Sweet Sting of Rejection

In the midst of a seemingly endless supply of  rejection letters, it is easy to forget it happens to the best of us.
Spotting real talent seems to be a rare gift  indeed, and the truly original material is frowned upon. After all, different scares us, takes us to the uncomfortable zone- new is strange and unknown. Risky. And in business, risks are to be controlled. Familiar is often the safe bet. Let´s take a look at some of the famous rejection letters received by our very best. Luckily for us, they did not stop writing or listen to the (bad) advice.

Ursula K. Le Guin went on to publish a wide variety of books, essays, short stories and poetry, especially in the genre of science fiction and fantasy. She has collected five Hugo-awards and six Nebula-awards, and a plethora of other recognitions.

The rebellious American Gonzo-journalist Hunter S. Thompson ( 1937-2005) did not take criticism well. This is the letter he sent to his own biographer, William McKeen in 1991. "The Outlaw Journalist" on Thompson ended up being published anyways, in 2008, and gained notable praise.

Tim Burton was young and eager to get published. But his good attempt of a children´s book did not quite pass the par. Disney considered his creation too derivative. Later he went on to direct such masterpieces as
"Beetlejuice", "Nightmare before Christmas" and "Sleepy Hollow". Maybe Disney just was not ready for his colorfully macabre style back in 1976.

Although we do not have the words to look at, one quite well-known writer to receive harsh rejection letters was a British lady by the name of J. K. Rowling. She was even advised to get a day job, since "children´s books do not sell well". Her books series, depicting the adventures of Harry Potter, is now the best-selling in history.

Sweet Sting of Rejection

Soviet Propaganda and Science Fiction

The art form of science fiction is a clever tool when depicting the unimaginable: alternate worlds, technology beyond our possibilities, other life forms and para-psychological theories. It liberates the imagination to see over to the other side: what could be, what might one day be possible. Just remember, back in the day cell phones and televisions were science fiction for Jules Verne.  Scifi can be useful in freeing our minds from the shackles of everyday rationality, but it is also a handy little weapon in the wars of propaganda.When done artfully, scifi can be armored to either question the prevalent political system or to reinforce it.

Coincidentally, the first science fiction movie on space travel was not done in the US, but in the newly formed Soviet Union by the filmmaker Yakov Protazanov. Aelita: The Queen of Mars (1924) was a silent film, based on a novel by Alexei Tolstoy. Protazanov´s work has undoubtedly influenced a number of later works in the same genre, most notably  Fritz Lang´s  famous Metropolis (1927).

The film was produced during the hype years of the "new era of communism", New Economic Policy. NEP stemmed from Lenin´s belief in introducing moderate "mixed-market" -measures into socialism. One of the signs of the new lax attitude was allowing foreign investment into the country, which produced a more commercially driven cinema production house, owned in part by a German organisation. Thus Mezhrabpom-Rus was able to give birth to Aelita, which arose from a curious marriage between the Soviet ideals on socialism and the good old Western capitalist business sense. The elaborate costumes and expensive set design were undoubtedly a result of this fruitful union.

Of course, Lenin understood the propaganda value of cinema. There is no question about it. At the time, the public did not understand the carefully orchestrated view on reality given by a motion picture. (One might ask if they sometimes still don´t). Aelita, however, did not receive a concordantly warm welcome from the comrades. It was deemed too Westernized, too bourgeois, and lacking short on socialist ideals. As time went by, the movie fell out of favor with the official Communist line completely. The movie attempted to portray a somewhat clear view on the Soviet society going through a transition- all re/presented in a strange space setting on an Martian planet.

The plot tells the story of a  group of people coming from  a post-war Soviet Union, traveling to Mars on a rocket ship. On Mars they help lead a rebellion against a ruling elite group- how fitting, one might ask. The plot offers the prerequisite love affair between the queen Aelita (pronounced almost like ´elite´) and the leader of the soviet group, Los. The affair is doomed, and Aelita is not to be trusted (like capitalism). After a series of tumultuous events, Los returns to Earth with his group of fellow-minded comrades. After impossible utopia, they find solace from the reality of Communism. Individualistic hedonism has been replaced with social duty and shared purpose.

Soviet Propaganda and Science Fiction

"Tron: Legacy" and Going Mad

I don´t know if you have already had the chance to see the new "Tron: Legacy", which is a sequel to the legendary original "Tron" from 1982. It´s in 3-D, full of cool images and gadgets. And good looking girls and boys in tights. And this is a Disney-movie, folks. Which sort of makes sense, if you have a dark and wicked mind, like I do. (Just kidding)

So far the reviews have been less than stellar. The plot is weak, if non-existing. The acting sucks. Jeff Bridges is apparently just waltzing through his performance like an insomniac on weed. The main star of the movie, Garret Hedlund, is pictured in every possible angle stretching his ill-fitting body suit. The movie did make around 44 million $ on its opening weekend, which is about $ 17 million more than the original "Tron" did, but this does lack the original estimate of 54 $. Is the sequel going to be a cult classic as its precessor? Hmm, I am not sure. The original "Tron" was also not critically well-received, nor did it make a commercial success. However, the ideas it presented at the time (1982) of the digital world, immersion into games, alternate realities, AI becaming aware etc. were groundbreaking.





The Los Angeles Times did an interesting article on the ´psyche´of the first "Tron"-movie, as theorized by Jay Martin, Martin, who is a University of Southern California Literature professor AND a practicing psychoanalyst, has provided his own intriguing take on the actual subplot of the movie. In sum, he thinks "Tron" perfectly describes the schizophrenic brain and its processes. Schizophrenic patients often see themselves being at the mercy of a machine or computer. He cites a German psychiatrist Viktor Tausk, who described
 "schizophrenia as a mental process which is experienced by the schizophrenic as if it were imposed upon him through the diabolical activity of some external force induced by a mysterious machine. The patient´s disordered impulses feel as if they are not his own, but are pushed inside from an alien outside."


In the first "Tron", Jeff Bridges´ character Kevin Flynn exhibits symptoms of paranoia, as evidenced by his videogames ("Space Paranoids"). Paranoia dwells into schizophrenia as Flynn is absorbed into the computer and must fight the manifestations of his own programs. According to Jay Martin, this underlying subplot is so raw and effective that it makes the viewers feel uncomfortable.

"The senses of fragmentation, alienation and danger as a way of life; the film´s representation of a primitive, paranoid schizophrenic process lying just beneath the surface of behavior, into which we might fall at any time - these are what made ´Tron` so hard for audiences to take".


The ideas of alternate realities, dream worlds and losing grip with reality are not that rare of a treat these days ("Matrix", "Inception", "Sixth Sense"). Perhaps the new version of the digital game world is met with less disturbed feelings?

"Tron: Legacy" and Going Mad