stuff to add to a "Later Life" section, but haven't had time yet. Will try to get to it in the next few days... --nathanbeach 14:25, 31 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Bibliography Approval[edit]

I'm awaiting approval (6/15/2005) from Dennis McMillan Press to include their annotated bibliography (my email to them):

I have started the Wikipedia encyclopedia entry for Charles Willeford and would like permission to fully copy the Willeford bibliography on your web site. If approved by you, the disclaimer text would read:
"This bibliography is excepted from _Willeford_ by Don Herron, courtesy of Dennis McMillan Press"
"Dennis McMillan Press" will be a link directly to your site. Please write back and tell me if this is okay. Otherwise, I will simply include the list of books without commentary. If you would like to see what the hell it is I'm talking about, please visit this link:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Willeford
Thanks sincerely!
Nathan Beach (in Dallas)

Response from Dennis McMillan Publications (6/16/2005):

Dear Nathan, Yes, you can use any Willeford material from my site that you want to, but it's Dennis McMillan Publications, not "Press," please. People are always getting that wrong, and that is the official name of my business. A lot of times they only put "McMillan Publications," or "McMillan Publishing," both of which lead to confusion with others of my name in the publishing game, of course. But go ahead with any and all things Willefordian! Dennis

I think the bibliography could be made more user-friendly by being more organized. The fiction and non-fiction could be separated out, the reprints could be combined with the originals (as they sometimes are), the Hoke Mosely novels could get a subhead. I think the bolding probably makes it harder to read. And the numbering is extra information that doesn't add much. Nareek 15:44, 7 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I completely agree -- I nearly did exactly that the other day when I was making changes. I think sections like these might work: novels (with a separate section for the Hoke Moseley books), poetry, essays/writing collections, biographies. I will work on this some this week (I can't today) unless you'd really like to, Nareek...? --nathanbeach 18:19, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, if it's alright with you I'll go ahead and make a first pass tonight or tomorrow and then you (and anyone else) can make any changes you see fit. I already made out a list mapping the duplicate titles (reprints) and categorized the books last week on paper when I was working on expanding the bio (I did this because I wanted to get the remaining books I don't have off of amazon). --nathanbeach 18:20, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Be my guest! Nareek 19:01, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I made a first pass (wish I had more time to work right now). Feel free to make any changes. I removed the bold on the titles, but now it looks a little bland and may be harder to read. I hope I didn't make more of a mess than an improvement. cheers! --nathanbeach 21:44, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
By the way -- I kind of modelled the bibliography lists after the Ernest Hemingway bibliography. But there are no comments within that bibliography. --nathanbeach 21:47, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I think some of the comments could be taken out and used to start stubs for the relevant works. Nareek 04:29, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
For the time being, I disagree. I think the comments give the flavor of Willeford's writing, the publishing world he operated in, and the respect he earns now. If and when someone steps forward prepared to write not just stubs, but actual articles on individual books--with plot descriptions, publication histories, sales analyses (where available), and critical reaction--then, of course, trimming down the master list will be called for. Without such a dedicated volunteer, I'm afraid stubs will just sit there, virtually unregarded, for a long time, making the reduction of information in the master article a net loss. Of course, there's no harm in testing the waters by retaining the comments on the page as they are, creating a few stubs in addition, and seeing what happens. —DCGeist 05:06, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Literary style section[edit]

Hey DCGeist: I originally started this response on your personal talk page, but then decided it might as well go here... anyways, thanks for your extensive contributions last night to Charles Willeford, especially all the cross linking to hardboiled crime, etc. A literary style section would be excellent, and I'm not really the type to do it, so please go ahead by all means. Very cool new links you added, too -- I'm looking forward to reading them more closely. I just read the Hoke Moseley books about two years ago and was immediately hooked, though I've still only read 5-6 of his non-Hoke books. I'm currently working on The Shark Infested Custard and have ordered a bunch more used from amazon marketplace. Charles Williams looks really interesting -- can you recommend a good starting point with him? --nathanbeach 15:53, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I know--there's just no getting enough of Willeford. I'd never claim that Williams is in his class, but then who is? (Jim Thompson. But that's it.) Of the three in-print novels by Williams, I'd definitely go for A Touch of Death--very smart, witty writing. In the out-of-print category, I'd start with The Big Bite and Hell Hath No Fury. It amazes me that the latter is out of print. I see Amazon has some insanely expensive early-edition copies--don't bother. If there's nothing reasonable on eBay, pick up the Black Lizard reprint cheap under the title The Hot Spot, read it, then--if you haven't yet--see the film. I restrain myself, of course, in article writing, but I'll say here it's one of the most deliciously entertaining movies of the 1990s. All the best, Dan —DCGeist 16:44, 22 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Willeford Archive/Grimhaven[edit]

Reading through that Willeford Archive list was really fascinating. It's too bad the library website doesn't really seem to work otherwise -- it doesn't seem anything links to the Archive page, and none of the back links work. The underlaying directory structure is a total mess. I'm afraid they'll eventually lose that page, so I saved it off to my back up drive just in case. I wish I lived closer to Florida. Might I ask if any of you have a copy or have read any of the unpublished novel Grimhaven? --nathanbeach 15:08, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Nevermind, I just found a better link to the Archive... --nathanbeach 15:18, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Much better link! Sadly, I've never read even a page of Grimhaven. I was thisclose to buying one of those fabled Xeroxes on eBay a few years back when the powers that be discovered and closed down the sale. Only then did I learn about the restrictions Willeford's widow maintains. Here's a link I considered putting on the article's main page...but it belongs precisely here, in discussion: A Writer's Life: Temptation. You may find it either poignant or hilarious--I think I know which way Willeford would've leaned.—DCGeist 18:23, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Interesting article. I think I would have read it before deleting. This has been up on ebay for a while (has absolutely nothing to do with Willeford, but I thought it was kind of interesting). --nathanbeach 20:47, 23 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Memoirs[edit]

Man, I just finished the Collected Memoirs (thanks guys for the fixes to my additions). Really great stuff if you haven't read them. I think it was about $15 off amazon. --nathanbeach 19:22, 2 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Born To Kill / Cockfighter[edit]

I am so confused by this poster for the movie Cockfighter. What does any of that in the poster have to do with the movie or the screenplay? I just finished reading the book and have seen about half the movie. I'm going to add a "differences between the novel and the movie" section to the movie article... --nathanbeach 20:21, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I just realized the hatchet/axe refers to chopping the chicken's head off, but why is he riding in a car with a woman driving? --nathanbeach 20:27, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, mercy, what a sales job. That's just the great Roger Corman marketing the hell out of a movie, without giving a flying...feather what it's really about.—DCGeist 20:41, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Have you seen the movie yet? It's pretty good -- Warren Oates is awesome, and the Harry Dean Stanton appearance makes it, as Roger Ebert claims, not "altogether bad". The major differences are kind of interesting since Willeford wrote the screenplay. What I've got so far (45 minutes into the movie):
  • Icky is blue in the book, but is named "white lighting" and is white in the movie
  • Frank's brother owes him $2500 in the movie, owes him $300 in book
  • motel room fight is with different person from Jack Burke in book (i need verify this?)
  • Frank takes the cock cage with him to Mansfield in the movie, rather than giving it to Middleton
  • the entire subplot with Berenice + playing guitar in the club is taken out
  • the entire subplot with Doc Riordan is taken out
  • Mary Elizabeth is blonde in the book, brunette in the movie
  • Mansfield's farm is in Decatur in the movie, not Ocala
  • The sale of the family farm house is completely different (the judge character is cut out entirely)
  • Middleton sells Frank the 12 game cocks, rather than the out-of-town character
I've seen the movie two or three times--like it a lot. Only three books of Willeford's have been adapted for film (which amazes me), but all three are very satisfying.
Brilliant work on identifying the differences. Let me suggest that when you write the section for the movie article that you pull out and highlight the major differences (like the subplot cuts and the change in the amount of money owed, which perhaps changes the tone of things significantly) before listing the minor ones. Again, great work. Dan —DCGeist 23:58, 9 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, the stuff like blonde/brunette, and the carrying cage are relatively unimportant. There were too many of those things to really write down. Have you read his diary of the filming process? I haven't found it yet (for less than several hundred dollars). --nathanbeach 16:30, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
No, I've never had the chance to read his production diary. There's also a couple of his novels I'm dying to find: Lust Is a Woman and Understudy for Love. Ever come across those? —DCGeist 23:05, 10 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Those are the same two I'm missing, plus The Whip Hand/Deliver Me From Dallas. I'm intrigued by the Deliver Me From Dallas title since that's where I live... and I identify strongly with the sentiment. I'm a little sad to only have two first-time-read novels left otherwise: Black Mass and Pick-Up... guess I need to start on Charles Williams. --nathanbeach 01:50, 12 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The remaining four major differences:
  • In the movie, Baradinsky goes back to the motel tournament (rather than driving on to a separate tournament), but he hides the cash under the dead chickens in the bathtub and doesn't lose money like everyone else in the holdup.
  • By the time of the Milledgeville tournament, Middleton's wife had died in the book, but in the movie Middleton refers to his wife as living.
  • In the movie, Mansfield doesn't "regain" his voice until after Mary Elizabeth leaves.
  • And finally, Mansfield claims Mary Elizabeth loves him, whereas in the book she leaves and he leaves it at that...

Field Trip[edit]

I'm attending a wedding in the Bahamas in April and am going to stop over a day in Miami to go to the Willeford Archive at the Broward County Library. I'll take some good photos if they'll let me. --nathanbeach 20:14, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe not as fun as I'd hoped, but...
Dear Nathan:
Yes, I have penciled you in on the Bienes Center's calendar for a visit
on April 9th and 10th. As we get closer to the date, please reconfirm
your appointment.
Thanks,
J**** F******
Bienes Center
P.S. Please note that the Center does not permit browsing the Willeford Collection.
My Response: Does that mean I need to have a list of which specific items I'd like to see? Thanks...
His Response: Yes, we will bring to your reader table just one folder at a time.

Just like Citizen Kane! Nareek 19:20, 5 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Again[edit]

Nice recent additions, DCGeist... I ended up not going to the Willeford Archive in Ft. Lauderdale back in April. I was really, really sick when I got to Miami from the Bahamas and pretty much just stayed in my hotel room in South Beach the whole time (traveling while sick is pretty much the worst). I regret not going, but I don't really know what I would have accomplished anyway. --nathanbeach 19:35, 24 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Charles Willeford. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:17, 2 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Charles_Willeford&oldid=1210966285"