Mark Sarvas provides the first of a much needed glimpse inside the inner trappings of n+1. I’m as shocked as anyone to learn that there was a time in which the people at n+1 were friendly with litbloggers. But, like all enfants terrible, something caused these manboys to lapse into unintentional self-parody and attack the people who, oddly enough, are probably in the best position to sing their praises. Since Keith Gessen and Marco Roth, as far as I know, lack the introspective know-how and perspicacity to pursue therapy, I certainly hope that Mark’s generosity, in which he will reveal the shifting character of these two men, will assist all parties.

I stumbled upon this site, which features a dramatic reading of a grammatically unsound breakup note. But it occurred to me that the man who read this note was more fond of playing Snidely Whiplash than coming to terms with the pain and heartbreak extant within.

So here’s my version (MP3, 2:30).

Here’s the note:

Dear Loser,[Chris]~~~~!!!!!

I thought you liked me you said it yourself I hate you .People only say you asked me out because you needed a date for the dance and that after the dance you would dump me well guess what bastert i dumped you cause you were thinking that i cheated on you i didnt so like idiots that you guys are and so smart that you are you called me a slut.I hung up on you cause you tol me it on the phone because i guess you werent man enough to tell me it in my face!I hate you and also guess what my mother hates you to that she the one who put me to do this ,you come to breakfast every morning and I aint stupid you try to sit next to me and my lil bro who only 7YRS old hates you to and dont even know what you did and is always blocking your chair.haha!I went out with another boy after you and after we were over you an idiot dared you even tried to ask me out again i didnt break up with him for you OK! I hate you ive always hated you spreading to everyone that i cheated on you when you just got jealouse that i used to talk to your friends to your so jealouse you automatically think i like them well guess maybe i do maybe i dont gotta problem you aint my boyfriend anymore I dont have to tell you who i like or who iam with and why got it i dont like you anymore the other day you told me that I have to tell you who I like or who Iam thinking of going out with its none of your buisness got that to you loser!I hate you and I know you still like me but i dont like you i dont care what your stupid friends say you make me touch your hands for stupid reasons u accidentally say you hugged me i will never like you again I HATE YOU I HATE YOU MORE THAN ANYTHING IN THIS DAMN WORLDDDDDDDDDD id rather date a spider or rat den u ur soooo ugly and fat !!!!!!!!!!And then saying that i loooooooved you pleasssse!!!!!!!!!!!Your such n ass wipe n bastert!! I HATE YOOOOOOOOOOU

Well bi you piece of shit i have more things to do right now then remember YOU

Listen: Play in new window | Download

New Scientist: “Glow-in-the-dark materials that shine with the whole range of visible colours, and can even produce white light, have been developed by Japanese researchers. The team from Ryukoku University, Kyoto, say they can be used to provide lighting and clearly readable signs in emergencies without the need for electricity.”

Garth at The Millions has some choice words to say about an “essay” that appeared in Issue 5 of n + 1, attacking litblogs. I’ve read the article in question.

Let me just say that I’m not against third parties taking litblogs to task. In fact, informed criticism is a healthy manner of keeping the conversation alive. What I object to is an uninformed statement that goes after any target without using supporting examples. n + 1, with this essay and the adolescent posturing seen in “The Decivilizing Process” has cemented its status as a worthless publication that is intellectually unfit to stand up against The Believer. I’ll confess that it took me a few years to warm up to The Believer, but, after a shaky start, it seems to be turning a corner, expanding its scope, penetrating more obscure and darker pastures and offering all manner of helpful reference points for the curious within its articles. Sure, The Believer still has a bit of a naive sense of wonder attached, and I’m not sure if its play-nice review coverage is entirely honest. But I’ve read the March 2007 issue of The Believer and greatly enjoyed this quirky article on Roberto Bolaño and Stephen Elliott’s lengthy essay, which is one of the most candid essays I’ve seen in The Believer‘s pages.

n + 1, by contrast, is nothing more than hollow posturing. More noise than signal. It believes that risk can be found through poorly thought out statements of outrage. It dabbles in masturbation, literally and figuratively, in a manner reminiscent of obnoxious liberal arts majors with too much time on their hands. Take this excerpt:

At one point the feminist writer Lonnie Barbach even suggested that men’s propensity to ejaculate before their female partners had achieved orgasm was the result not of selfishness but of an oppressive anti-masturbatory regime that taught boys to come as quickly as possible so as to avoid detection by their parents and schoolmasters.

Now to me, regardless of whether I agree with this or not, Barbach’s is an interesting idea. And a good essayist would address the current masturbation situation, either though specific quotes or interviews, or attempt to examine why Barbach drew this association. But instead of trying to place this Barbach paraphrase into context, or to even consider Barbach’s premise at face value, this assertion is followed up with these sentences: “Now this—this was solidarity. Masturbation had achieved the height of its moral prestige.”

$12 for this nonsense? For generalizations more content to waltz around an idea rather than plunge into it?

Why pay $12 when I can have some starry-eyed undergraduate hand me some pamphlet laced with this kind of doggerel for free?