Thomas McGuane on reviews: “John Updike said reviews are inexorably mixed—and that’s true. But it doesn’t exempt you from the storm and stress of them as they roll in. You’ll get one from the daily New York Times that says you’re the worst writer in the world, and one from the Sunday New York Times that says you’re the best writer in the world; the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette says somebody ought to shoot you, and the San Francisco Chronicle says, ‘Let’s welcome him to Mount Parnassus.'”
HTMLGiant interviews Stephen O’Connor about his fine story collection, Here Comes Another Lesson. (A few thoughts on the book.)
Elaine Showalter on the connection between Albert Camus and Philip Roth.
The Paris Review is currently working on an interview with Samuel R. Delany. Says editor Lorin Stein: “I don’t think Delany’s books have ever sold many copies, but if you want to know what’s going on in American literature, you had better know about him and his literature. So, in that sense, it may become a more parochial interview than it was; it may do less to encourage international understanding, but I think that now the literary community in the United States feels that it’s more marginalized than it used to be.”
Ted Gioia talks up his Postmodern Mystery project with Scott Timberg.
Karen Tei Yamashita discusses the massive amount of research she conducted for her National Book Award-nominated novel, I Hotel. The intensity of her research is certainly on every page, to a fault—during much of the time I was reading it, I wished the book were an oral history of San Francisco’s International Hotel, and at times the book’s novelistic elements were so thin I suspect Yamashita occasionally did too.
“In whole fields of discourse, from politics to academia, the very notion of a book—a static, authored, discrete hunk of prose—is starting to seem quaint.”
On Herman Wouk‘s Marjorie Morningstar: “By choosing Morality over Marjorie while indulging Marjorie over Morality, Wouk creates a character, call her a puritanical sybarite, much more intriguing than he may have intended.”
Scott Esposito on online literary criticism.
Russell Banks: “People more and more resemble people in the 1930s. Maybe that tradition of socially conscious novels written by Dreiser and Dos Passos will re-emerge. In my own work I’ve always had that dynamic conflict between high art and a narrative that’s socially conscious. There’s always been a healthy kind of back-and-forth. Maybe today’s crisis will bring that tradition back into view. I hope so.”
Allegra Goodman on revision.
Stanford is launching a multidisciplinary year-long program addressing war and ethics. Tobias Wolff is handling the literature part.
Anne Rice on sex and Catholicism.
On teaching graphic novels. A good chunk of Alexander Chee‘s reading list is unfamiliar to me, but we seem to share an admiration for Lynda Barry‘s memoir/writing primer, What It Is.
If you’re participating in National Novel Writing Month—or just writing a novel, I suppose—some extended advice on writing female characters: “I’ve read so many books about Men who live their lives apart from the rest of society, walking the streets at night, staying in their little apartments, FACING THE EXISTENTIAL DESPAIR OF THE HUMAN CONDITION. But I’ve never read a book like that with a female protagonist. It seems like female characters aren’t just limited by the depth of their character, but also by the questions they are allowed to interrogate.”
Dinaw Mengestu on a Times review that concluded with a hope that his fiction might “expand to the world beyond his own experience“: “Saul Bellow spent his entire career writing novels that pretty much concern the experience of Jewish American second generations—and obviously I’m not comparing myself to Bellow, but would you say, “Bellow needs to stop writing about that”? No. Philip Roth—“Just get over the Jewishness.” Toni Morrison should get over her African American experience thing in her fiction. And Edward P. Jones, my God, how many times is he going to write about black people in D.C.? It’s absurd.”
4 thoughts on “Links: All Talk”
Interesting point by Mengestu (who is firmly on my to-read list). Though I generally agree with him, at the same time I wish Aleksandar Hemon would move beyond the Slavic-protagonist-in-limbo-between-Eastern Europe-and-America theme.
Embarrassingly, I’ve read nothing of Hemon’s, though I have “Love & Obstacles” on my to-be-read stack. I think what Mengestu is (understandably) frustrated about is the notion that writing beyond his ethnicity, or beyond immigrants, would make him a “better” fiction writer, that it’s something he needs to do if he’s going to improve. What if he just wrote a better books about immigrants? At any rate, I think “How to Read the Air” is an excellent book, though I don’t really think of it as a book about ethnicity—it’s a book about lying, and how we get by despite/because of the secrets we keep.
Can’t find the Delany interview with the exact figure, but I recall him saying that “Dhalgren,” his masterpiece from the mid-70s, sold over half a million copies as a paperback original — he bragged that it sold more copies than the mass market paperback of its contemporary, “Gravity’s Rainbow” (both were issued by Bantam). Stein’s right that Delany is an important figure, though. He has influenced a lot of modern writers — Rick Moody and Jonathan Lethem leap to mind.
“A static, authored, discrete hunk of prose”?
Oh, please. I don’t think Tolstoy, Dickens, or Austen will be rolling over in their graves over this person’s bizarre remark. It calls to mind the Aesop’s fable whose moral is: “An ass may make fun of a lion.”