Some people say there are no rules in art. I'm sure you've all seen "art" that doesn't obey any rules. Some of your countries, cities, or schools have probably purchased Art that doesn't obey any rules. And you may have gagged when you saw it.

OK. I never went to art school, and I'm not an artist, so I probably don't know anything about anything, and least of all Art. But if I was going to have rules about art and give some curmudgeonly advice to young practitioners, I'd probably start with something like this, and drill it into kids in kindergarten. Adherance to these "suggestions" would save the DA web servers from being clogged by thousands of submissions per day...

I had a lot more rules than these, but they were really even too curmudgeonly for me, so after sleeping on them for a few days, I just wedged them into a crack in the floorboards where some future archaeologist can find them. I really should call this journal entry:

Uncle Vanilla's Ruthlessly-Edited Questionable Advice to Too-Young Artists

Rule 0. Never draw anything intended to be cool on lined paper unless you're sure you can slide the lines out from under the art work without causing it to hemorrhage.

Rule 1. Fluorescent Pink and Day-Glow Green are not background colors. (And Rule 1G: "Art" does not glow in the dark.)

Rule 2. We do not live in a binary star system, so the sun is never in two places at once, even if you're an expert with Photoshop. (This is really for photomanipulators.)

Rule B. Boobs are heavier than air and they hang, sag, or droop, even if they're "young and perky". (Boobs don't float in the air, stick straight out like ice-cream scoops, or fly, except in one marvelous little opera by Francis Poulenc, believe it or not: [link] .)

Meanwhile, back at the ranch, I have managed to to write only a minuscule amount of prose in the last 3 weeks. You know: work-work-work. And over the weekend I went to that cool Maker Faire. I have a deviation to prove it:



And, as usual, whenever I string you along this far, it's for a good reason, so here's the deal. Here's an interesting article about maturity ratings on books. I actually visited the site Common Sense Media and (so far) haven't found their hidden "religious indoctrination" agenda, so they might not be as creepy as I first supposed.

Now, I'm not a big fan of maturity ratings, even though I'm a big fan of maturity. And everyone knows by now that I'm not a great fan of violence, and in the fight between sex and violence in American so-called "culture", I think sex should definitely come out on top. (Yes, I don't write books where violence frolicks free while sex ends up in prison.) So, without further ado, here's your Sticktoitiveness Award du jour. SROP (who else) is giving away free free free copies of the Diane at Fifteen e-book in MOBI and EPUB format. (That's for Kindle and everyone else, too.) With the fabulous Lane Brown cover pictured here: [link] . Offer good only while supplies last, and only for adults over the age of eighteen. So, if you're too young, don't go there and download that zip file. Stay far far away. Go watch a violent movie on TV or something. But whatever you do, don't read that book.

So, why am I doing yet another give-away? It's a stupid publicity stunt. A little whiny protest about maturity ratings for books. It would be more to the point (i.e., betterment of society) to require child-rearing licenses for prospective "parents". In any case, D@15 is the book, as I've said elsewhere, that they would ban in a minute if they knew about it. But I think it's more wholesome than Catcher in the Rye, as most anyone who has read them both might testify.

So there you go: Uncle Vanilla's art substitute of the week.