I’ve been informed that Lev Grossman has refused the fruit basket I tried to send him this morning. The receptionist at Time also refuses to accept it because it means “having to go downstairs,” an ordeal apparently as arduous as climbing Everest.
I don’t understand this, because I’m sure Lev would have shared some of the tasty fruit with the receptionist and they might have bonded. I’m positive that the basket would have been shared around the Time office, providing sustenance for many overworked arts journalists.
But no. It was not to be! Lev has refused! The fruit basket remains undelivered, alone, merely wanting Lev’s momentary companionship.
Thanks a lot, Lev!
[UPDATE: It appears that the company was wrong about Lev's refusal. Lev has, in fact, received the fruit basket.]
Magic Hours by Tom Bissell: This marvelous collection of essays chronicles everything from film shoots to novelists rescued from oblivion. (The essay on the Underground Literary Alliance, with its portrait of raucous factions, unexpectedly reveals how soft today's literary world has become.) But if you peer between the cracks of these smart pieces, you may very well see how cultural lives are formed from the most unexpected life choices. And as we follow Bissell's development as a writer over the years, that goes for Bissell as well. (
Angelmaker by Nick Harkaway: Harkaway's latest novel greatly improves on his previous book, The Gone-Away World, which I'm already on record as praising. Angelmaker adopts genre elements without ever feeling like a genre book, and it leads me to believe that Harkaway is well on his way to a narrative grace close to China Miéville's. Yet inexplicably this very fun book, which includes an eightysomething badass named Edie Banister, a mysterious mechanical object that may destroy the world, farcical scenarios involving lawyers and the police, and some unexpectedly moving moments about fatherhood, doesn't appear to be getting much attention in American newspapers. Nothing from the snobs at The New York Times Book Review, nothing from The Washington Post. And since I can't get Harkaway on Bat Segundo, I hope this Jump Up and Down mention gets you hopping as well.
The Age of Insight by Eric Kandel: Unless you're really pressed for time, forget Jonah Lehrer. If you want to understand creativity and its relationship to neuroscience, then the bowtie-wearing Nobel laureate is your man. In addition to being a physically beautiful book (you will drool over many of the paintings), there are helpful overviews on optical illusions, science, biographical backgrounds, and many vital figures from the Vienna Secession. Kandel's enthusiasm (and his call for greater unity between the humanities and science) is contagious.
You mean I can score a free fruit basket simply by declaring you a mortal enemy? Stay tuned.
I find it so odd that first Sam Tanenhaus and now Lev Grossman won’t accept free goodies.
Their mommas must not have raised them right.
He is under no obligation to acknowledge your fruit basket.
And, just for the record, anthrax is not a fruit.
Jeff, that cracked me up!
I’m glad he accepted the olive branch (or apple branch). May he be nourished with peace!
Have you read the latest TIME magazine? He writes a complete essay about you (but not the peace offering of fruit). Was it really all that bad? Besides, maybe you should take a few steps back and breathe before you accuse someone of not accepting a peace offering. You never know, maybe he thought it was anthrax….
I’m so relieved this ended well.
I take back what I said about his momma, but the aspersion on Sam Tanenhaus’s remains.
I just find it awfully weird that Lev Grossman fills up a whole page in TIME complaining about your blog. When I was young, TIME was TIME, it had an air of definitude, an air of authority, I just can’t get used to this.
The FRuit basket was a nice move on your part, tho.
Why would you send a fruit basket to someone who killed your puppy? LOL.
Ed, you are my hero. I mean, my mortal enemy.
Jeff: it’s not just the fruit basket. First Ed has to damage your retinas. (Ouch!)
As a fellow non-professional amateur reviewer, I feel obliged to point out my fine, remarkably similar interview at my own site, which can be reached by clicking on something. As a non-professional, it is well within my bounds to waste valuable comment space with a plug for my cobweb-covered-in-comparison blog. Were I working for Time, I would simply step onto my balcony and let the masses fall upon the tender vittles of my parody piece; however, being an amateur, I not only point people to my site in a poorly executed plug, I point out the fact of my doing so twice in the same comment.
Like Lev, I am alliterative. I think. Did everyone notice? However, in no other way am I like Lev.
That’s not true. I am balding.
I have been trying to puzzle out why on God’s earth would TIME run the essay in question. Can anybody think of any burning, big-picture issue that is being addressed there? I was under the impression that the back-page essay is supposed to make some kind of relevant, timely point. Is Grossman’s complaint about the coverage he gets on this site a way of backing into an online-driven invasion of privacy complaint? I am not being facetious–I just plain ol’ don’t quite get it. Hmmm. Hmmm?
To Lev:
I enjoyed your column about Champion.
The last sentence reminded me of an evening about fifty years ago that I spent in a Chicago nightclub. The Ink Spots were appearing there, and they were being harrassed by the inevitable drunken heckler. The hecklee, the tenor, finally stopped everything, looked directly at the perp, and said, “You know, the difference between you and me is that I get paid for making a fool of myself.”
Keep up the good work.
Jim Brooks
I enjoyed your column about Champion.
The last sentence reminded me of an evening about fifty years ago that I spent in a Chicago nightclub. The Ink Spots were appearing there, and they were being harrassed by the inevitable drunken heckler. The hecklee, the tenor, finally stopped everything, looked directly at the perp, and said, “You know, the difference between you and me is that I get paid for making a fool of myself.”
Keep up the good work.
Jim Brooks
I am not taking sides. I just liked the last line of Lev’s column.
The essay Lev wrote about Ed wasnt just suppose to be about Ed. If you actually look into it he’s talking about how people hide behind computers and say stuff behind computers that they normally never would have said in real life. I look at it as it is addressing teens and young adults, that not only young kids do it…That even grown adults do it too.
As a colleague of Lev’s I felt it very important to clarify one point: Time magazine doesn’t have a receptionist. (We have this new fangled thing called voice mail…) The poor slob you got on the phone who didn’t want to retrieve Lev’s basket was likely a reporter who was probably, you know, reporting. This person, who likely has degrees they’re still trying to pay for, probably didn’t see fruit retrieval as a burning priority. (No offense, Lev.)
Respectfully yours,
Carolina Miranda
The “Uwe Boll” of Reporters
…anthrax in fruit bascets? Robots writting naughtie bloggs? TIME anrticles and all? Can I have the copywrites for a movie?!
Did I say “antricles”? Sorry about that, I meant “articles”. Never mind about the movie rights…too many people would cry…but then; we could always write a tragety!
You yourself are a complete tool