Review: Sloppy research ruins otherwise engaging stories
Rating: 3 out of 5
Date: 10 18, 2012
*sigh*I love "discovering" people with talent that have managed to fall through the cracks for one reason or another. Most of us do. It's the reason why that very first season of "American Idol" is still considered by many to be the best and why few "winners" from the show can match the success of that very first winner. "WE" discovered Kelly Clarkson because of that show. Like several million others, I fell in love with the lady and her talent the first time I heard her sing. I was a bit of a late-comer. My first moment of discovery with Kelly was the song, "Stuff Like That There," a big band classic I'd only heard performed previously by Bette Midler. I've been a fan ever since and bought each of her albums.With the advent of E-books I've similarly "discovered" numerous indie writers that for one reason or another were ignored by the huge publishing houses. Simon and Garfunkel once sang that the "words of the prophets are written on the subway walls" and this observation holds a deep truth. The truly great talents are seldom heard through the few mega-corporations still publishing music, movies, and books. The next Elvis or Spielberg or Twain will likely manifest in the midst of the "indie" movements of the respective artistic genres. E-books written by independent authors tend to be dirt cheap and sometimes you get what you pay for. But for every "garbage" freebie or under-a-buck book I've downloaded I've found several truly entertaining and gifted writers struggling to build an audience one reader at a time. Gary Ponzo is not yet one of these hidden talents, but I do believe the potential is there for him to become one."The Last Mountain Gorilla" is a trio of short stories. Each is born of an original idea, and each is worth reading. The author displays a propensity for throwing in a lively twist in the closing pages of each story that somehow reveals a hidden meaning in the seemingly straightforward title of the piece. Ever since I read Arthur C. Clarke's, "The Star" in my youth I have loved stories with unexpected twists. So why just 3 stars for this collection? Why is this "just ok" and not worthy of a 4-star, "I like it?"Every story ever written requires a certain suspension of disbelief. Even Ed Wood, the worst director in film history, knew this to be true and would at least make a passing attempt to dump a moment of science or logic into his films. It needn't be a boring litany of recent scientific developments, it just has to be something, ANYTHING, that the viewer or reader can snatch on to and think, "gee, this could really happen!" Michael Crichton was a genius at this. There was just enough description of "dino DNA" in "Jurassic Park" to grip the reader without boring him or her to death. Gary Ponzo is very much aware of the need for suspension of disbelief. Sadly, in each of these stories there is a basic flaw in the explanations to jerk the reader right out of the story.I'll just give one example from the titullar tale.The story involves a mountain gorilla. (Duh!) Here is a brief descriptive quote about the simian centerpiece:"He is far more sophisticated than even Dian Fossey could have imagined when she first discovered these creatures used tools to catch termites."Dian Fossey did indeed devote much of her life to living in the wild with gorillas. Much of what anthropologists and zoologists know about these singularly fascinating creatures is built upon her work. However, gorillas don't use tools to catch termites. Gorillas are vegetarian and live off tree bark, roots, and fruits. Mr. Ponzo is confusing Dian Fossey with Jane Goodall. Ms. Goodall devoted most of HER life to studying chimanzees. Among her many discoveries was the fact that chimps would make tools out of long sticks and use them to probe ant and termite mounds to snag what for them was a tasty afternoon snack.The quoted sentence is only present to explain the "skilled" behavior manifested by the gorilla in the story. The tale would have been good enough without it, but Mr. Ponzo wanted to provide something to prop up the logic and believability of the story. Five minutes of looking or a brief phone call to a museum would have shown him that he needed to use a different factoid. It's an easy enough mistake to make, but unfortunately there is a similar error in each of the other two stories as well.Please don't get me wrong. This trilogy is well worth the price and I DO recommend you pick it up. The entire trilogy of stories will take you an hour or so and each story is different and very entertaining in its own right. For me personally, I found this to be a work by someone at the very edge of becoming a truly gifted talent. I'll likely pick up something else by him when I've read my way through some of my sizable reading queue and get a but closer to completing the second draft of my own current piece. But I did want to let people know about this one rather noticable flaw in Mr. Ponzo's skillset because I know I'm not the only person bothered by this sort of flaw. I also have another reason...Many writers read reviews of their work, although some avoid critiques like a plate of plague. If Mr. Ponzo falls into the former category of author and does in fact read this, I wanted to mention the reason (singular) that he didn't get an enthusiastic 4 or 5 star review out of me for this particular set. My criticism is meant solely to be constructive because I believe he is VERY close to being a major talent and successful author. I hope my comments will ease him just a tiny bit closer to achieving that goal of all creative people - being the absolute best that they are able to be at what they do.Again, don't hesitate to pick up this book. It's well worth the price and each story has something fairly nifty to say. I believe you'll have a good time with it. Oh, and watch for whatever he comes up with next. I have a feeling it'll be a beauty.