jacc in the box  -  extra stuff         -back-

Author's notes - Book 3     (2018)

Admittedly, in a conversational setting, to people who do not know me
I can come across sort of like an intellectual troglodyte and it's funny to watch!  With writing, the process of writing that is, one has all the time and opportunity they need to complie ideas in seriatim allowing one to sound more eloquent and knowledgeable and less like a fuckwit. 

Yet, face to face I still sport the troglodyte facade...

Everyone does something stupid on the by and by and, hell, I excel at doin' stupid!  I'm an accomplished grandmaster at it!  You could say I'm
a verbal virtuoso of the foot-n-mouth d'ur!

The most important attribute to one's social capital is molding yourself into a well-rounded person.  That is, specifically, hygienically sound, well read (educated being a plus) with multiple interests, and humor topping that short list.  Humor being on top—but not too self deprecating.

One itty-bitty problem with writing full time, like I happen to be now, is that you abandon normal work habits, eschew daily social interaction and, with that, the concept of well-rounded goes right out the window!  Once you are on a fixed and narrow trajectory it is inevitable that you become—that guy.  You know who I'm talking about!  Anyway...

My commute is now 6 feet in bunny slippers (figuratively speaking) and to pursue this writing effort full-time I've had to tighten my belt.  Dropping dress collars for golf shirts and switching out slacks for sweats was too damned easy!  Having to shun Starbucks for Café Bustelo haunts me to this day.  I can see it in my face on those days I do not neglect shaving and the frowny mug before me, without his bitter-black French pressed Sumatra Dark Roast, is mutherfucking unendurable.

I just wanna slap the crap outta that muttonhead in the mirror and shout, "Hey, dumb-ass, Café Bustelo is just ducky!"

Oh, how we lie to ourselves.


Armes à Trois:

Real world weapons development kinda follows an engineering process that can be best described, historically speaking, as incrementalism.  In the jacc in the box series we are trying to emulate this and give you a taste of the real world in our fictional world but it's tough to do! 

We did the John Moses Browning thing with small arms back in Book 2 but here in Book 3 comes the Cerberus and the Djinn mods—and it is only gonna to get worse from here.  In the real world this shit never stops and, if you happen to take a few moments to peruse our "plates-design" pages you can see a lot of what's a-comin'!

As a heads up we're even planning beyond Book 6 but unless we do commit we won't post any of that yet.

If you do go over those pages I'll have you know there are a few "fixes"
I have to make on some of the referental items noted like "MRad" for an example.  Much of this was pre-internet so I was working off bad data back then...uuuuugh!


Lights, Camera...Inaction!

I went to USC back in the '80s and took screenwriting at the film school for three semesters, and in those classes we learned that action is great in a film—but it does not translate well in book form.  In class we made direct comparisons between the two types of writing and it was shocking to note how terrible action is in many books.

To be honest, in literary works action moves at the speed of snail.

In a visual medium establishing urgency is a breeze, but in the written word it's a bitch-an-a-half to give anything a sense of urgency because you can only read so fast.  In the jacc in the box world, because we're trying to be somewhat accurate, most of the action sequences here are actually moving at lightning speed—like the air battles at the end of the second book.  There is way-way more going on than I could possibly cram in there so we didn't even try!  I only put in those things that were necessary to define and frame the type of fight they were engaged in.  Action is something that could be padded out visually if optioned for the big screen—where, like an idiot, I've turned down offers twice before!

In the third book the SA and SS were having the same fight from planet to planet and THAT would have been boring as fuck so why in the world would I do that to you?  Most scifi franchises, specifically Star Trek and Star Wars, pull from the same grab-bag of formulaic action sequenses each and every time!  In spite of changing the framing and aesthetics it's the exact same handfull of repetitious fights!

I am doing my damndest to give you something different in each book!  That is not to repeat the same fight, and give the reader an experience that is both unique and has some foundation in reality

With that in mind, and considering that I have three more books, and returning to Taiji in the next two, here in Book 3 you get an old school Munzel breakout (an encirclement breakout) and out at Ngati Wha we thought it would be a kick in the shorts to give you guys something completely different...


Zombie Epidemic:

The chapter "zombie mod" with the GMi BER protocol was originally planned for the 5th book but, after moving a few things around, it is now closing out the third.  It ended up way more fun to put it here but we were forced to whittle it down to the three best "zombie moments" to squeeze it in Book 3.

In Book 5 this sequense was going to be a much larger and involved chapter but "mopping up the MOP" had to get pushed out to Book 5 and, to be honest, this crazy-ass detour does serve the story better here in Book 3.  Problem I was faced with was—of the thirty or so vignettes I had in my extensive notes...what was I gonna choose?  Which of the thirty-plus "moments" was it going to be?

We had to show them boot up, and we had to do the scene with Angela and the Colonel, but for the third and last shot I had sooooo many crazy, funny and gross moments in my notes to select from but, with the space limitations, it was the short and sweet Butter Baby that won out!

Yes, I have had several complaints from readers who say they've been cheated!  They say I could have gone crazy with this and, just to let you know, I did try to squeeze one or two more scenes in but it didn't work.  Butter Baby conveyed all there was to know about the GMi BERs and how they turned the battle around—and adding more was redundant, unnecessary, and would simply break the flow for the reader.

As much as I try to stealthfully adhear the lofty ideal that the readers imagination should do the heavy lifting, here in zombie mod me being overtly blatant about it was apropos.  I really did want to give you guys more but my personal muse, who goes by the name of Mari, she was screaming in my ear to cut it off at Butter Baby...so I cut.

Eventually, with coin in hand, I'll catch a ferry to cross a river—and on that day the bitch and I are gonna have words.    _/*\o_  FHITA baby!


Show and tell:

I hate the phrase "show, don't tell" and sometimes I just want to slap the crap out of writers when they utter it with a snobbish air about them. 

Showing the reader only applies to very specific situations, like a lead in to a chapter or environment or some critical "involved" moment between characters, but when you need to be concise for those many transitory moments, to avoid the endless-flowery descriptives and tiresome dreck from all the showing—just tell 'em how it is!

Where "show, don't tell" can get its wires crossed in the minds of the readers is when you mention something in passing that's important to note right now—but not critical to show per se. 

Not to be lazy, but sometimes it is best to have the reader do the mental lifting because at the end of Chapter 54 the "knowing having gone there" verbal exchange between Jessica and Cloe seems to have whacked the "where the fuck is my hot sex scene" hornet's nest!

What surprised me, and I'm not kidding, it's not the neckbeards who were expressing themselves thusly, it was the "Sapphic" faction who
was incensed that, 1.) I didn't flesh this out in a romantic scene and,
2.) Complained that Jessica was straight but was with Cloe, yet then
3.) Suggested (more like demanded) I make them a lesbian couple!

This whiny shit tends to get old but what I can say is that item-one will be coming in the future—it's just that it won't be with Cloe.  Then to respond to item-two...Jessica and Cloe just so happen to be straight but, like a fair majority of straight women, they secretly wish to dabble in their own kind (id est, fem-curious) if given the opportunity.

There is a big surprise in the works as it relates to item-three but you'll have to make an effort to "watch, don't kvetch" to be rewarded!  It'll not be exactly what your community has in mind but this was the original plan for Jessica since the very beginning.


Moral Turpitude:

After finishing Book 2 we had a whole bunch of readers text to say that they could NOT wait to see Boxter die in Book 6!  With Book 3 now out, specifically Chapters 55 and 65, (moral compass and plata o plomo) we got more than a few follow up emails telling us that they fell in love with both Boxter and Piper and are seriously troubled with the fact that I'll be killing him off at the end—because that's what always happens!

Well [sigh] I had to inform them that Boxter's fate is already sealed.

We got some pushback to that response and some even questioned my sanity and challenged me to find some way to keep him alive!  I shouldn't be so shocked but Chapter 33 (always a pall bearer never a corpse) as well as chapters 55 and 65 were crafted to incite just these reactions.

Upon reflection, as it relates to today's world, what I find troubling is that the dichotomy of the past has fractured on the left—pulling the centrists and "classical liberals" like myself deep into the right side of the house.

The problem I have is that many people today, specifically on the far left of the political spectrum, have a difficult time diferentiating between the preceived high-moral good (e.g. outcome) as opposed to all the actions, means and methods necessary to achieve said good.  One can clearly argue that a preceived good is probably morally right, but proponents of any one moral good usually fail to reflect and acknowledge that for one to trample over others to achieve said outcome (i.e. means and methods be damned) that in itself may pose a far greater evil than not achieving a desired good.  This lack of awareness is common on the left—where on the right it is always methodology being the first consideration.

All morally right propositons always require two sometimes diametrically opposed moral choices.  A morally right outcome "yin" clearly requires a morally right methodology "yang" to be substantively morally desirable.

Boxter is morally right but he realizes that the methods to achieve his morally right goals are themself morally repugnant—even reprehensible.  What gives Boxter a leg up over other morally challenged characters in literature is that he believes there is a special circle in hell set aside just for him.  Boxter is fully aware that his methodologies are, categorically, full-tilt evil where you'll discover that his long term goals are (strangely) morally positive?  Think Shiva when you reach into that clue bag...

"The road to hell is paved with good intentions" is a colloquialism that should give one cause for pause because history is repleat with such examples—and body counts.  That is, morally plateaued tyrants, time and again, have unleashed untold suffering and misery on the people because the ends are their justification to the means.

One's moral aptitude is always contingent on self-reflection and an ability to realize that, if given the reins, they too will fall into the same hubristic and narcissistic trap as everyone before them.  One's "Golden Path" can easily become a yellow brick road to injustice, oppression, or despotism with a heady chaser of blood-soaked delights.

What follows is an example of a delightfully positive little thingy where, in intent and implementation, is simply evil...



It happened, it took three books and it finally happened!  A reader finally recongnized my work as, to quote, "A celebration of diversity!"

Do you feel that?  Do you feel the vibes I am projecting from that one?  No?  Okay, let me help ya'll along with my take on that, conceptually speaking, with one word sporting five syllables... Meritocracy!

Did ya'll get that?  No?  Then repeat after me:  mer-i-tok-ruh-see

Look, everything that comes from the political left is designed to give fantastic feels, doesn't it?  The problem is that diversity, in and of itself, sounds great on paper but in practice (i.e. practical terms) it is sexist, racist, globalist-leftist, anti-west motherfuckery!

Saying or claiming that "diversity is our strength" is just a dog whistle for "let's destroy western society!"  Then again, with affirmative action being exposed as a really bad idea, and losing traction, the left has somehow managed to crowbar this toxic shit into corporate culture too!

Better yet, in collegiate admissions it was given an express lane!

If you think or believe that diversity is a positive thing, well...it is!  If you cram it down peoples throats it then becomes a terribly evil affair and a force for subversion—and this is also true in the corporate world 'cause lowering the bar for the sake of diversity is just maniacally stupid being the worst form of racism and sexism!  Not to mention it raises ill-suited candidates to an assailable level of incompetence.

Maria, Cricket, Nicole and Monique are all women who, in spite of being women, earned their way to their lofty positions in story.  Each of them deserve to be where they are because they either worked their asses off to get there or, like Cricket, they possess a natural ability, qualification or skill-set ideal for the job at hand.

The bitter pill to choke on...when it comes to those lofty positions being a woman counts against them because of the life choices women make so double-kudos to them and all those who may reach these levels of power per their ability.  For women to sacrifice children and family necessary for career advancement is a choice neither easy nor intuitive. 

To crowbar the ill-equipped, weak or culturally incompetant into elevated posts all to satiate the "Gods of Diversity" makes it a sexist or racist act, and sometimes one of wanton cruelty so, on principal, such mandates should be pushed back on and roundly condemned.

Naturally occurring diversity is a right-beautiful thing but it does take time so if this means ya'll are going to end up with an over-representation of kikes, chinks, push-starts and cracker white-males at the top of the heap then that's just the way it's gonna be, babe!  If you really don't like them apples then all I can say is—work harder!

What has happened to Europe because of the EU and globalism is a God-damned tragedy!  Once the EU crumbles and those nation-states regain their independence—the push back to this horseshit is gonna get ugly.  We in the United States dodged that asteroid so we'll pop our corn and sit back to watch the fireworks!

On an interpersonal and business level people should strive to be both color and gender blind—and that last one should be pretty damned easy since, FYI, there are only two...

I can already hear the shrill-whiny yapping from the overy privileged, college (un)educated, SJW gender-degenerate twats so, on a passing note, my pronouns just so happen to be d'uh and d'ur and I expect you insufferable prigs to respect my preferred safe-space which happens to be way-inside your personal bubble.   

So  [CLEARING OF THROAT]  we good?

PS: Proclivities and wishful thinking, tainted by narcissism, does not qualify as gender,
       but feel free to continue making yourselves look stupid—as history will reflect!

copyright © nicholas ralph baum - all rights reserved     [contact us]