Clive Barker has also glimpsed other worlds, but rather than driving him mad, these visions have compelled him to communicate what he has seen to others. This compulsion has led him to express himself in a multiplicity of media, including the sketches he drew as a child (and indeed, throughout his life), the plays he wrote in his twenties, the short stories he penned as he matured, the movies he directed, or even now, in the portraits he paints. It is this impulse that Douglas Winter, a polymath in his own right (lawyer, journalist, editor, author, book critic, public speaker), attempts to chronicle and explicate in The Dark Fantastic.

The book is arranged chronologically, following Barker from his early life in Liverpool, to his years on the London theatre scene, culminating in the present day, where we find him in Hollywood at work on his latest undertaking, the multimedia project known as The Abarat Quartet. Winter seems to have had unrestricted access to his subject and to those around him, as he cites knowledge gained from interviews with Barker and a plethora of Barker's family, friends, lovers, ex-lovers and business partners. Although Winter makes no claim of objectivity, he maintains a respectable distance from his subject, providing valuable insights into both the man and his work. Doing so, he makes a convincing case for Barker's inclusion in the pantheon of the leading creators of fantastic literature.

Perhaps the most important revelations are found near the end of the book, where Barker becomes more comfortable with his sexuality, finding true love with photographer David Armstrong. There also, he deals with the death of his father and his subsequent descent into depression. Barker's latest epiphany is the most fascinating, as he comes to realize that hundreds of paintings, seemingly created at random to combat his depression, all contained common themes, themes that eventually coalesced to form the basis of his Abarat Quartet project. The fact that he unconsciously worked his way towards mental health, even while breaking new barriers, is both inspirational and awe inspiring.

The book's upbeat 'ending" (Barker's only fifty as of the publication date) bodes well for the future. Barker, it seems, will continue to receive messages from other realities, filtering them through his artistic sensibilities to make them more palatable to us lesser mortals. We, the audience, merely have to open our minds, experience his work, and learn. By allowing Barker to take us to other worlds, we can more easily absorb the lessons he has to teach us about our own.

Yes, this book has a furious pace to it. That's about all it's got, and it's very tiring.

In order to have a reader stick with the story, Winter, like all authors, has to create empathy for his characters. If a story doesn't have someone to root for the reader eventually gets to the point where they think, so what? I got to this point during the USC thing in the sewers.

The characters are all one-dimensional: CK, Doctor D, Renny etc. Characters with any dimensionality are all over the place. Jinx is supposed to be a violent street thug, but he shows a tender side. He's horrified when a woman's remains are discovered in a car. Gimme a break!

I reckon that Winter's first draft had all the characters portrayed true to form the way they should have been - the bad guys were just bad guys as in Reservoir Dogs. Then someone told Winter or he recognized himself that no one was going to finish reading his story if there wasn't someone you cared about. So in his second draft he attempted to draw some sympathy into his characters. But because this story is founded on the plot and not the characters, it fails.

Winter creates sympathy for Lane by:
- having him talk to a photo of his dead mother;
- having him read his mother's copy of Crime and Punishment and talk about it;
- being implicated in the assassination of a public figure;
- losing his partner;
- forming a friendship with Jinx;
- being betrayed by his girlfriend.

But in the end I thought--Lane, you're a gun runner. You should be used to violence, your expectations from life would be tempered by living outside the law with violent, murderous people. Someone who can live like this wouldn't have an intimate relationship with someone. We have no investment in his relationship with his girlfriend so who cares? We don't identify with Lane's pain because we haven't grown to like the girlfriend; we haven't seen how their relationship is important to him.

Lane loses his partner Renny - again, so what? We don't know the guy. Does Renny even say anything in the book? We have no investment in their relationship, did Lane even like him? When the partner's killed, we don't care.

The problem with the reader not caring is that these are Lane's prime motivations for the climax of the book. The foundation for the big payoff at the end of the book hasn't been laid in the middle.

The Jinx character is just completely from Winter's imagination and breaks all credibility. Douglas - he's a psychopath, a murderer, a drug dealer. He's not Malcolm X. The whole USC thing is entirely misconceived. I got confused. At the start of the book Doctor D is the head of DC's most notorious gang of drug dealers - ruthless, violent, sociopathic. Come the middle of the book I discover they're actually a nurturing, loving commune - a drug-dealing CCNV! A self-sacrificing bunch of misunderstood brothers, their women and children. C'mon (I'm rolling my eyes here.)

If you like stories that are founded on plot machinations, with characters forced into them, this book is for you. I have this image in my mind of Burdon Lane kicking and screaming wanting to tell his real story as Douglas Winter forced and twisted him into the plot he'd already created. Burdon Lane's story is out there, but Douglas Winter didn't tell it!

I would've prefered a book that shows us that Lane is a guy worth caring about. That shows he has a good relationship with Renny, that he loves his girlfriend. Then when things start going topsy-turvy, you'd be there right behind Lane.

There are lots of great books out there that tell you how to write books with characters you care about: How to Write A Damn Good Novel by Frey, Characters and Viewpoint by Card, Stein on Writing by Stein.

The basic premise is this. The main character Burdon Lane is called into an arms for money deal which goes wrong. Before he knows it, he's on the run from the FBI, police and his business partners. While on the run, he forms an unlikely alliance with a DC gang member who was also involved in the deal-gone-bad. They struggle to make it back to DC, find out what exactly happened and make those responsible pay.

This is a terrific first novel from a highly original voice. So why only four stars? Smart readers may, like myself, figure out a key plot twist early in the novel. Does it detract from the narrative? No, but it seemed just too damn obvious coming from a writer of Winter's talent. Furthermore, some of the African American characters in the book seemed too familiar, like they'd just stepped out of New Jack City or King of New York. But then what do I know? As Melvin Van Peebles once said to me, "boy, you're just a middle class white guy from England."

These are just observations, not criticisms per se.

If you are a fan of crime novelists like Michael Connelly, Andrew Vachss, or Elmore Leonard, you'll really enjoy Run. But be warned, don't start this book late at night becuse YOU WILL FINISH IT.

Clive Barker's wraparound story wasn't very good. It had some interesting parts to it, but really, not his best work. Landsdale, who wrote the first story (each story took place in a different decade...but I'm not sure when barker's story took place) wasn't too bad. David Morrell's story I'd say the same about. F. Paul Wilson's story about Nazi Germany was excellent. Probably the best in the book. Poppy Z. Brite and Christa Faust's story was a good one. charles grant's story wasn't bad. Whitley Streiber wrote an unintelligable, very bad story for the 50s decade. I never really caught on to what was happening. Elizabeth massie wrote what would be the second best story in the book, it too was excellent. Matheson, who I know is a good writer wrote some garbage for the book...it sucked. David J. Schow and Craig Spector wrote a story for this book that was okay, it was almost good, but something is missing from it (hmm...I wonder if that'd be Skipp). And since at least half of this book was bad, I was worried when I got to the last decade/story which was written by ramsey campbell. Luckily he wrote a pretty good story.

3 stories by Stephen King: "The Reploids", "Sneakers" and "Dedication".

3 stories by Dan Simmons: "Metastasis", "Vanni Fucci is Alive and Well and Living in Hell" and "Iverson's Pits".

1 story by George R. R. Martin: "The Skin Trade".

While the stories by King and Simmons are more or less short, the story by Martin is long, taking up almost half of the volume.

The only (almost) original story is "Metastasis" by Simmons, where a medical experiment lets a man see strange violet creatures (usually invisible) feeding on human beings like vampire slugs, causing cancer.

"Sneakers" is a ghost story, while "Dedication" is about urban witchcraft and "The Skin Trade" is a story about werewolves and investigation.