Don’t Blame the First Lady. She Still Doesn’t Know About EKG Treatment.

The Age has the Mark Haddon profile to end all Mark Haddon profiles. He confesses that he’s a fortysomething who listens to the Flaming Lips and Sparklehorse, is 30,000 words into his next novel Blood and Scissors, and (regrettably) has been reading the McSweeney’s crowd.

Laura Bush has called gay marriage “a very, very shocking issue.” She also reports that she faints at the sight of blood.

The American Prospect has some fun with a comparative review of stalker/sucker/spineless wanker memoirs.

Caryn James examines the recent rise of Hollywood fiction.

And if, like me, you were an RPG geek back in the 80s, you might be interested to know that Paranoia has returned.

Most People Just Go to Anger Management Training Or Get An Antidepressant Prescription

Salon: “And instead of playing the peace-loving Christian, Gibson is swatting at critics, real and imagined. Of New York Times writer Frank Rich, Gibson admits to having said, ‘I wanted to kill him. I want his intestines on a stick. I want to kill his dog.'”

And that’s not all, kids:

Sawyer: You said, “The Holy Ghost was working through me.”

Gibson: I’ve received a lot of ridicule for that statement. I think that the Holy Ghost is real. I believe that he’s looking favorably on this film and he wanted to help.

Proclaiming himself “somewhere between Howard Stern and Saint Francis of Assisi on the scale of morality,” Gibson also seems creepily preoccupied with evil, both apparently in the focus of his film and in his current situation.

Sawyer: You said at one point, “The big dark force didn’t want us to make this film.”

Gibson: Sure.

Sawyer: What was the force?

Gibson: What was the force? It’s the thing you can’t see. I’m a believer, by the way. So if you believe, you believe that there are big realms of good and evil, and they’re slugging it out.

(via A.O.)

Quickies & Jesus, Not the Book Babes Again

Ro Sham Bo in lit: Unfortunately, the article stops just as it begins to reveal something.

McSweeney’s vs. Partisan Review/Agni: guess who gets more coverage.

The Book Babes are so absurd that I’ve decided to start addressing their columns on an equally absurd first-name basis. This week, they weigh in on the Amazon brouhaha, with predictably vapid results:

“How are readers supposed to trust reviews if they don’t know who the reviewers are and what their biases might be?” Absolutely, Margo. So why not cough up your own biases up right now and explain why you allowed Norman Mailer to get away with that ridiculous New Journalism claim a few weeks ago? Or why you and Ellen didn’t press Keller further? Or how you both remain silent over the pre-NYTBR regime change’s move to non-fiction? You two think you’re covering the book scene?

“Everybody is entitled to an opinion.” Everybody’s entitled to an informed opinion with a reasonable argument, Ellen. And confessing your love for a has-been as tripe-heavy and WASP-blindsided as Anne Tyler suggests to me that you might be unqualified to review literature.