Oldies But Goodies {Put This One on Your TBR List} Book Reviews: Three Fantasy Horror Selections by T. Kingfisher by Karen S. Wiesner

 

Oldies But Goodies

{Put This One on Your TBR List}

Book Reviews: Three Fantasy Horror Selections by T. Kingfisher

by Karen S. Wiesner 

Beware potential spoilers! 

I read a tremendous amount of T. Kingfisher (who also writes and illustrates under her real name Ursula Vernon) books in 2025, and I've been reviewing them for my Friday column here on the blog for much of that time. Because there are so many, I've been trying to do combined evaluations of her works according to series, genre, and/or theme. This week, I'm grouping three of her stories under the category of adult fantasy horror. 

Before I start, I have to lament about the fact that library apps tend to be insufficient when it comes to following prolific authors. I have two different library apps (Libby and Hoopla) and cards from two different physical libraries, yet I find that, even with all of that, I can't get everything I'd like in order to read/listen to everything by Ursula Vernon and her alter ego T. Kingfisher. Libraries should really commit to an author--all or nothing. If I like something by an author, I want to read her entire body of work. I think most true readers feel the same. In the case of this particular author, I wasn't able to get everything via the library apps or at the actual locations themselves. I ended up purchasing new trade paperbacks of each because I couldn't get them from the library. Of Kingfisher's body of work, these are probably my least favorites. Sigh! 

After reading so many of her eclectic selections, I've deduced that this author is uniquely her own--whether she's writing adult or kids' fiction, whatever the genre she writes in. She has her own style that flouts all conventional definition, and these are no exception. I like that, but it can also be an issue when you're reading a lot of her titles at once. In some ways, it's like the fact that Julia Roberts is always Julia Roberts in all her films. As an actress, her own personality bleeds into her work so it leads to her being typecast. She's tried to get out of that by doing different genres, including several unflattering roles, but the end result, unfortunately, is that Julia Roberts is always Julia Roberts. If you like her and think she's a great actress, as I do, then that's fantastic for you and her. If you don't, then probably not so much. In the same way, T. Kingfisher/Ursula Vernon seems to me to be, basically, the main character in anything she writes. Most of the time, that works for her; rarely, it doesn't quite make it. 

Note that I'm reviewing these selections in the order I read them, not the order they were published in.  

The Hollow Places is an adult fantasy horror novel published in 2020. Kara is the main character. Newly divorced, she's invited by her uncle to live at his unusual museum featuring weird "natural wonders" while she gets her bearings. While she's there, wanting to keep busy and avoid the melancholy of her situation, she stumbles upon a mysterious portal. She and her old friend Simon from next door enter it and become trapped in a nightmare, alternate universe. 

By all definitions, this one sounds like everything I'd love in a book. Yet I didn't. The protagonist and her companion didn't seem as well fleshed out as the characters in the previous stories I'd read of this author's. Additionally, it reminded me a lot of Alice in Wonderland and Gaiman's Nevermore, both of which I want to love but ultimately just don't. Too many insane events take place in stories like these, and, in my opinion, simply don't form a cohesive whole that I can connect with. It all just strikes me as random, unappealing crazy- or silliness. For fans of Wonderland and Nevermore, I imagine this one could be an amazing, upside-down adventure. 

A House With Good Bones (clever title) is an adult horror novel with a touch of modern gothic thrown into it. It was published in 2023. The heroine Sam takes an extended vacation from work as an archaeoentomologist (she studies insects and arthropods recovered from archaeological sites) because her brother is worried about their mother. Sam quickly realizes he was right to be concerned. Her mother seems different. While investigating why, sometimes with the help of her mother's handyman, Sam stumbles onto a lot of family secrets and peculiarities within the house and outside, in the rose garden. As usual in these kinds of stories, sometimes it's better to leave the past buried. After all, curiosity always tries to kill the cat. 

I expended tremendous effort trying to get into this story. I read a plodding chapter, took a break for a few weeks, read another slow chapter, went on to something else for a very long while. At that point, I knew I was going to have to buckle down and work really hard to force myself to read it. I'd purchased the trade paperback, brand new, so I didn't want it to be for nothing. 

There were a lot of interesting parts to the story. Sam is a well-constructed character with Kingfisher's typical big personality chock full of unique humor. My problem with all of Ursula Vernon/T. Kingfisher's work is that her main characters are constantly uttering little "asides" in introspection that can take over so they're no longer amusing injections but annoying blockades to plot development. There are so many of them, it became like I was reading someone's stream of consciousness journals! Each one is a detour from the main story, and that can get boring and overwhelming when trying to get into a particular story. 

Combine that problem with the fact that this story was such a slow burner. Having read The Hollow Places first, I got an inkling of where the faults in this particular genre were for the author, but here I was really slapped in the face. My crux issue is that the author seems to have a problem developing horror. Every time things got scary, it was as if she herself jumped onto the page and jarred us out of the story with off-putting and off-piste commentary that detracted from the action. It really broke up the tension and left me deflated and disappointed. I read horror because I want to be scared out of my pants. I want to chew my nails. Why would an author pop that balloon of rising terror when it's the whole purpose? 

As contradictory as this is going to sound, I did end up liking A House With Good Bones. You know, despite itself. It was an unusual story with creepy roses and bugs and a compelling twist on the obvious villain. In general, I liked the main character, but the over-excess of personality did get overwhelming sometimes. I wish it hadn't been so hard to get into, such a challenge to make it all the way through. But I was glad to have read it despite its slow and uneven pacing and the author self-sabotaging when it came to developing the horror. If you can stick with it, as I forcefully did, I think you'll be glad you did. 

The Twisted Ones is an adult horror novel published in 2019. While between editing jobs, Melissa, aka Mouse, accompanied by her loyal, sweet but dopey coon dog Bongo, ends up clearing out her so-not-beloved grandmother's house crammed with everything imaginable hoarded over the course of a lifetime. Early on, she finds her step-grandfather's journal and begins to be pulled into the crazy world he lived in in his final years. Local folklore combined with the old man's rantings about incoherent dreams of the woods and its bizarre, creepy creatures mingled with her own intrigue with the journal could lead her down a path there can be no return from. The local neighbors are certainly colorful and full of not-quite helpful information and support.

As in the previous two stories, we have what I believe is T. Kingfisher's fictional counterpart playing the starring role with the specific details like job, friends, and names, etc. being slightly changed up. Again, we have a male "protector" who doesn't quite live up to the role of hero, doesn't become a love interest, doesn't actually feel all that necessary to the story one way or the other. Instead, a new friend takes on the role--foolishly and unbelievably--of accompanying the heroine when she has to go against all sense and reason to confront the evil stalking her. Once more, there are way too many asides distracting from the plot, and the author defuses all the tension every single time before it really comes to a head. 

It was so hard to get into the story in the first place, and sticking with it was a daily struggle. The Twisted Ones wanted to be scary but it wasn't. Instead, it was just weird--probably as weird as her inspiration for it (mentioned in the Author's Note), apparently an Arthur Machen found manuscript called "The White People" that was published in 1904. I haven't even heard of it. While I'm glad I finished it because the core story was worthy, I didn't love the execution of this tale any more than I did the previous two. 

I hate to say something like this, but these three books seemed disturbingly similar as I read them. It was almost as if they were one book and the author just swapped out miscellaneous technicalities to make them slightly different. A House With Good Bones and The Twisted Ones, in particular, felt way too much alike. At least initially, the "Scooby Doo" lovable dog made this one much easier to read because at least the main character wasn't just talking to herself. Now she was directing her nervous tension onto her pet, which made everything a lot more palatable. I also wasn't a huge fan of the "past story told in journal entries" plot advancement. I won't lie to you--those were extremely hard to get through. In my opinion, it was a lazy way to tell the backstory, almost like those cabbagehead-isms from Star Trek, where characters are wont to say, "As you know…" before launching into important information about the plot that the viewer needs to know. 

~*~

I was looking for pee-my-pants chills from these three books, but I got novelty weirdness instead. Alas, I expect a lot of readers who like freaky, strange tales rather than true horror might like these three vastly more than I did. In general, I'd say the core narrative of each was good and pushing through to get to it was, at minimum, rewarding. 

Karen Wiesner is an award-winning, multi-genre author of over 150 titles and 16 series.

Visit her website and blog here: https://karenwiesner.weebly.com/

and https://karenwiesner.weebly.com/karens-quill-blog and her publisher here: https://www.writers-exchange.com/Karen-Wiesner/

Oldies But Goodies {Put This One on Your TBR List} Miss Hickory by Carolyn Sherwin Bailey by Karen S. Wiesner

 

Oldies But Goodies

{Put This One on Your TBR List}

Miss Hickory by Carolyn Sherwin Bailey

by Karen S. Wiesner 

 

Beware potential spoilers! 

The world was a very different place when Miss Hickory by Carolyn Sherwin Bailey was published in 1946. This was a children's novel, not a picture book with questionably well-done art accompanied by a sprinkling of words across the pages. Miss Hickory has 128 pages, 24,000 words. Back then, children were often read to by other people, usually parents. No doubt, many of these books were far beyond the child's own reading level yet the stories were perfectly understandable to them. The current suggested age for this book is 8 to 12, which boggles my mind a bit, and not simply because I can't imagine too many kids these days picking up a complex book like this. Additionally, back then stories like this one seemed to have a higher purpose than simply entertaining readers. 

Miss Hickory was one of the very first books I ever read on my own as a child. With a protagonist who's a living doll made from a forked apple tree twig and a hickory nut for a head, her story was magical to me. Miss Hickory lived in a luxurious corncob house made by her owner Ann. Miss Hickory is used to being spoiled, but now things are changing. Ann is going away, and selfish Squirrel has decided he likes Miss Hickory's comfy house for his own winter home. Crow helps her find a nest where she can live out the winter, but she'll need to be clever and courageous to survive. The author and her husband lived on a farm with an apple orchard, and she drew inspiration for this story from there. 

When I reread this enchanting story again recently, it was to the realization about just how prickly and hard-headed (sorry) Miss Hickory is. She likes to instruct people how best to live their lives but accepting help from others always leaves her irritated. And sometimes she misses out on wonderful things because of her stubbornness. Hilariously, she also likes be very feminine, and we find several chapters with Miss Hickory being a fashionista by making herself new and beautiful clothing out of things like maple leaves and grass and cherry blossoms. I found it interesting that Miss Hickory took the existence of God for granted. There's a Christmas miracle to be seen, but she misses it because she's too pigheaded to listen to anything Squirrel has to say. Does she learn her lesson through the many chapters in which she and her friends live out their lives on the farm? I'm not sure. But she does learn a lot about herself--her own origin, for one. 

This story was told very strangely. Most of the chapters were from Miss Hickory's point of view, which made sense, as this is the compilation of her adventures during the seasons. However, sometimes we're put into the perspective of another (usually animal) character for no other reason I can fathom other than that the author felt she'd started a story with that particular character and needed closure before going back to Miss Hickory. 

Though Squirrel plucks off and takes a bite of Miss Hickory's head (too scary for modern readers in both words and illustration? probably)--his character is suitably drawn with all the complexity needed for readers to find him endearing despite his actions. He's an animal designed for storing up food for himself, yet he can't seem to remember where he's hidden all his nuts from one minute to the next, let alone over the course of a long, harsh winter. And, frankly, wouldn't he much rather just eat it now? Of course he would! It's easy to root for all of these lovable, fully-fleshed out characters. Though the chapters play out in a seemingly random fashion, the story does actually reach full circle by the end. 

I'd be remiss not to mention the lovely illustrations done by Ruth Chrisman Gannett. I found out they were done by a process called lithography, which is a really archaic (though there are still people who do it) means of photocopying something. Apparently, the artist has to be very careful while drawing on the stone (or similar material) as there are no second chances with this method. Either it's drawn right the very first time--or as close as possible--or a whole lot of time, effort, and materials will be wasted. Find out more about the art of this here https://jerwoodvisualarts.org/art-techniques-and-materials-glossary/lithography/ and be sure to watch some YouTube videos of it actually being done. I found it fascinating. Too much work, definitely, but still intriguing as a precursor to modern-day photocopying. 

Inspired by the incredible artwork in Miss Hickory, I couldn't help wanting to do some sketches from the book myself, which were all done by black and white lithography (although color is possible with the method). I even did one in color, though only the cover of the book has color in the first edition. Does anyone else want an apple now, too? <grin>

  

Miss Hickory Black & White Sketch and Colored Pencil Rendering by @Karen Wiesner

 

Miss Hickory's Corncob House by @Karen Wiesner 

If you do an internet search with the words "Miss Hickory illustrations", you'll see some of Gannett's original designs, including one of Squirrel holding Miss Hickory's still scolding head just before he takes a bite of it. Never fear, Miss Hickory may end up headless, but she's also "heedless, happy" that way. Clearly, her head had been holding her back. 

Children and adults alike will find a timeless, magical world to explore in this well-deserving Newbery Medal Winner. The lesson to be learned (as all these old books had some kind of moral to impart, which I heartily approve) is not to hold yourself back from who you're meant to be--not with the promise of comfort nor with the hurtle of fear of the unknown. 

Karen Wiesner is an award-winning, multi-genre author of over 150 titles and 16 series.

Visit her website and blog here: https://karenwiesner.weebly.com/

and https://karenwiesner.weebly.com/karens-quill-blog and her publisher here: https://www.writers-exchange.com/Karen-Wiesner/

{Put This One on Your TBR List} Book Review: Hunter's Run by Gardner Dozois, George R. R. Martin, and Daniel Abraham by Karen S. Wiesner

 

{Put This One on Your TBR List} Book Review: Hunter's Run

by Gardner Dozois, George R. R. Martin, and Daniel Abraham

by Karen S. Wiesner

 

 

Be aware that there are spoilers in this review. 

Hunter's Run is a science fiction novel published in 2007 and written over the span of 30 years by "three young authors over time": Gardner Dozois (who's credited with the original concept), George R. R. Martin, and Daniel Abraham. I reviewed one of Martin and Dozois' co-edited anthology collections (Rogues) back on June 28, 2024. Martin is, of course, the famed author of A Song of Ice and Fire (HBO's Game of Thrones). Dozois was a science fiction author before he passed in 2018 as well as the founding editor of The Year's Best Science Fiction anthologies (from 1984 through 2018) and Asimov's Science Fiction magazine (1986–2004). Abraham is a novelist best known for his The Long Price Quartet and The Dagger and the Coin fantasy series, and (with Ty Franck) as the co-author of The Expanse science fiction series under the joint pseudonym James S. A. Corey.  

In 1976 Dozois conceived of the story of a man floating in darkness. A year later, he was invited to teach at a summer science fiction writing workshop by Martin, who found Dozois's story interesting. Dozois felt stalled in continuing it so, after three years in a drawer, he asked Martin to collaborate. Martin wanted to explore the alien world of São Paulo. In 1982, Martin couldn't get any further in completing the story either, so he passed it back to Dozois. Neither was able to find a way to progress, and the book went back into a drawer until 2002. Martin brought it to the attention of a young "Turk", author Abraham, who completed it as a novella. Martin called it "Shadow Twin". It was published in 2004. Later, Dozois reworked it into a 300-page-plus novel and renamed it Hunter's Run. Despite how disjointed the writing of this story undeniably was (the full account of the process is included in the back matter of the published novel), it surprisingly does come together in a seamless and cohesive way. At no point in time did I feel like someone (or some two or three) else had written certain aspects of the story. If for no other reason, that does make this "experiment" quite an achievement.

Before I proceed any further, I'll again warn that there's no way to review this book the way I want to without giving away key aspects of the plot. If you want to read the story without being told those pivotal points, go read the book and come back to this review later. 

In this futuristic science fiction, humans have reached the stars but unfortunately alien species including the Silver Enye, Turu, Cian, and others have already claimed the choice worlds. However, these races allow human colonists (mostly the downtrodden, poor, and/or potential lawbreakers) to join in the world-building by crash-testing them on empty planets too dangerous to be colonized by the "worthy". 

The main character Ramón is a thoroughly despicable creep who came to the planet to escape the poverty and hopelessness he faced on Earth. Unfortunately, the capital city on São Paulo is no better. The only law in this place is survival. A prospector, Ramón drinks away whatever money he makes or spends it on the woman he's with, though certainly doesn't love or particularly even like. He's an abusive jerk (though Elena can be described exactly the same way) who ends up killing someone important. On the run in the wilderness "wastelands", he tells himself if he can find a rich mineral strike somewhere, he can start his life all over. He stumbles upon an alien installation. Before he can do anything about it, he's kidnapped by the aliens. 

When he comes to, he's told by the aliens that another man has discovered their location and they have to capture him before he reveals their existence to the human colonists back in São Paulo. Ramón is compelling to join that hunt. In the process, Ramón begins to bond with his captor Maneck. Eventually Ramón learns that the other human intruder was actually the original Ramón that the aliens have cloned to create him--he's the clone of the original Ramón. Despite this, Ramón begins to understand that these advanced aliens also landed on this hostile planet where they're just trying to survive. Cloning humans and trying to learn their behavior is simply a way for them to blend in and co-exist. 

The clone-Ramón manages to escape this captor and meets up with the older, jaded and, frankly, out of shape version of himself, who doesn't recognize him. It doesn't take long for clone-Ramón to realize he really, really does not like the original Ramón. He begins to question his own existence, intentions, and purpose as a result. When the original Ramón discovers who he is, survival is again the only option. The clone kills the original (whoa!) and tries to take up his old life in the capital--which means consequences of the original's crimes and imprisonment. Soon the clone decides he has more in common with the aliens and more chance at a life of peace and purpose with them. 

While all the authors who had hands in this project played with radically different ideas (told in the interviews in the back of the book) for Hunter's Run, at its heart, the theme is in the exploration of what it means to be human. Everything you've read thus far in this review are all the reasons I wanted to love this book. It sounds amazing, doesn't it? The subject matter, the setting, and the concept is utterly compelling to me as a person and a writer. I truly enjoyed the Enemy Mine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enemy_Mine_(film) overtones that pervaded the interactions of clone-Ramón and the alien. 

To me, the fatal flaw in Hunter's Run (and probably it's earlier version "Shadow Twin" as well) was that the authors jointly made the protagonist--and, by default, his clone--so unlikable and thoroughly despicable that I never got to the point of feeling like his/their story was captivating, nor were they worth rooting for. In his interview in the back of Hunter's Run, Dozois said, "There was an essay by Damon Knight complaining that almost all heroes in science fiction are middle-class white Americans whereas almost no one on Earth is… 'Where is the space hero who is Mexican?'…I made Ramón in the 1970s very stereotypical… We needed to move away from that." Given that glimpse of story creation, I found it highly ironic that the three authors, even working together, ultimately chose to make Ramón stereotypically violent and reprehensible, so much so that it was hard to feel sympathy for him on the basis of the fact that, wherever this man went, he constantly felt he had to fight from every side just to survive. Ramón as a person was portrayed as ruthless, selfish, and vicious. He made bad choices he couldn't blame anyone else for. Regardless of his merciless setting or the environment he was in, he was a man who would always be who and what he was…a creep. There's no sugar-coating that fact with philosophical, psychological, or cultural discourses. 

As the majority of this story was told from the point of view of his clone, who does--to his credit--seem to be at least aware his original self was a jackass, I experienced disappointment that the clone didn't seem significantly changed even after he realized who he was in relation to the original Ramón and admitted to himself he didn't care for his "predecessor". As Jerry Seinfeld said, "adjacent to refuse is refuse". I guess ultimately I strongly need to feel a protagonist is a hero, or more accurately, has the potential to become one through the course of a story, not simply a degree above a villain, as this clone character was. I could in no way conceive that clone-Ramón might break free of any association with his original counterpart. His motives only felt slightly less egotistical and "survival of the fittest" than the original Ramón's. I kind of wish the authors had chosen to tell the story from Maneck's perspective, or at least partially so. 

The end also bothered me because, again, it displayed so pointedly that clone-Ramón wasn't much better than the original. There was no clear resolution. Clone-Ramón escapes prison and heads back to the alien hideout, hoping to find a way to live with the aliens in peace--and the reason he does this is to escape the imprisonment he's facing and to better himself. We never learn whether the aliens are amicable to this. I hate endings that don't provide adequate resolutions. To me, this still feels like a story untold, as it certainly must have at the many stages the authors shelved the unfinished versions. 

While there was a lot to be impressed by here in terms of the thematic explorations which make this tale well worth reading and the masterly world building of these three amazing writers, sadly I didn't actually enjoy it at any point. Still, it's certainly something any lover of science fiction action/adventure tales and fans of these three authors should consider picking up. 

Karen Wiesner is an award-winning, multi-genre author of over 150 titles and 16 series.

Visit her website here: https://karenwiesner.weebly.com/

and https://karenwiesner.weebly.com/karens-quill-blog

Find out more about her books and see her art here: http://www.facebook.com/KarenWiesnerAuthor

Visit her publisher here: https://www.writers-exchange.com/Karen-Wiesner/

 

"Mr. Ed" and Writing the Great American Novel

Please see my long comment on Linnea's post that went up yesterday. She's right, it takes longer to write shorter.

Well now! Isn't The Great American Novel what we all feel we're doing when we write?
Of course, we know it isn't so. Problems of genre-prejudice aside, you don't write "the great American novel" on purpose. Perhaps someone else on this co-blog will examine the concept "great" and the concept "American" in depth, and "novel" is a whole subject on its own, but today I wanted to examine what makes an Icon of a culture.

What is the function of an Icon and why do cultures elevate some trivial bit to become an icon to future generations?

Where do Icons come from?

I saw a segment on the PBS News Hour last week that's been bugging me with this question, and in truth it has a lot to do with Alien Romance and Intimate Adventure and Genre-Prejudice and Iconography.

"Mr. Ed" the 1960's TV show was billed and named in the News Hour segment several times as An American Icon. I think the publicist for the book written by the star of the show whom they were interviewing must have coined the phrase and succeeded in convincing the reporter to use it.

"Mr. Ed" preceded Star Trek and was an SF-ish parody crossed with kiddy-fare and came out immensely popular with adults because it was interlaced with complex relationships (like I Love Lucy and The Lucy Show).

http://www.tv.com/mister-ed/show/769/summary.html for more information (episode guides are there if anyone posted them -- tv.com is only as good as the contributors).

Mr. Ed was followed by "My Favorite Martian" -- and later by Star Trek which turned everything topsy turvey.

You see, Star Trek was actual adult drama -- not even really SF's traditional "Action/Adventure For Teen Boys" though it had that element prominent on the surface. ST posed serious questions about morality, ethics, world politics and religion.

SF on TV was revolutionized by Star Trek -- but the thin edge of the wedge, the ground-breaker, the true entry point into the general consciousness for science fiction (and adult stories about non-human intelligence) was via COMEDY.

And so Mr. Ed (about a deep buddy-friendship between an ordinary man and a talking horse who wanted to keep his verbal skills secret) became an American Icon (nearly 50 years later, when the star of the show writes a book about it!).

So maybe "an icon" is the tip of the root of change -- the point where a seed breaks open and starts to grow, but isn't quite recognizable yet.

Yes, I noted Rowena's post about Ginger Root and its shape. You see the impression humor makes.

So an Icon may be the first not-quite-recognizable appearance of a thing, or the next growth stage where it becomes recognizable (Spock has been named "an Icon") -- or some further inflection point in a growth curve.

Why do we appoint some things as "icons" and other things not? Well, that's another discussion having to do with popularity, publicity, journalistic choices, feedback between audience and profit-driven journalism, and group mind building.

But before we discuss any of that, and get bogged down in the related topic of "what is Art, really?" I think here on Alien Romance, we should study the 1960's a little deeper and learn.

Try this link:
http://www.tv.com/comedy/genre/4/topshows.html?g=4&era=1960&l=A&pop=&tag=gen_subtabs;era;4

Romance has been as derided as Science Fiction.
Science Fiction has begun to lose that stigma (still has a way to go, but frankly SF fandom WON the battle).

Romance is still considered "girly" fare, kid-lit, or the opiate of the useless drudge of the household.

But The Romance Genre really is an in-depth, far ranging and far reaching, highly philosophical, blatantly critical study of a single astrological phenomenon long known as The Neptune Transit -- which is famous for its spiritual effects.

The Alien Romance exposes that buried philosophical depth to the eye of the un-educated and perhaps innocent reader just as Star Trek exposed the philosophical importance of Science Fiction buried inside Mr. Ed, My Favorite Martian, Bewitched, and The Adams Family. (I'm not even mentioning Superman and other "kiddie" items, just general comedy.)

As Alien Romance adds an adult dimension to Romance, so Comedy added an adult dimension to SF.

Our next step must be a TV SHOW -- maybe made from a feature film -- which will become an American Icon like Mr. Ed -- a lighthearted romantic comedy with an alien point of view.

Now, maybe that's already happened and we're too close to it to see. I could nominate Buffy The Vampire Slayer and Angel as the Alien Romance Icon, maybe Lois and Clark -- maybe Forever Knight? Today we have Tanya Huff's Blood Files on TV along with a chance for The Dresden Files to make it on the Sci Fi channel. Maybe we're already there?

Anyone else have a nomination for the 2000's decade American Icon that will change viewing habits and make Alien Romance highly respectable general audience fare recognized on its artistic and philosophical merits?

What exactly is an icon and how do you recognize it before the media names it so?
Or maybe more to the point, how do you get to be "the media" that gets to choose what to select as "an Icon?"

Note this media piece on the last episode of The Sopranos:

--------------Were 'Sopranos' fans whacked or blessed? By JOCELYN NOVECK, AP National Writer
NEW YORK - And so on the first day of Year One A.T. — After Tony, that is — the "Sopranos"-viewing world was split in two camps.
One was muttering bitterly into its morning coffee at the open-ended conclusion of the epic series, a banal family moment over onion rings that would have delighted existentialist Jean-Paul Sartre, author of "Being and Nothingness."
The other was lavishly praising the iconic HBO drama for capturing life's essential ambiguity and disorderliness.
See the full article:http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070611/ap_en_tv/tv_sopranos_ending;_ylt=AnWtrKSlaxXnNWYMMX9RZueuGL8C
---------------------

Is "iconic" a buzzword being cheapened by overuse? Or does this really point the way forward into the general consciousness?

Jacqueline Lichtenberg
http://www.simegen.com/jl/