Due to current existential circumstances, I will be taking a break from this blog for the next two weeks. Don’t worry. All is well. And I’ll have more to say about all this later. I’m only sorry that I wasn’t able to turn out more podcasts, but I’m doing the best I can.

A number of people have kindly volunteered to guest blog in my absence. If you’re interested, email me. But I can’t guarantee that I’ll get to your email immediately.

Their crazed musings should start to appear here tomorrow.

In the meantime, take a walk around your block with your slippers on and hug someone who needs it.

Josh Getlin gets his facts wrong in this article about the so-called litblogs vs. print war. The quote that Getlin attributes to me is actually from Colleen Mondor:

It’s okay for the lit blogosphere to exist as a version of your Mom’s book club – it’s okay for us to talk books and authors and compare notes on favorites, as long as we keep our place. Have you got that? We must not think for a moment that we contribute anything beyond serving as accessories to the real literary discussions.

I should point out that Getlin contacted me by email. I offered to talk with him over the phone and clarify my points. He never returned my call. But I did send the email he quoted.

And I’m glad that he at least noted the fact that Michael Dirda and I have been emailing. But I’m baffled that Getlin didn’t get a quote from John Freeman.

[UPDATE: One other correction to Getlin’s piece. For those who don’t know the story, here is the history of events. Dirda didn’t write his words in The Washington Post, as Getlin claims, but he contributed them to the NBCC blog Critical Mass. I was the first person to leave a comment on that post. I wondered why Dirda was so hostile to blogs. I called for harmony between print and online voices. Other figures, such as Colleen, Bookblog’s Marydell, Ron Hogan, Dan Wickett, David Montgomery, and numerous others, have asked the same question I have in various threads at the Critical Mass site as well as various posts at their respective sites: Why is the NBCC so hostile to the very literary enthusiasts who need to be involved in the campaign? John Freeman attempted some spin control with this post at Critical Mass on April 30, only to suggest, merely a week later on the Leonard Lopate Show, that newspapers should steal from blogs in order to survive. The question then is why Freeman constantly waffles in his clear animosity towards blogs (I certainly have no animosity towards Freeman, but he seems to confuse criticism of his writings with criticism of him as a person) and why he can’t quell these troubling prejudices in favor of a united front for literary coverage in all conduits.]

[UPDATE 2: The Los Angeles Times will be correcting the piece.]

Also, for the record, I think Josh Getlin is, in general, a pretty good reporter. I think this was simply a case of Getlin not understanding blogs very well.

My review of Haruki Murakmi’s After Dark can be found in this Sunday’s Los Angeles Times Book Review. Here’s the first paragraph:

The title of Haruki Murakami’s latest novel may connote the smoke-hewn, jazz-strewn flow of Hugh Hefner’s old television show. But the book’s post-midnight Tokyo is a lonely place where the trains have stopped running and the love hotels and the family restaurants are sanctuaries for the loners and the sad sacks stuck working graveyard.

I’m honored to be in there with Sven Birkets, who reviews the new DeLillo book, and Sarah Weinman, who reviews a Sara Paretsky volume.

I’m worried about Michael Orthofer. He hasn’t updated the Literary Saloon since Monday. He hasn’t returned emails. And the phone number I have for him is now disconnected.

If anyone knows if Michael’s okay (or if Michael himself might let us know), please leave a comment in this thread.

[UPDATE: Mark Sarvas tells me that he’s talked with Orthofer. He’s just been having computer problems. So no worries, folks!]