- I intended to link to it yesterday, but this week at the Litblog Co-Op, folks are discussing Marshall Klimasewiski’s The Cottagers. There’s talk of horrible vacations and, on Friday, a podcast interview will follow.
- Charles Shields reveals how he used the Internet to conduct research for his Harper Lee biography.
- George Eliot’s letters to Henry Lewes have gone online. You can access the letters here. My only question: why didn’t they do this in the middle of March?
- Patti Smith hits the New Yorker.
- Kathleen Parker: “People who read books are different from other people. They’re smarter for one thing. They’re more sensual for another. They like to hold, touch and smell what they read.” What Parker didn’t tell you is that some “people who read books” can also be found in criminal databases and some of the more unsullied readers are prone to displays of snobbery. I’ve known some pretty smart and sensual people who don’t read in my time and have even managed to get more than a few of them attracted to books. Largely because I was able to assure many of them that I was a schmuck. The key to getting people to read is to be humble and to listen very carefully to people. Then you can figure out what kind of books they’re likely to go crazy over. (via Bookslut)
- Niall Griffiths revisits Cormac McCarthy’s The Road and finds that there’s more inside the book than during his initial read. I’d like to see more newspapers do this. Litblogs are often accused of rushing out their posts (and I would agree with this to some degree), but many print critics are equally celeritous in banging out their reviews to meet deadlines. Because of these conditions, I have to ask whether a book like Pynchon’s Against the Day really received a fair reception, or, for that matter, whether most books are fairly assessed in today’s environment. Mr. Asher has more to say about the socioeconomics of book reviewing.
- Tales from the Reading Room compares the postwar Paris cultural atmosphere with today’s troubling media environment.
- Who knew that Harlequins were mining Village People templates for their book covers?
- There’s a documentary about equuphiliacs now making the rounds.
- I got the tip from Maxine, but it appears that Lindsay Anderson’s if… is getting the Criterion treatment. Now if they can somehow get Anderson’s other masterpiece O Lucky Man! onto DVD, we’ll all be very lucky.
- Michiko on Michael.
- The L.A. Times Book Prize winners.
- 50+ Free Resources for Effective Reading. (via Book Glutton)
- Mother Jones: “By the end of the century, half of all species on Earth may be extinct. Who will survive the world’s dwindling biodiversity, and why?” (via Isak)
- Gawker takes the NYTBR podcast theme song appropriately to task.
- Here’s a presidential platform I can get behind — apparently, in more ways than one.
- It had to happen sooner or later: Twitterlit, which comes from one Debra Hamel.
- The Audit Bureau of Circulations has reported sharp drops in newspaper circulation in Spring 2007.
- Also, the New York Times will no longer participate in the White House Correspondents Association dinner. Personally, I blame Rich Little.
- Arrested for holding placards of Orwell and the Magna Carta.
- Against National Poetry Month. (via Books, Words, and Writing)
- Scooby Doo manga. (via The Beat)
- Amazing.
- I agree with Lev Grossman. The X-Files has run its course.
Roundup
– May 1, 2007Posted in: Roundup
The Call by Yannick Murphy: The always interesting author of Here They Come and Signed, Mata Hari returns with a novel that whips up a worldview from a rather quirky set of limitations: namely, the call logs that a veterinarian maintains as his son is unexpectedly put into a coma and an unforgiving economy denies him work. What emerges is a surprisingly optimistic, often funny, and very moving account on how one family uses acceptance and forgiveness as a way to atone for hard knocks. (
Birds of Paradise by Diana Abu-Jaber: Forget Franzen and Eugenides. If you're looking for a social novel that counts, Diana Abu-Jaber is the author you're looking for. Building from the free-form exploration of consciousness and identity in Crescent and the gripping procedural structure of Origin, Abu-Jaber's latest novel is her finest, equally fluent with gutterpunk culture and smarmy real estate men. It has been suggested by The Washington Post's Ron Charles that you will likely gain some pounds while reading this novel. This is certainly true. Abu-Jaber's description of food is so precise that it often made me want to do more cooking. But I very much admired the way in which Abu-Jaber presents all her characters as unwitting victims of rough capitalism, which permits them some dignity even as they perform terrible acts.
The Last of the Live Nude Girls by Sheila McClear: This memoir isn't so much about the decline of the Times Square peepshow, as it is about one young woman's efforts to pull herself up by by her bootstraps when presented with few economic options. Filled with self-introspective candor and a quiet dignity, McClear's story is one that might befall any of us in these volatile times. While McClear does get back on her feet, her book leads one contemplating the terrible fates of other young women now moving to New York and falling into deadlier vocations. (
I agree with you about the snobby article about reading. I agree people should read more and literature is good, but reading books doesn’t make a person superior.
There seems to be a lot of importance placed on reading fiction books as a measure of knowledge these days. This article (correct me if I’m wrong) seems to point to fiction as the path to knowledge. Personally, I don’t have the time or patience to finish many books, and the books I read are rarely fiction. I do read all day long though, mostly news (online and print), stuff online and articles/books for college. The books I read for fun are usually non-fiction (although I do read fiction sometimes). Does that mean my brain is deteriorating? I don’t think so. I still feel somewhat of a inferiority complex because I don’t read a lot of fiction books though. For me, I guess I get a lot of fiction stories from films, and that takes away a need for read fiction. Maybe films are killing literature?
I also disagree about the X-Files, I’ve gotten into watching that show again (they play it a lot on cable late at night) and I’m dying to see another film! Even if it sucks, it would feel good to know they at least tried. It won’t make the older shows worse.
Scooby Doo manga is wrong. So is Rich Little.
Get “siller” with the triller, G (as in Grossman).
I can’t figure out whether cable is airing only the bad X-Files reruns, or if every episode was that way. I don’t remember much from 7th grade. Maybe one of these days, scientists will find that hormones are good for erasing memory. Either way, I won’t be seeing that sequel.
I have a hard enough time deciding whether to see the Simpsons movie.
I remember saying that The X-Files was going to be my generation’s equivalent of the original Star Trek. Seems like it’s right on schedule.
(Yes, that prediction was in part an unflattering comment on David Duchovny’s abilities, specificaly that he is about as much of an actor as William Shatner.)
They’ve been re-running a lot of the later conspiracy episodes lately, which aren’t as good (in my opinion) as the older stand-alone episodes.