# Fred Wiehe



## Fyrethrid (Jan 18, 2006)

If you like horror with some mystery and fantasy woven into it, (Which by the way, to me seems to be a pretty original concept) then try looking up some of his books on amazon, His latest is called Strange Days. He is a varily unknown author, but don't let that stop you, I'd say he's at least as good as Dean Koontz or Stephen King. rofilel:


----------



## Stewart (Jan 30, 2006)

> I'd say he's at least as good as Dean Koontz or Stephen King


 
I'm not a fan of Koontz or King but, having read the following passage from Wiehe's website, I can guarantee you that he is nowhere near as good as either hack.



> Foreboding clouds blanketed the sky in black shades of malevolence, holding hostage the sun and its life-giving rays. Litter and garbage swirled into the air like man-made tornadoes of destruction. Palm trees slashed about as if under attack from an invisible enemy. The wind whipping around the old Victorian house and whistling through the eaves sounded strangely musical. The gate to the white, picket fence continuously swung open and slammed shut, keeping time with the eerie melody of the wind, like a bass drum: _thud, thud, thud_. Lightning ripped the sky in two, and thunder boomed in the distance, a crescendo to the evil cacophony of sound that raged outside Edna Gear’s window.
> 
> Inside the house, the hardwood floor creaked to its own scary tune.
> 
> ...


 
The prose is overwritten, melodramatic, and reeks of someone trying too hard to create atmosphere. But, what's really depressing, is there's not much connection with the scene or, indeed, the character. It's feels like someone telling you there's a brutal storm in full swing while you are looking out on a sun kissed beach. And it's no good telling the reader that the character's pain is intense, you have to take the reader inside their mind and _show_ how intense the pain is.


----------



## Fyrethrid (Feb 7, 2006)

Your entitled to your own opinion. But if you don't like his work, (And, it seems, horror in general) did you really have to get on here just to tell me, a guy that actually likes his writing, that it sucks?

And by the way, your calling Koontz and King 'hacks' tells me your yet another person who considers genres such as horror trash. Why would I care about your opinion?

Good day to you.


----------



## Hodge (Feb 7, 2006)

Oh my. While Connor is wrong about King (haven't read Koontz), this guy's prose is way over the top... And not really that good.



> Inside the house, *the hardwood floor creaked to its own scary tune.*



Oh my.


----------



## Stewart (Feb 7, 2006)

Fyrethrid said:
			
		

> if you don't like his work, (And, it seems, horror in general)



Actually, I grew up with horrow movies and read horror fiction into and after my teens taking in many _Point Horror_ novels_, _the classics, King, Koontz, Laymon, Brite, Barker, Fowler, Lumley, Lovecraft, Poe, Kiernan, Wheatley, Herbert, Hutson, Rice, Little, Campbell, Ligotti, and so on. I was once a subscriber to _Cemetery Dance_, for the short fiction and genre news.

I've read extensively to the point of saturation and the knowledge that the genre has been depreciated by lazy interpretations of what horror should be. People spend too much time writing new twists on vampires (Koontz is blatantly retelling _Frankenstein_, damnit!) to even think about expanding the genre. The nearest to an imaginative horror novel we've had in recent years was Mark Z. Danielewski's fine, yet flawed, _House of Leaves_. Even that, however, suffers from exploring a tired archetype (the haunted house) but kudos to Danielewski for giving it a wonderful postmodern spin. I tend to think that the good horror these days is contained within short fiction or, if pushed to a novel, those novels where the horror is merely tangential.

The problem with exclusively reading horror is that you inevitably become bored. The novels are, for the most part, churned out by authors now and they just seem to be covering old territory, recycling the same old ideas. When Stephen King first broke into households with _Carrie_ it was a breath of fresh air; here was someone writing a story about people, here was someone that saw horror as a psychological concept, a refreshing notion in the seventies given that standard horror fare was pulpy creature novels where people were chased and terrorised by some beast or other (ie_. Rats_, James Herbert; _Slugs_, Shaun Hutson; _Night of the Crabs_, Guy N. Smith).

In fact, the last one there, _Night of the Crabs_ by Guy N. Smith says how bad horror was back then when you consider the cover:







Yep, "in the tradition of _The Rats_" which actually means: swap rats for crabs. That, for example, just demonstrates how horror becomes saturated: a clear lack of imagination. And then King, once original, started to go over the same ground (_Carrie_ [girl with ability to move things with the power of her mind] and _Firestarter_ [girl with ability to start fires with the power of her mind]; _Christine_ [a supernatural car in Pennsylvania] and _From A Buick 8_ [a supernatural car in Pennsylvania] and, also, _Trucks_ from _Night Shift_ which reads just like Wyndham's _The Day of the Triffids_ except trucks take over the world instead of plants; and _The Shining_; and haunted houses of _The Shining_ and TV series _Rose Red_).

The horror market, in my opinion, took another hit in the nineties with serial killer fiction on both page and screen. _The Silence of the Lambs_ was okay, coming not long after Dahmer's conviction, but that seemed to make everyone want to write about serial killers. We were treated to "satires" like _Scream_, absolute twaddle like _Copycat_, Poppy Brite's thinly veiled supposing of Jeffrey Dahmer in _Exquisite Corpse_, and the late Richard Laymon. Now, there was a pointless author. I read a number of his novels - _Savage_ was okay - but he was someone who just wrote about strange men going around murdering women (_Blood Games_) leaving pointless clues and murdering women (_Endless Night_) or raping and murdering women (_The Beast House_). One wonders if there was something Richard was trying to tell us.

Then came, with _Scream_, teen horror (_I Know What You Did Last Summer_, and other formulaic cack!) and teen horror for television: _Buffy the Vampire Slayer_. And now, in 2006, horror is just too mainstream to be interesting: the major way it can be interesting, as I have said, is with short fiction which, in itself, is a small market meaning the quality has to be better and more crap doesn't make the pages.

The annoying way in which sequels had to be funny (_Evil Dead II_, _Nightmare on Elm Street_, _House_) or ultra camp like later _Critters _movies also lessened the impact of horror.

So, Fyrethrid, I think it's plain to see that I do have an interest in horror - and I still, don't ask why, check out the horror section (if they still have one!) when I visit bookshops - and that it's just that I have passed it by or, as is more correct, passed it over, since there's little quality or innovation there. It would be good to see some new authors coming along, like Miéville and Martin have done for fantasy, although by the inclusion of Miéville I don't mean for novels stuffed full of repetitive adjectives; we already get that from the Lovecraft wannabes. 

So, having read some of Fred Wiehe, I feel justified in declaring that he isn't very good; his lack of a proper publisher pertains to an obvious lack of quality control which is why books like this see the light of day. ​ 



> And by the way, your calling Koontz and King 'hacks' tells me your yet another person who considers genres such as horror trash. Why would I care about your opinion?



It's not about whether you care for my opinion or not; I'd be happy if you were to simply respect it. I don't think horror is trash, as I've said; I just think it has been trashed.

As regards your comparison to King or Koontz I know for a fact that this guy - who I suspect is you! - is nowhere in their league. Someone liked their work enough, for example, to publish it in the first place: King got lucky by being innovative, Koontz served an apprenticeship - Wiehe went to Authors Choice Press (_Starkville_), PublishAmerica (_The Burning_), iUniverse (_Night Songs_), and Helm Publishing (_Strange Days_) to get his novels out there.


----------



## Fyrethrid (Feb 7, 2006)

*As regards your comparison to King or Koontz I know for a fact that this guy - who I suspect is you! - is nowhere in their league. Someone liked their work enough, for example, to publish it in the first place: King got lucky by being innovative, Koontz served an apprenticeship - Wiehe went to Authors Choice Press (Starkville), PublishAmerica (The Burning), iUniverse (Night Songs), and Helm Publishing (Strange Days) to get his novels out there.*

Okay, before you write another chapter in order to prove your worth at critiquing entire genres, let me clarify that, I am _not_ Fred Wiehe. Sorry to disappoint, but, there you are.

Also, what's wrong with going to publishers such as the ones listed above? I mean, someone at these publishers had to like his work in order for them to be published. Just like someone had to like Kings or Koontz's work in the beginning to publish them. I do not see what problem, (which your hinting at oh so vaguely) you have with the publishers fred Wiehe has gone to. 

But I'm sure I'll be indulged with further knowledge from you on this subject sooner rather than later. So by all means, carry on.


----------



## Stewart (Feb 7, 2006)

Fyrethrid said:
			
		

> I am _not_ Fred Wiehe. Sorry to disappoint, but, there you are.




Okay.
 



> Also, what's wrong with going to publishers such as the ones listed above? I mean, someone at these publishers had to like his work in order for them to be published.


You will note that PublishAmerica was one of those I listed. Well, PublishAmerica published Atlanta Nights. Like all vanity efforts, there's nobody there appreciating anything. They are just ways of bypassing agents and valid publishers to escape the quality control that tries to stop such nonsense seeing the light of day.


P.S. Your signature states that your story is called _Heroes Dust_. Don't you mean either _Hero's Dust_ or _Heroes' Dust_?


----------



## Talia_Brie (Feb 7, 2006)

> although by the inclusion of Miéville I don't mean for novels stuffed full of repetitive adjectives; we already get that from the Lovecraft wannabes.


 
Ha.

Sorry, couldn't help myself. That was funny.


----------



## Talia_Brie (Feb 7, 2006)

Furthermore, I agree with Connor's interpretation of the horror genre at the moment. Although I would have trouble including _Silence of the Lambs_, _Buffy the Vampire Slayer_ and _Copycat_ as horror. I think Silence and Copycat are thrillers, and Buffy is stupid teen comedy.

But apart from that, I agree with every comment.

I also feel I should state that I feel Connor is actually the best read person I know, or know of. Read some of his book reviews. He provides astute anaylsis of a myriad of genres. I would certainly value his opinion on an issue like this.


----------



## Fyrethrid (Feb 7, 2006)

*You will note that PublishAmerica was one of those I listed. Well, PublishAmerica published **Atlanta Nights**. Like all vanity efforts, there's nobody there appreciating anything. They are just ways of bypassing agents and valid publishers to escape the quality control that tries to stop such nonsense seeing the light of day.*

I'll give you this, but you fail to explain why the other publishers are inadequate.


----------



## Stewart (Feb 8, 2006)

Talia_Brie said:
			
		

> I would have trouble including _Silence of the Lambs_, _Buffy the Vampire Slayer_ and _Copycat_ as horror. I think Silence and Copycat are thrillers, and Buffy is stupid teen comedy.


 
I think it comes down to exploring horror across the genres. You could look at a war movie and concede that it demonstrates the horrors of war. In such a case the horror is tangential and can get to you; horror need not be about ghosts, monsters, and witches. The same goes for the thrillers above; _The Silence of the Lambs_ may well be a thriller with some police procedural but its serial killer content can give it a bit of crossover with horror in the way that a political thriller (i.e. _Clear And Present Danger_) doesn't.



			
				Fyrethrid said:
			
		

> I'll give you this, but you fail to explain why the other publishers are inadequate.


iUniverse and Helm are both vanity publishing. The blurb, for example, on the iUniverse home page reads thus:



> There's no need to waste years hoping that someone will publish your book. iUniverse makes it possible for you to become a published author today. Only we have professionals with extensive knowledge of the industry to guide you through a unique and supported self-publishing experience.


 
And the Helm Publishing website, actually called Publishers Drive, is a sub-division within a print on demand company who also handle flyers, menus, etc. for all occasions.


----------



## Fyrethrid (Feb 8, 2006)

*And the Helm Publishing website, actually called Publishers Drive, is a sub-division within a print on demand company who also handle flyers, menus, etc. for all occasions.*

And how do you know this? I looked on their website and saw nothing about flyers or menu services. They seem credible to me.


----------



## Stewart (Feb 8, 2006)

Fyrethrid said:
			
		

> And how do you know this? I looked on their website and saw nothing about flyers or menu services. They seem credible to me.


 
Because if you go to Helm Publishing's *Contact* page you get a link to the webmaster's site at The Oku Group which states:



> Document Services which include photo scanning, reduction & enlargements, CD Archiving, and Document conversions to PDF format. Layout & Design for promotional materials (Posters, Brochures, Flyers, Business cards, mailers and other promotion materials) and Book Publishing through our partner Helm Publishing.


 
So, click on the services link and you get offered a choice from:



> Our Basic Services Package includes:
> Custom professional cover.
> International Standard Book Number (ISBN).
> Inclusion of author photo and cover photos.
> ...



Which, again, is vanity publishing. I must say that you are incredibly defensive of Fred Wiehe's choices of vanity press.


----------



## Talia_Brie (Feb 8, 2006)

> I think it comes down to exploring horror across the genres. You could look at a war movie and concede that it demonstrates the horrors of war. In such a case the horror is tangential and can get to you; horror need not be about ghosts, monsters, and witches. The same goes for the thrillers above; _The Silence of the Lambs_ may well be a thriller with some police procedural but its serial killer content can give it a bit of crossover with horror in the way that a political thriller (i.e. _Clear And Present Danger_) doesn't.


 
And yet the overall message of the movie (_Silence_) compared to say, _Seven_, is where I think the distinction lies. There's a good deal of crossover but in _Silence_ the villain was Buffalo Bill, and they caught him. Not out of luck, but by following the clues. This sort of message is re-affirming for the audience. While in _Seven_ they caught John Doe because he walked into the police station and said "Detective, I think you're looking for me". This message is a little more disturbing, unsettling, because it indicates to an audience that good police work may no longer be enough to protect them against serial killers.

In my opinion the objective of true horror fiction is to leave this sort of cultural anxieties unresolved.

But there is some crossover in the content, so I can see why you are referring to them.

Anyway, I don't think this thread is about genre theory, so ...


----------

