Thursday, October 24, 2013

Horror Author Trivia Contest and Guest Blog Post Info

     Just to recap the rules, the first person to correctly answer all ten of these questions correctly wins a free copy of one of my ebooks, either “Dead Reckoning” or “Kaishaku.”  In the event that no one answers all ten, the winner will be the person who answers the most correctly by the end of the Coffin Hop (October 31st).  If there is a tie during that last scenario, I’ll choose among those who tied randomly.  Good luck!
Also, here's the address for the Coffin Hop:  http://www.coffinhop.com/


1)      In Mary Shelley’s “Frankenstein” the monster finds three books which he uses to help him learn how to read.  Name the books.
2)      In Dean Koontz’s “Phantoms” what is the name of the character who wrote a book about mysterious disappearances throughout history (“The Ancient Enemy”), and anticipated the situation that occurs in the book?
3)      What is the title of Stephen King’s first published story (not counting stories in his brother’s newspaper)?
4)      What famous author published stories in his local (Brooklyn) newspaper starting at the incredibly young age of 8?
5)      In 1977, Berkley Books published novelizations to many of the classic Universal horror movies from the 1930’s and 40’s.  A famous author wrote three of them (“Bride of Frankenstein,” “Dracula’s Daughter,” and “The Wolf Man,”), using the pen name “Carl Dreadstone.”  Name him.
6)      What exotic locale was where Scottish born Robert Louis Stevenson died, in 1894?*
7)      What famous author was a speechwriter and campaign organizer for Carl Zeidler’s successful early 1940’s campaign to be mayor of Milwaukee?
8)      What famous author was born Howard Allen Frances O’Brien?
9)      Several real life spies, and Fleming’s own experiences, were inspirations for Ian Fleming famous James Bond character.  Another reported inspiration was a spy series written by an author arguably more famous for his many horror books.  Name him.
10)  During the 1980’s and 90’s there was a movement in horror writing called “Splatterpunk,” characterized by very graphic, gory descriptions of violence, designed as a “revolt against the traditional, meekly suggestive horror stories.”  What noted author (and practitioner) is credited with coining this term?


*  I thought this was a funny coincidence—at one point in his life Stevenson visited Molokai, and heard a clergyman speaking ill of noted leprosy humanitarian Father Damien.  He disagreed, and wrote a strong letter criticizing this man’s opinions.  This man’s name was….Dr. Hyde. 

Also, today (Friday, October 25th) I'll be guest blogging on Karen Kennedy Samoranos' blog, with an article about writing inspiration.  The address is:  http://karenkennedysamoranos.wordpress.com 

Wednesday, October 23, 2013

Exhuming Corpses For Fun and Profit

    (This nonfiction article is a reprint, having been published twice before, in slightly different versions, once in the late, lamented "Morbid Curiosity" magazine.)

     Whenever I tell someone that I’m an archaeologist, the typical response is something like, “Cool.  I’ve always been interested in that.”  Then when I describe a common artifact or site their eyes invariably glaze over.  I certainly understand it; they’re used to seeing dramatic things like Egyptian tombs or Mayan temples on television or in National Geographic, and a few projectile points or the remains of a fire pit ( things that contract archaeologists like myself commonly encounter) usually just aren’t interesting to a layperson.
     However, mention that you’ve exhumed graves, and your audience usually perks up.  Many people pepper you with questions.  And the ones that don’t ask anything usually are doing so because they find the concept revolting, but not tedious.
     Burial projects aren’t that common in my line of work, but even so, in my twenty years in the field I’ve spent over two of these years just exhuming.  The jobs have ranged from a week long project investigating a tiny, six grave family cemetery, to a nine month long job with over 4000 bodies, and requiring a crew of 50 to remove them.  The jobs have been mostly in the Mid Atlantic, and were fairly recent historic burials—early 1800’s up to the 1960’s. 
     For a variety of reasons the maps and overall burial records of the cemeteries were usually spotty and incomplete.  Therefore we generally had only a rough idea of where grave shafts were.  The excavation of the graves was almost always begun by the backhoes; the machines would remove most of the soil atop the graves until the outlines of the grave shafts were seen.  (Oh, and I know the expression is “Six feet under” but clearly, especially in pre-backhoe days, and in areas with rocky or compact soils, many gravediggers figured three or four feet was deep enough.)  In some cases this was demonstrated by soil changes, for some the actual coffin outline was apparent, and for some the presence of the bones themselves showed the grave’s location.  Once this was done workers would typically place wooden stakes at the head and foot of each shaft, sometimes with nails connected by string tracing the outline of the actual shaft.  Each grave shaft would then be numbered, and its location mapped in, and surveying teams would try to match up the graves to the existing maps (if any).
     Now it was time to actually dig up the graves.  The excavators, typically divided into two or three person teams, dug with shovels and discarded the dirt produced, until they encountered bone.  At this point, the digging team used trowels, dustpans, and brushes to completely uncover the skeleton.  Soil lying directly adjacent to the bones was then passed through quarter-inch screen to recover any bits of bone or small artifacts (such as nails or buttons) not seen during the excavation.  After the skeleton was uncovered and cleaned off as well as possible a photograph was taken of it.  (Note:  On smaller jobs, when we had more time to spend on individual graves, more photographs and drawings were done.)  Then, the bones were removed, and as they came out basic scientific data was noted about them either by a professional osteologist (bone specialist) or by the excavating team themselves, depending on the project.  This information included the body’s approximate age of death, sex, and stature, if any or all of these were possible to determine (and many times they weren’t), along with any signs of disease or injury.  The bones were placed within cardboard boxes, (sometimes wrapped in plastic bags) along with plastic bags containing the coffin nails, metal hinges, (and for some projects, pieces of the coffin itself) and any personal non-human remains found in the grave.  These boxes were then usually reburied (for one job they were cremated), typically in huge concrete burial vaults.
     Several factors often complicated this simple procedure.  Probably the worst one was water.  Many of the cemeteries had relatively high water tables, so a grave shaft was sometimes moist or even completely under water.  We would use sponges, buckets, or water pumps depending on the severity, but in some cases there was no way to remove the water and you just had to do the best you could, and hope no bones were accidentally left in the murky lake facing you.  Another common problem was soil that was heavily infested with rocks and/or compacted by heavy machinery running over it.  To get through these soils, pickaxes were necessary, which obviously increased the chances of inadvertently damaging the bones.  Other obstructions were construction related, such as  concrete light post columns or highway supports which had been carelessly punched through the grave shaft, which clearly also wreaked considerable havoc on the body inside.
     The burial practices of the time period also complicated our job.  The average grave shaft had more than one body in it (the most I heard of was seven) and frequently the coffins had rotted to a degree that sent all the bodies in the shaft into each other.  It was often difficult (sometimes impossible) to tell which bone went with which person.
     Finally, the preservation of the bodies varied tremendously.  Some were nearly pristine, with every single bone still present and firm.  Unfortunately, these were rare exceptions.  Most had suffered significant decay, and sometimes the few remaining bones were either powdery, mushy, or as thin and fragile as tissue paper.  The ribs, vertebrae (spine bones), hand bones, and foot bones were more rarely recovered, with the skull and long bones—the femur (thigh bone), tibia and fibula (lower leg bones), humerus (upper arm bone), ulna and radius (lower arm bones),  and pelvis being the most resistant to decay.  Notice that I’ve only mentioned bones so far.  Flesh was rarely found.  By far the most common organ recovered was the brain.  Other tissue remains I saw were sheets of fat (which resembled grayish globs), and probably kidneys/liver (which looked like reddish-yellow cornmeal).  Hair was rare as well, but every so often it would be recovered—sometimes entire ponytails, eyebrows, and even, disturbingly, pubic hairs.  One body in a cracked concrete vault (which really helped preserve the deceased) also had extensive skin, and ligaments.  That was one of the very few bodies that had a strong, bad odor—reminiscent of pickles, very vinegary.  And finger and toe nails were exceedingly uncommon—much to the relief of much of the crew, as many found these body parts oddly repugnant.
     Some pathologies—illnesses or injuries—leave evidence on the bones.  Although these were rare, all told we saw quite a few different injuries and conditions.  Most of the injuries seen were bone breaks, sometimes showing healing with bad settings, which must have been excruciatingly painful.  One man obviously had been hit by a large object such as a train, as practically every long bone he had showed the distinctive spiral fractures which would result from such a collision.  Another man had clearly been murdered; he had a blunt force trauma on the front of his skull, along with two gunshot wounds, also to the skull.  One of the bullets, a .32 caliber, was recovered and must have been lodged within him.
     As for diseases, tuberculosis was by far the most common one seen, with its characteristic pits in the long bones, clavicles, and vertebrae.  Several cases of syphilis were also found, including one man whose striations (bands) on his teeth revealed that he had congenital syphilis.  Another skeleton’s pelvis was extremely thick and looked like coral, indicating cancer.  Some bone abnormalities showed how a disease had been treated or identified; we saw dozens of bones, usually skulls, with straight cuts through them that indicated that they had been autopsied, and other skulls with smooth, bored holes which told us that the person had been the recipient of trepanation. 
     Skeletons with extraordinarily rare conditions were also exhumed.  Several microcephalic skulls were recovered, whose owners in pre-P.C. days were probably called, “pinheads.”  Another woman’s pelvis yielded a boney, but slightly spongy softball-sized mass which was either an ovarian tumor or a reabsorbed placenta/fetus.  And one radius with an extra “prong” was something our osteologist had never seen before.
     Several other unusual items appeared in grave shafts every now and then as well.  One grave contained a skeleton, along with a metal box which contained the cremated ashes of another person.  Most unsettling of all was the jar with a five-month-old fetus still preserved in formaldehyde.  Also strange were the tiny coffins containing nothing but an amputated limb, which seems bizarre and absurd to me.  I guess that’s the one funeral in which the, “deceased,” can give their own eulogy, and what do they say?  “My right leg was one of my closest friends, and I’ll always remember its generous nature and delightful sense of humor.”?  One cemetery had a “witch’s bottle” buried in it—a magic charm consisting of a bottle filled with nails (and sometimes, bodily substances, such as urine, feces, menstrual blood, etc).  This was usually evil magic, to break up a relationship, so the witch could steal a partner.  (And I don’t know what excuse the witch used if the victim caught them collecting waste from their outhouse!)
     Most of the burials contained no non-human remains other than coffin parts.  However, clothing was not uncommon; usually it was scraps and buttons, but occasionally certain articles were recognizable, such as a pair of pants, or a dress.  Shoes, belts, and hats, and even underwear were sometimes found as well.  Personal items were more unusual still, but we saw a variety:  jewelry such as rings, necklaces, pendants, and earrings; religious items like rosary beads, crosses, crucifixes, and saint medallions; change purses and coins; matches; shaving kits; makeup kits; military medals; a truss; pocket watches; penknives; toothbrushes; combs; bottles and jars (including embalming fluid bottles, evidently included by a lazy mortician); dentures; gold teeth; a harmonica; clay pipes; and a doll.  The rare glass eyes recovered usually caused a stir—it’s somewhat alarming to uncover a skull that appears to be staring back at you!
     The fetus account especially reminds me of a common question we got asked, and still do:  “Did it bother you to dig up dead bodies?”  I’d have to say for most of us the answer would be, “No.”  Certain things bothered some or even most of the crew a bit, like say a baby’s skeleton, or brains, or particular smells, but this seemed temporary; I can only recall a person or two who left a project early due to not being able to handle it psychologically.  Clearly, I think that people had a good idea of what to expect when they signed on for this type of job.  Also, perhaps the fact that we were basically dealing with just skeletons, and not fleshy bodies (usually) helped us to distance ourselves enough to get through the project.  And yes, we’re human—countless jokes were told throughout the projects.  The humor ranged from innocent, “Alas poor Yoric, we knew him well,” references to bad taste kidding around about necrophilia.  Possibly these were coping mechanisms, or else simply our way of passing the time.
     But all joking aside, I was offended by the circumstances which warranted the projects in the first place.  Several of them were like the movie, “Poltergeist,” in that people or organizations claimed to have moved the bodies at a previous time, but had only actually removed a handful, but every one of the headstones or grave markers.  One place in NJ had obviously been the area where a machine had torn through over 60 graves and pushed the bones in a big pile, in a scene unfortunately reminiscent of the movie, “The Killing Fields.”  Furthermore, the initial reburial spot for one of the jobs had to be abandoned because a quick inspection of the cemetery showed over a hundred pieces of human bone scattered on the surface, near the burial vaults!  Apparently the cemetery’s caretaker was blind and never mowed the lawn.  These incidents obviously show a serious lack of respect for the dead.

     So, in closing, my feelings about digging up the dead are as follows.  Certainly I think that cemeteries should be well maintained and secure against theft or vandalism.  Plus if alternate areas for the construction of buildings or roads are feasible these should be opted for instead.  Any transferal of bodies is disrespectful to a degree—I’m sure that most people don’t like the idea of having their, or their relatives’ remains exhumed, picked up, probably jostled and damaged slightly, and finally moved to what is in most cases a mass grave or burial vault, with their bones encased in a cardboard box.  However, the unfortunate reality is that in some cases alternate areas aren’t feasible, sometimes due to issues like the discovery of forgotten, unmarked grave yards after construction has begun.  In these cases, then, I think that companies and states should do what was done on the projects I’ve described—remove the bodies using all reasonable care, and rebury them in another, safe cemetery.  That said, I’d be lying if I said that I didn’t enjoy cemetery projects.  Even with all the physical and emotional issues that I’ve mentioned, I still do find it interesting.  Perhaps part of this can be attributed to a certain degree of morbidity on my part.  “I never feel so alive as when I’m digging up the dead,” is one of my jokey (perhaps of questionable taste) quotes.  However, whatever the reasons, I always try to do the job as best I can, and at least limit the negative aspects of what is overall an unfortunate situation. 

Coffin Hop 2013 and Contest Rules

     Hello, and welcome to Coffin Hop 2013!  Thanks to Axel Howerton and Julie Jansen, for starting and once again hosting and setting up this event.  From now until October 31st, look for posts on a variety of horror-themed subjects, including a "Night of the Living Dead" cemetery tour (with photos), an in depth look at an underrated horror movie, and even a post about the World Series.  (Okay, that last one isn't horror-themed, but it is topical, considering the time of year.)
     Like last year, I'll be running some contests.  First off, any person who comments on a post starting with this one until the end of October 31st will be entered into a random drawing, and the prize is a free copy of one of my ebooks ("Dead Reckoning" or "Kaishaku"), winner's choice.  Additionally, two of the hop's posts will be a horror author trivia quiz, and then a horror movie quiz, with ten questions for each.  The first person to answer all ten questions for each quiz correctly wins, again a free copy of one of my ebooks.  If nobody gets all ten by the end of the Coffin Hop, the winner will be the person who gets the most correct answers.  If say, two people get eight correct answers, then I'll randomly pick a winner from these.  Since I only have two ebooks available, that's the most you can win total.  So in the event that one person wins both trivia quizzes, they won't be part of the overall randomly picked winner from all commenters.  So hope everyone has fun, and good luck.  And please put the "hop" in this Coffin Hop and visit the other participating blogs.  Happy Halloween, THE holiday for all of us horror fans!

Tuesday, October 22, 2013

Two Announcements

      Starting on this Thursday, October 24th, and running through October 31st, I'll be participating in the 2013 edition of The Coffin Hop.  So look for much more frequent posts (probably one per day) during this period, including a nonfiction account of what it's like to exhume graves, horror movie and horror author trivia contests, a visit to the "Night of the Living Dead" cemetery (with photos), and even a post about the World Series, since that will be going on, too.  Prizes of free copies of my ebooks will be given away as well.  And, of course, since this is a blog hop, it will be interconnected with the blogs of dozens of other horror authors and artists.
      Additionally, on Friday, October 25th, I'll once again be guest posting on fellow author Karen Kennedy Samoranos' blog, with an article about writing inspiration.  The address is:  http://karenkennedysamoranos.wordpress.com
 

Thursday, October 17, 2013

Exotic/Disgusting Foods and Beverages Forum--Pumpkin Beers

     Since it’s the Halloween season I thought I’d do a post about the brew of the season—pumpkin beers.  By doing so I may be risking alienating (or boring) any non-American readers, because pumpkin beers appear to be a nearly exclusive American beverage.  Also, these beers are probably pushing the “exotic” title, as due to their type’s popularity explosion in the past decade or so they’re probably more like “slightly unusual.”  But what the hell—I want to post about at least one food or beverage with a tie to Halloween this month, so let’s get on with it.
     In researching pumpkin beers, I was surprised to learn that their history is extensive.  Like before the U.S. was even a country.  One website I consulted noted that America’s first folk song, written in 1643, was a satire about eating (and drinking, in the form of pumpkin ales) nothing but pumpkins and parsnips.  The lyrics I viewed weren’t that funny to me, but humor can be culturally and time period bound, and this song is over 350 years old, so I’ll give it a break, and not mock it.  During this period, evidently malt was hard to come by, so early European colonists looking to brew beer turned to a local plant that was a good source of fermentable sugars, the humble pumpkin.  As a result, pumpkin ale was quite popular, especially in the 1700’s, along with regular porters and ales.  A recipe for making it survives from 1771, even.  However, this popularity took a major hit in the early 1800’s.  Pumpkin ale was seen as passé, and apparently malt sources weren’t such a problem to easily locate anymore.  Regular grain ales, porters, and then lagers especially came to dominate the U.S. beer scene in the mid to late 1800’s, and up until the present day.
     However, in the early days of the craft, microbrewing movement, in the late 1980’s, a brewer decided to experiment, and reintroduce the pumpkin beer.  This brewer, Buffalo Bill’s Brewery (out of California) even used one of founding father George Washington’s personal recipes for their prototype (although the commercial version was apparently different, and used pumpkin pie spices in place of actual pumpkin to make it).  Over the next couple of decades pumpkin beers steadily grew in popularity, and now hundreds of U.S. breweries offer them.
     And this in itself produced surprising information.  I didn’t realize how polarizing an issue pumpkin beer is.  People seem to mostly love it or hate.  I read a particularly vicious quote about the style from a Washington City Times beer writer, Orr Stuhl:  “Even picking a favorite is like picking a favorite airborne disease.”  Looking through some comments in the websites and blogs I looked at, I saw some similar opinions—how much they hated pumpkin beers, and in some cases, how they hated that they were sold, and how those that enjoy them are not “real” beer drinkers, etc.  These were balanced by comments defending pumpkin beers, many of whom extolled (or at least appreciated) the style.
     I myself, not shockingly, love to try new types of beer (and meat, organs, cheeses, vegetables, fruit—you get the idea), and I’m not adverse to all the fruit-flavored beer types, either, like lambics, framboises, some shandies, winter seasonals—some are quite tasty.  Although I have to say that even the good ones, like decent ciders, are usually so sweet that I can only have one or two in a sitting, and can’t drink them all night.  But as a switch up, I can appreciate them from time to time.  Over the years I’ve tried the occasional pumpkin beer, and recall liking some, so I went into this project with enthusiasm.  But enough history and chatter, let’s get to the rankings.  I deliberately chose a mix of larger, macrobrewery offering, and smaller, local microbrews.  And these are listed, worst to best, using the school A(excellent) through F (failure) rankings.

Southampton Pumpkin Ale (New York State): D.  Very nasty, and astringent.  Not good at all.

Starr Hill Boxcar Pumpkin Porter (Virginia): D.  I like that they tried a different beer style—most pumpkin beers are ales or lagers—but the result was tremendously disappointing.  It was tasteless, like water.  Akin to a light beer—that’s how watery it was.

Blue Moon Harvest Pumpkin Ale (Colorado): D.  Thin, tasteless, and not worth it.

Buffalo Bill’s Brewery American Original Pumpkin Ale (California): D+. You may recall from above, this was the one that reintroduced the style back in the late 1980’s.  So I expected it to be exceptional, since so many copied it, or at least the idea.  But no, for me.  I found it only slightly pumpkin-y, and a lot astringent.  

Lakefront Pumpkin Lager (Wisconsin): C-.  Disappointing.  Only a hint of pumpkin flavor.  Watery and weak.

Post Road Pumpkin Ale (Brooklyn Brewery, NY):  C.  Okay, not great.  Slightly bitter in an unpleasant way.

Shocktop Pumpkin Wheat (Missouri):  C.  Mediocre.  Had slight cinnamon taste.

Shipyard Brewing Pumpkinhead (Maine):  C.  Drinkable.  Not very pumpkin-y.  Rather bland and inoffensive.

Ithaca Country Pumpkin (NY):  C+.  Okay, weakish.  Not great.

Sam Adams Harvest Pumpkin Ale (Massachussetts):  C+.  Slightly better than average, but still not very special.

The Traveler Beer Company Jack-o Shandy (Vermont):  C+.  Really different—it’s a shandy (lemon peel) mixed with pumpkin.  Weird.  Flavor pairing is a little off-putting and strange, but somehow is not terrible, and is oddly drinkable.

Southern Tier Imperial Pumking (NY):  C+.  Weird.  Sweetish at first, then unpleasant aftertaste.  Does hide extremely high alcohol content (8.6%) well, though.

Uinta Punk’n Harvest Pumpkin Ale (Utah):  B-.  Nice odor.  Okay, a tad blandish.  Still a marked improvement over most of the others.

Harpoon Pumpkin UFO Unfiltered Ale (New England): B-.  A bit weak, but better than average.  Slightly more pumpkin-y.

Smuttynose Pumpkin Ale (New Hampshire): B+.  Nice odor, very good.  Spicey.  Tastes normal at first, than pumpkin flavor really kicks in nicely.

Weyerbacher Imperial Pumpkin Ale (Pennsylvania): A-.  Very good.  Blend of spices was well done.

    In conclusion, looking at my rankings, I’m struck that I’m apparently an exception to the “love it or hate it” dichotomy.  Half (8) I found to be mediocre and average (“C” rating), and I disliked (“D”) 4, and really enjoyed (“B to A”) 4.  And even the 4 lowest ranked ones weren’t terrible, weren’t drain pours or anything.  So it appears, if I generalize, that I kind of like the style, but only slightly.  Also, I should note that I wasn’t able to get my hands on two of the acknowledged superior pumpkin beers—Dogfish Head’s Punkin and Southern Tier’s Pumking (Note: found the Pumking three days later, tried, and ranked above).  If I can locate them I’ll add them to the list.










































Thursday, October 10, 2013

Exotic/Disgusting Foods and Beverages Forum--Halloumi

     Halloumi is yet another example of my favorite food, cheese.  This exotic hails from the Mediterranean island of Cyprus.  The Cypriots have been making it for 800-1600 years (I know this date range is longishly vague, but it’s all I could determine from half-assed research).  It has spread a bit, though—it’s now also enjoyed in Syria, Jordan, Lebanon, Israel, Greece, Southern Turkey, and recently, the U.K.  Traditionally it’s made from a mixture of sheep and goat’s milk, but of late cow’s milk (being cheaper) is sometimes substituted or added.  Cheesewise it’s semi-hard, unripened, and soaked in brine.  Because of its high melting point it’s often cooked—either grilled or fried.  It’s also often wrapped in mint, which acts both as a preservative and a flavoring agent.  In summer it’s sometimes eaten with watermelon, and it’s also commonly eaten with pork or lamb sausage.
     I found halloumi in the Cypriot aisle of my local supermarket (I’m kidding, of course.  I’ve never seen any such aisle in all my travels.  It was located in the international cheese section).  I have a strong aversion to cooking, so unless it’s absolutely necessary, to avoid getting sick or riddled with worms, like with fresh meat, I usually don’t.  Therefore, I just had the halloumi cold, both plain and on crackers.  I thought it was very tasty either way.  It was slightly salty (no doubt due to the brine-soaking), but not overwhelmingly or unpleasantly so.  Its texture and flavor were reminiscent of both mozzarella and feta, I thought.  I would certainly buy it again, and maybe will even consider cooking it next time.
     I was, however, disappointed in one way.  Halloumi is also known as Cypriot Squeaky Cheese.  And it did, on several bites, but only slightly.  At the very real risk of starting a bizarre dairy-based war between Finland and Cyprus, I thought the former’s squeaky cheese version (Leipajuusto, see earlier post) won the squeak contest.  Granted, I’m relying on my memory—I didn’t measure these noises on the decibel scale or anything, or record them for more accurate comparisons, but still, I remain confident of this conclusion.

     And while we’re discussing things Cypriot, I should give a shout out to my former colleagues Bill (“Johnny”) and Michelle, who have both chosen this island as the focus of their archaeological studies.

Thursday, October 3, 2013

Exotic/Disgusting Foods and Beverages Forum--Pork Hocks

     “Hock,” for me, was one of those words I’d heard before, as in “ham hocks,” but I wasn’t sure exactly what part of the body it referred to.  About a month ago I was wandering through the canned meat section of the grocery store and there it was, a jar right next to the pig’s feet (see earlier post, if interested).  Both were made by Hormel, and both were packed in vinegar.  After I bought it I went ahead and looked it up.  The hock is not the foot or ankle—rather it’s the joint that connects the metatarsals of the foot to the lower end of the lower leg bones (the tibia and fibula).  As such it consists of skin, muscle, tendons, and ligaments.  I'll give you a moment to clear the drool off your chin.
     Because many of these tissue types tend to be rather tough, pork hocks are usually stewed for long periods to make the meat more tender and palatable.  They're often part of soups, or served as a stew with vegetables.  Despite their handicaps, hocks are consumed perhaps surprisingly widely--folks in England, Germany, Austria, Switzerland, Poland, Italy, Sweden, and China, among others, are known to enjoy them.  Back in the U.S., it's known as a soul food staple.  Alternate names for this food are "hough" and "pig's knuckle."
     As I often do, when I was ready I simply opened the jar and had at them, plain.  There's no getting around this--they looked kind of gross.  There were some obvious differences from pig's feet right off the bat.  There were soft, flat-ish pieces of what was clearly skin portions, whitish pieces of fatty tissue, and other parts that looked like more traditional chunks of meat (the tendons, ligaments, and muscle parts, I assume).  But when eaten as a whole, it tasted pretty similar to the pig's feet.  Vinegary, certainly, but otherwise, like tender pieces of pork.  Not as good as bacon, or sausage, or better cuts of meat, like pork loin, but not bad, either.  I had little trouble finishing off the jar.  I can't say I'll make it part of my regular meal rotation, but I might buy it again, on occasion.  Also unlike the pig's feet there were no bones to deal with.  And for those afflicted with celiac disease, I'm pleased to inform them that hocks are bereft of gluten.
     And so my quest to consume every part of the pig except the "oink," as the quote goes, continues.  I guess next up will be the eyeballs, or uvula, or kneecaps.