Sylvia Rose Novak

28-year-old Sylvia Rose Novak is a folk/Americana songwriter, a multi-instrumentalist and activist based in Birmingham, Alabama, USA. We talked to Sylvia about the inspirations behind her songwriting, her growing collection of tattoos, and background in horse-training…

SRN SEW-6

When did you realise that music and songwriting was what you wanted to do?It hit me kind of like a train in the summer of 2013. I wrote a couple of songs in the six months leading up to that revelation without any real purpose or desire to make it “a thing”. But, honestly, it feels like lightning hit me at some point that June and I’ve never looked back.

What inspires your songwriting? Is there anyone you admire? Ryan Adams. I want to grow up to be Ryan Adams, pinball machines and black Cadillac and all. He fascinated me. He’s also one of my favorite writers and musicians. I also greatly admire Jason Isbell. As far as what inspires me, that’s a grab bag. It could be a minor character in a book I’m reading or maybe just the state of the world. I’ve written songs about people I’ve never met just because their story struck me. I tend to prefer writing about things and people that are not me or my life, but I do that on occasion too.

SRN Early Promo-1

How does music fit with your other interests, such as yoga and horse training? One of my friends and, for lack of a better word, “mentors” in the yoga community (Ruby Chandler. She owns Shakti Power Yoga Athens. She is beyond amazing.) played one of my songs in a class I was attending once and, to my surprise, it actually worked! I always kind of wondered if it would. Outside of that, I think my live performances are more directly influence by my yoga practice than my writing is. I try to stay totally present for and connected to the audience – that is yoga.

I was a horse trainer for a long long time. I actually still do one-off training work sometimes. It’s in my blood. People will bring me a horse and say “This horse isn’t safe. It’s explosive. It’s impossible.” and 99% of the time, they’re just not listening. The horse is scared or anxious. Some of the best horses I’ve ever worked with were “impossible”. Now, I mostly just hack around on my horse of 11 years, Milo (who was also “impossible”.) I got him in 2007 and love him more than almost anything. He’s a big fat thoroughbred and he’s ridiculous. Like a giant dog.

With so many projects going on what do you do to relax? I’m actually currently sitting on my couch rereading “Sex, Drugs, and Cocoa Puffs” for the fourth time. This is one of my very rare quiet mornings, so I’m enjoying it immensely (as I wait for the internet installer). I find ways to decompress when I can, but it’s rare. Hitting my yoga mat and working with my horse both help even though they’re active things. I also like to run when I can. I’m also a big fan of wine. Specifically Pinot Noir and Shiraz.

SRN Early Promo-3
Can you tell us about your tattoos, you’re an incredibly creative person, are your tattoos a reflection of this? I think they’re more a reflection of the tattoo artists. Most of the time I walk in and say “this is kind of what I want and where I want it”. And let them do the rest. I am by no means a visual artist. I once did an acrylic painting of Warren Zevon that looks a lot like Jim Henson. [My husband hangs it up in the house, anyway.] I have the album artwork from Jason Isbell’s “Here We Rest” on my back. It’s a piece of artwork by Browan Lollar. I love that record but, moreso, love that piece of artwork. My favorite tattoo is the big Ryan Adams tribute that I have on my forearm. Radar at Walk The Line in Athens, GA knocked it out of the park. I think my tattoos are more a tribute to the things that inspire me than of my actual creativity. – except for the compass earth between my shoulder blades. That one’s a reflection of being 18 and making a poor life choice.

Photos by Wade Allen

Series Review: Hannibal

Our guest blogger is hobbyist film and TV series reviewer and writer Harry Casey-Woodward. This is the second in a series of posts in which Harry will be sharing his opinions on things he has watched. Read his first review here. In this post Harry is reviewing Hannibal

Hannibal, 2013- , cert 18, 2/5

American TV shows tend to annoy me. Of course there are exceptions and this is not going to be a rant about how everything produced by America is pig slop compared to the firm upholding columns of British art, because I enjoy more American films, book and music than such things from my own country.
However, it’s the way the ‘hottest’ US dramas are shoved in your face constantly while someone’s screaming ‘YOUR LIFE WILL NOT BE COMPLETE WITHOUT THIS.’ And when you bully your busy consciousness to pay attention to them, you realise that under all the hype, the glossy technical sheen and pretty actors, there’s not a lot going on.
‘Hannibal’ is no exception. For those not in the know, this series now in its third season is about everybody’s favourite cannibalistic psychiatrist, Dr. Hannibal Lecter and is set way before ‘Silence of the Lambs’ and even before ‘Red Dragon’, the first Hannibal story.

In the show, Hannibal is somehow not yet suspected of being a serial killer (despite an overly sinister performance by Mads Mikkelsen) and he is asked by FBI man Jack Crawford (Laurence Fishburne) to be psychiatrist for Will Graham (Hugh Dancy), a special consultant for the FBI who’s ‘too unstable’ to be an agent and is revered for his ability to fully emphasise with serial killers.
There have already been two films about Will Graham. In both ‘Manhunter’ (1986) and ‘Red Dragon’ (2002), Graham is presented as a brave, intelligent individual, battling his own demons. Hugh Dancy portrays him as a toddler constantly on the verge of a tantrum. He’s this fragile genius who everyone must dance around or he’ll snap and slaughter them all. Unfortunately the suggestion that someone who looks as threatening as a teddy bear can have a dark murderous heart isn’t very convincing.

His ‘gift’ is overblown too. In the films, Will simply sees the crime scene through the view of the killer, using psychology to pick out clues. In the show, Will can not only fully re-imagine the crime but also re-enact the whole thing, thus causing further annoyance when he pretends to be some big bad psychopath every episode. The replaying of the murder is impressive the first few times, but it gets a bit old when it’s done every episode.
The tendency to over-do things lets this show down big time. Every shot has to look sensuous and glamorous, whether it’s Hannibal’s cooking or a dismembered body. As impressive as the hallucinogenic scenes and perfect lighting is, every episode is an assault to the senses which gets exhausting. Yet under the flashy imagery, the dramatic emotions and heavy dialogue on psychology and murder, the show isn’t saying a lot. All it does it cater to society’s sick obsession with serial killers, of which there are a hundred other shows and films doing the same thing.


Every episode attempts to outdo the one before in terms of gore and violence. Every episode, Will and Jack are investigating a new killer in their local area, which just feels unrealistic. So does the amount of violence perpetrated by the killers. We’ve got killers building sculptures out of bodies, turning bodies into instruments or using them as fungus gardens. While the films attempted to be realistic and in depth with the psychology of their killers, the show just uses outrageous gore for gores’ sake, which feels shallow and sick.
The one thing that could have had more spice was Mad Mikkelsen’s performance of Hannibal. It’s cool to see a cold, restricted portrayal of the character, but Mikkelsen shows so little emotion in every episode that he gets a bit wooden. I still find Hopkins’ performance more chilling. He may be tongue in cheek but he demands your attention, whereas Mikkelsen comes across as a bit lazy.

But maybe I shouldn’t be complaining about something that has been written primarily for entertainment and I should just accept the fact that I do enjoy it for the nonsense that it is. However, what gets my goat is that it tries to be some deep philosophical drama when there’s not much substance under the style. And as for being a horror show, it’s not very scary. While the films went for the classic tools of suggestion and atmosphere to creep you out, the show just throws gore in your face. But if sensual overload is your thing, this show has a lot to offer visually, and Hannibal’s cooking did make me hungry…

What do you think? Do you agree with Harry’s review? 

Images from Sky