David Rakoff, Part Two (BSS #168)
David Rakoff is the author of Fraud and Don’t Get Too Comfortable, and a contributor to This American Life.
Condition of Mr. Segundo: Bitter towards cheapskates.
Author: David Rakoff
Subjects Discussed: What type of journalist Rakoff is, being careful with revealing a personal life, Gypsy Rose Lee, whether or not Rakoff has contacted the people that he’s written about, working in an ice cream parlor, the distinction between “secretary” and “assistant,” the fear of using a person as comic fodder, the culture of scrutinizing people, contending with a call from Albert Maysles in relation to a Little Edie Beale tribute piece, a sense of disproportionate entitlement, the Log Cabin Republicans, how political views encroach upon a personal essay, the similarities and differences between the real Rakoff and the Rakoff persona, being a shy reporter, finding it difficult to approach people, dwelling on decor, Rakoff’s false belief that he is a hack, Joan Didion’s crop knowledge, Bugs Bunny, Puppetry of the Penis, the need to report upon things alone, Rammstein, being frightened and confronting fear, how details are changed to suit an essay, narrative liberties, being an American immigrant, the difference between writing before 9/11 and after 9/11, writing essays that are love letters to New York, “frauding” readers, Marion Ettlinger and photographic poses, plastic shoes, writing travel pieces, and trying to write fiction.
EXCERPT FROM SHOW:
Rakoff: I’m very indulged. I am allowed to be at least 50% of the story, which is a weird thing to do. And I should learn how to do a little bit less of that. Simply because I think it’s a good set of tools to have. I think all of them are good sets of tools to have. Because of that, because I am allowed to be 50% of the story, I’ve been tremendously careful. From day one, I was tremendously careful about what I revealed and what I didn’t reveal. You know.
Correspondent: Yeah.
Rakoff: No one knows about my family. No one knows about my love life. You know, it’s a very controlled revelation. I’m not a memoirist, for example. Weirdly enough, I’ve been working on pieces that are a little more personal right now. Which has been odd to do. But, yeah, I’m both in the story and not of the story.
Correspondent: But I’m wondering if there’s a certain risk that you have to confess something if you are 50% of the story. I mean, that has got to be a terrible bridge to walk if you really don’t want to reveal things about yourself.
Rakoff: Sure. Yes. But I don’t feel — you know, and I’m sure the day will come when, like Gypsy Rose Lee, who made a career of not revealing anything, eventually found her star power fading and finally took it all off. And by that point, nobody cared. There might come a time when I do have to do that. But it’s not that difficult to say not going to do this, not going to talk about this, not going to talk about that. Invariably, whatever I reveal in stories are either in direct response to what’s going on or they’re just a kind of a return to a homeostatic kind of despair that suffuses everything I do or observe. Almost invariably, the insights that I come to are somewhat melancholy.
Podcast: Play in new window | Download




Correspondent: But surely colors and textures, these things have value too? These things trigger memories as well!
Jacobson: One of the things they say to you here is, “We’ve done all that. You’re struggling with something that we’ve dealt with.” And someone said something to me in — not Detroit, but Atlanta. I was reading a little bit of the beginning of the novel, when much is made of the fact that the hero, who is a cartoonist, can’t draw some of the more sexual details in some homoerotic cartoons that he’s employed to copy for a pirate of gay eroticism. And he says he can’t do it because he can’t imagine what it’s like wearing tight leather pants or tight denims. Because Jewish men wear loose pleated trousers and a cardigan. The joke being that Jewish men don’t live in their body. Someone who was taking me around Atlanta who heard that said, “You’re wrong there, you know. You might be like that in England, but we’ve passed all that. We’ve dealt with the body. We’re now at home in the body.” And I thought, “Is that right? Well, am I dealing with a problem that’s gone?” But then I remember that every Jew I’ve actually met over here is in exactly the same state of mind. They might be out there playing their round of golf, but they are living in their heads. They do live within their heads more than in their body. Their neuroses are exactly the same as the English neuroses. And I thought, I’m actually — the thing that I thought that they told me that I was dealing with that’s out of date is not, in fact, out of date. 
Fernandez: I want to address that. My favorite medium of all time is radio, and it always will be. You’ve heard the cliche “theater of the mind.” And it’s absolutely true. Every listener had a different picture of what he was listening to in his head. And it was a marvelous medium. And great for actors. It was live!
Correspondent: Well, we’re talking about radio as “It was a fabulous medium.” Do you think there’s absolutely no hope — particularly in this podcasting era; I mean, here we are talking on a podcast — of old time radio returning?
Correspondent: But it’s not all bad. You have, for example, the honor of the tip. The dollars constantly inserted under the martini glass.
Subjects Discussed: The outlandish nature of Peculiar in relation with the more realist tone of Thirst, designing an episodic novel, the 9/11 allegory (or lack thereof), “shopping for an opinion,” soap operas, The New Republic, the hirsute nature of Harriman, character names, the list of students in Humbert Humbert’s class, obscure baseball players with really great names, starting from notes, third-person narration, Philip Roth, messy lives, death and victimization, Cantor Fitzgerald, specific sentences that kick-start the narrative, commas in sentences, rewriting, the most pleasurable thing about writing, Shakespeare, and political incorrectness and satirical limits.
Subjects Discussed: The anonymous perception of the service sector, avoiding legal clearances from the Red Lobster, personal loyalty and honor vs. corporations, High Noon, the advantages of a setting a novel within a 24 hour period, using the present tense, collecting stories from restaurant employees, coats being sliced, the importance of cars, the sad-ass nature of the Chevy Regal, character names, working as a caterer, personal experience vs. imagination, education vs. reality, staying true to a character’s experience, Old World figures, attitudes toward the lottery, salting a parking lot vs. salting a meal, 


Subjects Discussed: Authoring a conceptual book with veto power over the designer, family detachment, cross-references, Bay Area literary magazines, the McSweeney’s influence, Em Magazine, book art practitioners, being on a first name basis with Dave Eggers without really meeting him, teaching a class on design with scant knowledge, frightened photographers, how to organize artists without having them succumb to advertising influence, inviting readers to cut up the book, John Barth’s Lost in the Funhouse, nepotism and William Gass, character who share surnames with authors, speculating on character deaths, Garth Risk Hallberg’s streetcred, drugs, the problems of a representative North American family living in New York, lying and imagination, the “healthy glow” on cheerleaders, penis envy, lengthy sentences and commas, Raymond Queneau’s “sonnet machine,” being hostile towards Geos, plastic bags and trees, the Great Pacific Garbage Patch, Ian Frazier’s “Bags in Trees,” on the reader being unfairly tricked by the book’s trompe-l’Å“il, whether all books should be published in hardcover, e-books, and reading Bob Woodward in PDF.
