bad review

"Every mind lives or dies by its ideas; every book lives or dies by its language."

So this is the last sentence of the now almost famous bad-meanie review of Alix Somebody's new novel. I could only skim the review, saw he cared enough to name-drop half the canon, and I'm almost positive I'll never have time to read the book, but the sentence is rather compelling, and I like it and am almost left wishing it were true. But I'm also reminded of Philip K. Dick and other writers who very rarely crafted a beautiful sentence but had other things going for them that have kept them in print. One of my favorite creative-writing guides, title escapes me, at one point tries to give the languageless writer a boost by reminding us of how many famous writers didn't write such poetic prose and how some were paid by the word and not the pretty sentence. Dickens. Balzac. Yeah, I agree, it's wrong to name Hemingway here, but in 2012, Bukowski is as loved and in print as anyone from his generation. Some would say language was a strength of Kerouac's writing although most of these folks weren't critics. For The New Yorker, James Wood once wrote of Paul Auster, "Although there are things to admire in Auster’s fiction, the prose is never one of them."

No one path to literature, and at the end of the day, I suppose that this Alix Somebody or Nobody or Youtellme (and I'll admit I now remember her last name is Ohlin) has to be grateful for this Jerk Reviewer and the NYTimes just for running any review of her work. A lot of great books don't get close to being reviewed by such a major publication. And now I've been to the amazon page for the book, and it looks like The New Yorker and everyone else, customers and critics, loves the darn thing silly. My final impression is that the author will survive the scathing pen of Giraldi.

Fight for Your Long Day, Alix Ohlin and William Giraldi! And the rest of literature, too.

(I must confess that I liked the part of the review where he addresses the importance of a book's title.)

NYTimes "Gunning" for Protestors?

Like a well trained dog, I exceed my reading limit early each month, but I'm still able to pass on that the New York Times has Occupy Wall Street front and center on the Sunday morning website, and that they include links to three stories.

The main headline reads, "Protesters Are Gunning for Wall Street with Faulty Aim."

To me, it's unfortunate that peaceful protestors would be described in a "legitimate" news source as "gunning." And, alas, the first sentence is a dig at the ignorance of these peaceful young people:

"Demonstrators on Wall Street this week seemed to lack hard knowledge of the system they were fighting."

In fact, if they do lack this "hard knowledge" it could be due to how the system's statistics continually mask reality, whether we're talking about rates for unemployment, inflation, or pay for college grads. It's only in the last few years that we've seen more establishment journalism include information on discouraged workers or workforce participation rates.

Harper's Magazine in the Index ran the statistic that 85 percent of 2011 college grads returned to live at home after commencement, and any teacher in America who has ever reported this statistic or something similar  to his or her students is greeted by expressions of shock and disbelief. That statistic certainly doesn't mean that these young people remain at home for the rest of their adult lives, but it also doesn't account for the millions of other adult Americans living with their parents due to economic necessity.

So, perhaps, if it is true that these young people lack hard facts, perhaps it is also their sources--educators, journalists, parents, and others--who might take some responsibility for that? And perhaps the journalist who "broke" the story for The New York Times could also, by at least some criteria, be counted as among those who lacks "hard knowledge"? Or, perhaps, she is at least expert enough to know where her salary comes from?

There was also a nice Mom from Queens on the Occupy Wall Street livefeed just now who sent her love to the viewer who asked if she could be his Mom. And then, she sent her love to all of us. And blew kisses.

save the trees?

This article from The New York Times describes how one literary journal is embracing "new media," "social media," and more or less whatever else you would like to term it. To the best of my knowledge, they are not burning books, not even to heat their marginal, "start up" offices, but, yes, why of course, they are "tweeting" stories directly to your iphone and giving you additional options for receiving your content. Er, your short story I meant.

It looks like Rick Moody and Colson Whitehead are already in on the deal. More later on how twitter.com plans to survive any future ice storm or hostile elevator environment. (Let me know if those literary allusions--read "bad puns"--are not so obscure for you.) Peace.