Growing up a Scholastic Books kid

Clifford the Big Red Dog

I was raised in a house brimming with books. Children’s books especially, but plenty of books for teens as well. I inhaled these books, reading some three or four times, just so I could reenter their worlds and experience them one more time. My brother and I were never in want of books, although my parents were not especially well-to-do back then.

The reason for this surplus is that my mother worked for Scholastic Books—yes, the Scholastic Books that hosted book fairs at your school when you were young, the company that published evergreen classics like Clifford the Big Red Dog, Goosebumps, and Encyclopedia Brown, Boy Detective. She did not work at the company’s New York editorial offices—what a different childhood that would have been—but rather at a West Coast distribution warehouse located in sleepy Pleasanton, California.

My mother was a voracious reader, and she wanted to pass her love of books on to her children. She was in her early twenties when she landed her position at Scholastic, and it was a bit of a dream job for her.

Her determination to teach us to read paid dividends. I could read by age three, although I was not an active reader. I preferred running around our quiet suburban neighborhood, playing kickball and riding my Big Wheel from one neighbor’s home to the next. I was one of those fearless/clueless kids that would walk up to a front door, ring the bell, and ask the parent if their child could come out and play. (I often did this during dinner time, much to the annoyance of our neighbors.)

It was in this suburban idyll that my mother introduced me to books. Scholastic permitted employees to take home a small number of remaindered and returned titles from the warehouse. When my mother came home from work, she occasionally would be carrying a children’s book or two. I was completely uninterested at first, and so these books were stocked away in a hallway closet.

Finally, when I was five or six, my mother suggested I might enjoy Encyclopedia Brown Solves Them All by Donald J. Sobel. For whatever reason, I picked it up, lay on the couch, and consumed the book from start to finish in one read-through.

For those who don’t know, Encyclopedia Brown is a child sleuth who runs a detective agency out of the garage in his home. Propitiously enough, his father is also Chief of Police for the Smalltown, USA suburbia Encyclopedia’s family lives in. Each book in the series features ten (so so) short kid-centric mysteries, like stolen ice skates and missing hamsters. Right before Encyclopedia Brown solves the “crime,” the reader is asked to guess the solution before turning to the answer in the back of the book. (In this way, Encyclopedia Brown mirrors the Golden Age of Detective Fiction, where books also halted the narrative to challenge the reader to solve the mystery.)

Cover of "Encyclopedia Brown Solves Them All" by Donald J. Sobel

Hooked, I read as many books in the series as she could bring home. From there, my reading habit grew outward. My mother happily brought home more challenging work for me to read.

The cultural, racial, and sexual shifts in America made the 1970s a rather shaggy and complicated time to be a child. This employee’s perk of bringing home remaindered books meant a great many of the titles I read were published in the 1950s and early 60s. The illustrations depicted working dads in ties and wingtips, and homemaker mothers in dresses and pearls carrying spatulas. Boys had haircuts like Marine recruits, or wore coonskin caps. Girls practiced ballet, rode horses, and, if they were a tomboy, tagged along with the boys on whatever wild adventure they cooked up. Some of these books had been published a mere ten years earlier, yet they read like they’d come to me via a bookmobile time machine.

Damn or praise these books on their political merits, the point is, I became an active reader at a young age. My reading diet quickly grew omnivorous.

I began to read the newspaper every morning. Not merely the comics page, but much of the front section, and especially the Opinion and Op-Ed pages. When I was bored, I would pick a volume of an encyclopedia off our family room shelf and simply browse it, page by page, until I found some topic I wanted to read more about. Later, I did the same with the colossal People’s Almanac #2, which I honestly believe I read in its entirety. (Not from front to back, but by dipping into articles as they suited me over the years.) All of this came about thanks to my exposure to Scholastic’s books.

This Flickr collection of titles sold by Scholastic Books in the 1960s and 70s really takes me back. I’ve not read all these titles, but I recognize the covers of almost the entire collection. Books about fancy dolls and show horses were not really my “thing” as a young boy, but I treasured books by Beverley Cleary and Judy Blume, as well as the intense psychological portrait of Harriet the Spy. Encyclopedia Brown made me want to be a detective; Alvin Fernald made me want to be an inventor; 100 Pounds of Popcorn made me want to be an entrepreneur. Every young person who read the Mad Scientists’ Club’s books wanted to join.

There are other books that stayed with me, but whose titles I’ve forgotten. One was about a boy blinded by a firecracker who has to learn Braille and to navigate the world via a seeing-eye dog. Another regarded a pudgy boy who lives in a New York skyscraper with his fitness-obsessed parents. They want to send him to a “fat camp” boarding school which, he learns in confidence from an admission counselor, doesn’t actually care what the kids eat, or even if they exercise. The boy spends his summer break devouring ice cream sundaes and perfecting his admissions essay. It’s a subversive little book, and definitely the product of 1970s, and not 1950s, America. My young mind, raised on the coy cynicism of Looney Tunes and MAD magazine, was magnetically attracted to anything eager to thumb its nose at authority.

Cover of "100 Pounds of Popcorn" by Hazel Krantz

Over time, my mother got to know many of the Scholastic editorial staff in New York City, even if their friendship was purely via long-distance telephone conversations. She knew R. L. Stine, for example, creator of Goosebumps. (He was more familiar to me as Jovial Bob Stine, editor of Scholastic’s Bananas magazine, their family-friendly substitute for MAD.) Somewhere in my parents’ house is a copy of Clifford the Big Red Dog signed by Norman Bridwell.

My mother loved working for Scholastic, because she cherished children and wanted every child to have books. She did that by providing free books to our school’s Scholastic Books Fairs, to ensure no one went home empty-handed. And she made sure our teachers’ classrooms had things like children’s dictionaries on their shelves, if they needed them, or any other reference material they may be lacking.

She grew up on a ramshackle farm in the Mississippi Delta, raised by her grandparents, where the muddy soil was tilled by mules and mosquitoes clouded the humid air. For her, books were a cheap way to escape penury and live vicariously in another world, if even only for a few hours at a time. Books were “portable dreamweavers,” and she wanted to share that dream.

The twelve types of indie writers on X/Twitter

One: The carpet bomber

Non-stop tweets and retweets promoting their books, as well as books by their friends. “What you call ‘social media,’ we call ‘free ad space.'” Apparently, there’s no such thing as too many hash tags in a tweet.

Two: The hustler

They pepper your timeline with tweets documenting their perpetual-motion writer’s life: Workshops, retreats, conferences, book signings, phone calls with editors, selfies with other indie authors. They’re living la vida loca, baby.

Three: The charmed life

Anecdotes about their cats. Magazine-style photos of perfect chai lattes. Dream-vacation photos of rolling green European countrysides. Oh, yes—did they mention they’re spending four weeks in Key West to develop their next novel?

Four: The political animal

Screw books, they’re on Twitter to snark about every D.C. dust-up du jour. Following even one of these accounts will poison your timeline with screaming matches between people who refer to politicians by their initials.

Five: The mover and shaker

Lots of screenshots of Kindle sales reports and KU normalized page counts. Tweet-threads on how to exploit Amazon book keywords and categories. The occasional nostalgia post on finagling that sweet BookBub Daily Deal years ago.

Six: The tea sipper

Drops a tweet every two to six weeks about something absurdly human that happened to them on the way to the pub. For some reason, this type is always British.

Seven: The old oak

Daily pronouncements about how the indie writing scene has changed since they got in on the ground floor waaay back in 2019. Had one bestseller back when you could game the system and get on USA Today‘s bestseller list for a week.

Eight: The unrepentant one

Laughingly brags about using AI to write eight-dozen books a month, all moneymakers. “You suckers are doing this the hard way.” Oddly, they have nothing of substance to say about any other book on the planet, even obvious ones like The Firm, Fight Club, or Green Eggs & Ham. Not an actual author.

Nine: The griper

Never happy with any rating below five stars, and never happy with any review that mentions a problem with their story. What does it take to satisfy these damn readers, a back massage? Stand back, this type is a ticking time bomb.

Ten: The agented

In case you didn’t hear the news, they added it to their account name: “Joe Blow is Agented.” Casually drops tidbits from their latest phone call with their agent, who is agenting them. Offers followers soothing tweets that, one day, if they work hard, they’ll all manage to rise from the trenches and find an agent.

Eleven: A star is stillborn

Mission accomplished! Agent acceptance, book contract signed, manuscript sent off to the editor—this type is last seen boarding the rocket ship to fame and success. Nine months later, they’ve mysteriously deleted all those tweets and switched their account to selling scented bath oils online.

Twelve: Yet another bot

Likes six posts you wrote months ago, follows you, and DM’s you, all in a span of seconds. Has an @-handle with more numerals than your Social Security number. Account name is a Big and Famous writer, who (in real life) has better things to do than maintain a presence on X/Twitter.

A year ago: “A Charlie Brown Christmas”

Charlie Brown & Linus talking about a Christmas tree

Last December, I posted some thoughts on “A Charlie Brown Christmas” that kind of took off. Here’s how it opens:

Last night, I saw a live performance of “A Charlie Brown Christmas” at the San Francisco Symphony. One of the people I went with had never seen the original television cartoon—yes, it’s true.

Afterwards, she asked a simple question: “Why did Charlie Brown pick such a bad tree for Christmas?”

Here it is again, one year later:

The other meaning of “A Charlie Brown Christmas”

The other meaning of “A Charlie Brown Christmas”

Charlie Brown and Linus at the Christmas tree lot.  From "A Charlie Brown Christmas."

Last night, I saw a live performance of “A Charlie Brown Christmas” at the San Francisco Symphony. One of the people I went with had never seen the original television cartoon—yes, it’s true.

Afterwards, she asked a simple question: “Why did Charlie Brown pick such a bad tree for Christmas?”

As we walked, we talked a bit about Linus’ speech at the end, and how the story asks about the “true” meaning of Christmas. This was all fine, but it merely danced around her question of the tree.

What I said next sprung from me. It wasn’t something I formulated or ever considered before:

“Charlie Brown recognizes something familiar in the tree. It’s been overlooked and doesn’t seem to have much to offer anyone, which is what he’s experienced in life. At the end, the other kids see the beauty in the tree, and in decorating it they’re appreciating Charlie Brown too.”

I don’t claim this is a deep insight, or even an original one, but it came to me all at once. I watched the TV show as a child in the 1970s, and rewatched it countless times over the years, and yet I’m still finding meaning in this Christmas tale.

Merry Christmas, everyone.

What’s going on in my world?

The Bridge Daughter Cycle

It’s been awhile. Although the web site has been mostly quiet, I’ve actually been juggling a few projects and staying busy.

First, I am working on a new novel, which I hope to have mostly finished before the end of the year. It’s a bit of curveball compared to my past work—an absurdist caper comedy shot through with gallows humor. I’ll share more details when the manuscript shapes up and the final book comes together.

Second, I’m developing another interactive fiction video game. I’ve filed my intention to submit it for the Interactive Fiction Competition this fall, although having it ready and debugged in time for the comp will be tight. This one will be a bit different than my prior title (According to Cain), in that this new game more like a detective story, where interviewing people and gathering clues is vital to finishing the game. Again, more details will be coming as development finalizes.

My presentation at NarraScope went well. I had a great time in Pittsburgh, meeting a variety of people in the interactive fiction space from academics to seasoned game developers. A casual and positive conference. If you’re interested in my presentation, a PDF of the slides are here. (I’m told a video of the presentation will be available later; I’ll post here when that happens.)

Finally, I have a few blog posts in the hopper. Keeping busy with the above means I’ve neglected the blog. I do plan on paying a little more attention to it in the coming months.

As always, if you’re looking around for your next read, please consider my latest (A Man Named Baskerville), my Bridge Daughter series if you’ve not picked it up yet, or any of my other books. If you’re not on my mailing list, sign up and you can download a preview of A Man Named Baskerville.

Stay tuned!

Aside

It finally happened

Wordle logo

I’m an inveterate Wordle player. When I wake up, I’ll open the app and try to finish the game before rising. I’ve played nearly two hundred rounds so far, which is by no means a long span of time compared to other Wordle fanatics I’ve seen online.

Like most ardent Wordle players, I have my start word, that is, my initial guess which is intended to locate as many common consonants and vowels as possible, in order to make better-educated guesses in the next turns. I went through a few start words when I started playing, landed on one I liked, and have religiously opened with it since.

Well, this morning I hit pay dirt: My start word was, in fact, the word of the day. I’ve wondered for a while now if it would ever happen. Praise be, it has.

And no…I’m not telling you the word today (although see comments for more).

Wordle 654 1/6

🟧
🟧
🟧
🟧
🟧

Why won’t Google include my Sherlock Holmes copyright post?

Sherlock Holmes

In January, I posted about my research into the history of the copyright status on Sherlock Holmes. Although many news outlets rang in the New Year with proclamations that Sherlock Holmes was now free of copyright and in the public domain (“Now anybody can write a Sherlock Holmes story”), I pointed out that they’d made similar proclamations in 2013 (“Finally, Sherlock Holmes is now in the public domain”) after a 7th Circuit court decision castigated the Doyle literary estate.

Indeed, Sherlock Holmes, Dr. Watson, and the bulk of the Holmes canon have been in the public domain for decades now (in the United States, at least). My conclusion was that the Doyle literary estate has been using fear tactics to con creators—from movie studios down to independent authors—to pay them bogus licensing fees.

Something strange happened after posting that entry, though. I check in with Google Search Console now and then to see how my web site is being indexed and discovered by users. My post on the history of Sherlock Holmes’ copyright status has been indexed by Google but is not available via search. In other words, Google’s servers have seen the post, they’ve analyzed the content, but they refuse to add it to their search engine for users to discover. (Google has indexed pages on my web site that link to the page, but not the page itself.)

It’s been over three months. Posts I made after the Sherlock Holmes entry were indexed and made available on Google immediately, usually within a week. Almost all my other blog posts are available on Google (so far as I can tell). Not the entry on Sherlock Holmes’ copyright situation, though. I’ve made repeated attempts to get the page indexed. I ran a Google Search Console tool to find any problems on the page. I’ve gone through Google’s help system to find any valid reason the page may be excluded. The result: Zilch, and my page remains unavailable on Google search.

This isn’t a problem on alternative search engines Duck Duck Go or Bing. It’s only Google.

Google is free to present or exclude any pages it wants to. I’m not even arguing they owe me an explanation, although I’d appreciate one.

But just as Google is in control of their web site, I’m in control of mine. I’ve tried my best to navigate their systems and understand why they’ve excluded my page, to no avail. So I’ll use my final option—my voice, however small—to let others know.

Update: Several weeks after posting this, Google Search began returning the page as a result.