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.
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.
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.