David Foster Wallace (1962-2008)

October 10, 2008 at 4:28 pm | In Uncategorized | Leave a Comment

I opened an email from my brother this morning, one that made me sigh and start my day with a heart a little heavier than the one I woke up with, even on a Monday morning.  It seems that the world became a poorer place on Friday.  Acclaimed author David Foster Wallace took his own life at the age of 46, throwing in the towel after a nearly life-long battle with depression that had become severe in recent months according to Wallace’s father.

Wallace was one of the most acclaimed writers of the last two decades, an acclaim owed mostly to his magnum opus Infinite Jest, a massive novel with enough end- and footnotes to occupy a novel themselves.  Infinite Jest is a sprawling, non-linear novel, filled with an outrageous cast of characters and a whirling vortex of a plot.  The only possible comparison I can offer is Thomas Pynchon’s outrageous masterwork Gravity’s Rainbow.  Wallace weaves together a number of disparate narratives to tell a story of life in the near future, a time when corporations sponsor entire calendar years and a large portion of what was once the United States has become one giant landfill.  It is a story that involves an academy of tennis prodigies, a halfway house for recovering drug addicts, a group of wheelchair-bound French-Canadian terrorists, and the strange history of a film so entertaining that it causes its viewers to become zombified catatonics after only brief viewings.  I was absolutely enamoured with Infinite Jest when I first read it two years ago.  Once I started that doorstop of a book, I couldn’t be parted from it.  Every free moment became an excuse to read a few more pages.  Lunch breaks were devoted to reading it.  Sleep was lost.  It was that good.

Wallace was also a gifted essayist.  The titular essay of his collection A Supposedly Fun Thing I’ll Never Do Again never fails to bring a smile to my face. In recent years, Wallace was a creative writing professor at Pomona College, where by most accounts he was a favorite professor of the creative writing department.

Science Fiction: Out of the Literary Ghetto

September 15, 2008 at 4:35 pm | In Uncategorized | 1 Comment

Science Fiction has rarely been given as much as a favorable glance from the critical community.  Often derided as a literary ghetto or dismissed outright as juvenalia, the genre has nevertheless persisted as a viable commercial enterprise for writers.  Science Fiction and Fantasy books account for nearly 8% of all consumer dollars spent on books.  In 2004 alone, nearly 6000 new Science Fiction and Fantasy titles and editions were published (these statistics lump Science Fiction and Fantasy together, a standard practice for booksellers and publishers that irks fans of both genres to great irritation–but that’s a topic for another rant). 

And while popularity cuts very little mustard with the critics, it does point out that Science Fiction as a genre is a literature of the people.  Science Fiction can’t reasonably be said to dwell outside the mainstream of literature anymore.   Besides its massive share of the market, it is a genre that is trickling into mainstream fiction.  The crossover success of books like The Time Traveler’s Wife, The Brief History of the Dead, and Jonathan Strange and Mr. Norrell has shown that audience who normally scoff at Science Fiction and Fantasy can be “tricked” into reading it, as long as bookstores stock it on the regular fiction shelves.  This is hardly a new phenomenon;  literature has long been full of Science Fiction that slips out of the genre bullpen to great success: what are books like Brave New World and 1984 if not Science Fiction?

The Dixie Association: Avid Readers’ Special Event

August 19, 2008 at 5:49 pm | In Avid Readers, Uncategorized | Leave a Comment

I hope to see everyone this Thursday at 6PM for a special reading by Arkansas author Donald “Skip” Hays.  He’ll be reading from his novel The Dixie Association and answering questions about the novel and the writer’s craft.  The Dixie Association is not only my favorite sports book, it’s one of my favorite books, period.  In fact, I wouldn’t hesitate in recommending the book to a person who cares little if anything for baseball.   The Dixie Association is a hilarious, often raucous look at life in the American South, and Arkansas, in particular.  The plot centers around Hog Durham, an ex cattle rustler and small time thief, and his triumphant season playing first base for the Arkansas Reds.  The Reds are a motley crew of characters, including Cuban refugees, a Native American spitballer, a washed-up drunk knuckleballer, and even a beautiful young woman who substitutes for Hog at first base.  During their season, the Reds encounter religious fundamentalists, the good old boy justice system, and political pressure from the media and aspiring politicians alike.  These encounters make for a wild read.

The reading promises to be an entertaining one.  As always, newcomers are welcome to join us.

Changes for Avid Readers

August 19, 2008 at 5:23 pm | In Avid Readers, Uncategorized | Leave a Comment
Tags:

First and foremost, I’d like to apologize for becoming a little lax in my blogging duties.  The summer reading program was extremely successful for us this year, which means that we were very busy, and the blog got a little lost in the shuffle.  So, some news:

The Avid Readers Book Club is undergoing a few changes.  Beginning in September, the club will expand to two different meeting times.  The original Avid Readers club will continue to read award-winning titles and authors, but will now meet in the Shiloh Room noon-1PM the third Tuesday of each month.  Cindy McCauley will be taking my spot as the group facilitator. 

Details of the first Genre Book Club meeting are on the Genre Book Club Page!

The March: Avid Readers’ discussion (cancelled)

July 3, 2008 at 7:44 pm | In Avid Readers, Books! Books! Books! | Leave a Comment

I should have known better when I decided to forge ahead with the Avid Readers’ discussion scheduled for the eve of a major national holiday.  July 3rd is just not the time to get together with your book club.  Odds are that even if you don’t go in for the fireworks, picnics, and John Wayne movie marathons, you still travel or take part in some family gathering.  In a bit of rash thinking last month, I made the call to keep our regular meeting time intact.  Alas, it was not meant to be. 

However, we did read a good book: E. L. Doctorow’s The March.  Since we didn’t actually convene to discuss the novel, the following critique is all mine.  Rest assured, I will get the opinions of the other members and update this post accordingly.  Unless, of course, they all completely agree with everything I say, and let’s face it, the odds of that are slim.

As with Doctorow’s Ragtime, the author’s most celebrated work, The March is made up of a group of entertwining stories that sometimes intersect and/or diverge.  It’s a structural device that is good for conveying the historical sweep and import of the events described, but it’s also one that destroys the possibility of any quick, easy plot summary.  Perhaps the best way to describe the plot of The March is to simply describe some of the characthers found therein.

There is General Sherman himself, the Union general who is leading a prolonged march into the American south.  Sherman is a brilliant military strategist, but is also mentally unstable, and has a hard time reconciling his romantic ideals about war with the reality of the desctruction that his troops cause.

Pearl is a freed slave who leaves her Georgia plantation to follow the troops.  She finds herself disguised as a drummer boy, and eventually ends up assisting the battlefield surgeon Colonel Wrede Sartorious.  The surgeon is a German immigrant who is so deeply invested in his surgical operations that he is detached from the violence around him. 

Will and Arly are Confederate soldiers who find themselves defecting from side to side in order to survive.  Arly is a particularly clownish character who provides much of the comic relief in the novel.  His philosophical discourses seem to be at odds with both sides of the conflict.  Strangely, Arly sees himself as protected by a divine power to carry out great deeds. 

General Kilpatrick is a Union general under Sherman’s command.  Kilpatrick is a crude tactician who has a reputation for behaving recklessly and getting soldiers killed.  He is presented as a psychological foil for Sherman.  Unlike his commander, Kilpatrick has no illusions about the glory of war, and sees each conquered city, town, or plantation as a means to achieve personal gain.

These characters make up the bulk of the narrative, but there are numerous others who litter the landscape of the novel.  Even those characters that are given limited space in the narrative are memorable.  Doctorow offers no one-dimensional stock characters during the course of The March.  And it is this aspect of the novel that sets it apart from many historical fiction novels.  Doctorow presents history as the accumulation of many stories.  Even Sherman himself is presented as only one piece of the historical backdrop, and the lives of even the lowliest social stature have a part to play in the drama.

Doctorow’s style is immensely readable, and although the cast of characters seems unweildy or overwhelming in describing the novel, it never seems so in the reading. 

Next month, we’ll be meeting at a special time.  We’ll get together Thursday, August 21, to discuss Donald Hays’ The Dixie Association.  The author himself will be on hand to read from his novel and take part in our discussion.  This will be a great opportunity to get to know an Arkansas author and his work.  As always, and especially for this event, we welcome visitors and newcomers to take part in the discussion.  Copies of The Dixie Association are available at the Information Desk for checkout.

Ian Fleming…the spy writer who eludes us

June 30, 2008 at 2:53 pm | In Books! Books! Books! | 1 Comment

Last month saw the 100th birthday of Ian Fleming;  it also saw the publication of a new James Bond novel, Devil May Care, by Sebastian Faulks, a novelist picked by Fleming’s estate to continue the exploits of the literary British spy.  Faulks’ novel returns to the Cold War era plots and geography of Fleming’s original novels, in effect negating the many Bond novels written after Fleming’s death.

I’m probably not qualified to write about this.  I haven’t read Devil May Care and I’m also very much an Ian Fleming neophyte.  I’ve seen all the James Bond movies (what male in my marketing demographic hasn’t seen at least a handful of them?), but I always suspected that the films departed significantly from the source material of Fleming’s novels.  Maybe Sean Connery’s James Bond seemed to have too much of the actor’s own personality.  So in my recent quest to read anything that could possibly fall under the pulp fiction umbrella, I’ve come to Ian Fleming.  Sure, Fleming’s spy novels are the product of a post-pulp fiction era, they have all the earmarks of those earlier works: swift pacing, outlandish settings and characters, compact plotting that occasionally veers into the lurid, and crowd-pleasing action.  And while pulp fiction seemed to primarily be the domain of American writers (Lovecraft, Howard, et al.), Fleming’s British voice appeared to be the overseas equivalent of mid-twentieth century popular fiction that I’d been seeking.  So I picked up  Casino Royale and Live and Let Die.

Here’s the verdict.  Like a lot of the popular genre fiction from the 1930s to the 1950s that I’ve encountered, Fleming’s Bond novels are a lot better than they have a right to be.  Let me clarify that.  When one thinks of Fleming’s spy novels, probably the last things to come to mind are crisp, almost poetic prose, beautifully rendered settings, and rounded characterizations.  To be sure, the novels aren’t without their pulp cliches: spectacular violence, hard-drinking, womanizing, and improbable plot twists.  However, the literary James Bond possesses a depth of character that is somewhat muted in the films (the truest portrayal of Fleming’s Bond is probably Daniel Craig in Casino Royale, which stays fairly close to the source material, especially given the very different political backdrops in the two eras in which the filma and novel are set). 

I’m still chipping away at Fleming’s Bond novels, but I’ve already learned that the literary Bond is not even English (he’s half Scottish/half Swiss), that he doesn’t just drink martinis (he drinks everything in sight), that he’s not a wisecracking comedian (he is at times downright dour), and he possesses a fatalism mostly lacking in his screen counterpart.  None of these discrepancies are shocking;  it’s common practice that characters are altered for the big screen.  What is shocking is that most people don’t seem to know much about Fleming’s Bond.  I can’t believe that I haven’t already read these books.  I feel like they should have been a part of my adolescence, alongside books by H.P. Lovecraft and Stephen King. 

My advice: give Ian Fleming’s Bond a chance.  If you’re at all a fan of briskly paced action-oriented fiction or you’re simply nostalgic for a time when popular fiction wore its genre tags proudly, then you can hardly go wrong.  And if you need a recommendation weightier than mine, consider this: JFK was a fan. 

Demon Dogs and Dainty Doilies

June 9, 2008 at 4:30 pm | In Books! Books! Books!, Uncategorized | Leave a Comment

Lately, I’ve become a fan of mysteries.  At the library, the circulation of mystery titles is fast and furious, and we shelve them by the cartload.  But, in discussing mysteries, I’ve come to learn that it is a varied genre that inspires strong preferences and author allegiances in its readers.  There’s the hard-boiled crowd and the cat mystery crowd.  There’s the horse race mystery crowd and the police procedural crowd.  There are those who like humorous wise-cracking mysteries and those who prefer the darkest psychological suspense offerings.  And all that says nothing of the growing number of supernatural sleuth stories. Saying “I like to read mysteries” is a bit like saying “I’d like to eat food for dinner” in that either statement could entail a wide variety of flavors.  I’ve come to realize that when it comes to many of these flavors, I’m completely out of my depth.

I came to the mystery genre through the classics, and they are still my favorite.  Raymond Chandler, Dashiell Hammett, James M. Cain, Jim Thompson, Ross MacDonald, and David Goodis hooked me with their hardboiled, tough-guy narratives.  They led me to their narrative progeny: the crime fiction of the self-proclaimed Demon Dog of Crime Fiction, James Ellroy.  Then, I looped back again, and read some of Arthur Conan Doyle’s Sherlock Holmes stories.  I found a wealth of great books that were just sitting there waiting to be read, books that I neglected because I’ve never cared for Agatha Christie-style mysteries.  How could I have known?

I’m continually trying to win people over to science fiction, fantasy, and horror.  I tell them that any genre is broad, and contains a wide array of material.  Just because you don’t like Star Trek doesn’t mean that you won’t be able to find some science fiction that you like.  Just because J.R.R. Tolkein is a lot of nonsense to you doesn’t mean you won’t like other fantasy authors.  I guess when it came to the mystery genre, I should have listened more closely to my own advice.  Just because I can’t ever see myself liking a book where a cat solves crimes and I can’t wrap my head around Miss Marple doesn’t mean I dislike mysteries.  It just means I prefer the Demon Dogs to the the Dainty Doilies.  And lucky enough for me, and for those who prefer the Dainty Doilies, the mystery genre is as varied as its readers.

The Meaning of Night: Avid Readers’ discussion 06/05/08

June 7, 2008 at 2:44 pm | In Avid Readers, Books! Books! Books!, Uncategorized | Leave a Comment

The Avid Readers book club convened on a very warm and windy Thursday evening to discuss Michael Cox’s debut novel The Meaning of Night.  The novel is complex and lengthy, mixing mystery, suspense, and historical fiction into a potent literary cocktail.  The book is subtitled A Confession and is a work of meta-fiction purporting to be the edited and footnoted compilation of a papers recently discovered in a university library.  These papers are the first-person account of Edward Glyver, who reveals through twists and turns his meticulously plotted revenge against the one person he blames for his downfall: the rakish literary figure Phoebus Daunt.

The Meaning of Night is set in Victorian-era England, and Cox presents the reader with a thoroughly realized setting.  Often the reader is shown the contradictory extremes of life in this era: the grand country estates with lavish sitting rooms, and the filthy gaslight-illuminated streets where thieves and prostitutes populate the night.  Glyver is a man of both worlds.  He is both highly intelligent and ruthless.  He is capable of acts of charity, as well as acts of cruelty and violence.  He has the ability to move inconspicuously in high society circles, but he also is a frequent visitor to opium dens and brothels.  Ultimately, he is a man driven by a singular purpose: revenge.  This complexity makes Glyver a three-dimensional character as well as a fascinating, though unreliable, narrator.  Glyver spares the reader none of the sordid details, welcoming us to his narrative by casually describing his murder of random person before gorging himself on an oyster supper.  Literally, this takes place in the opening sentences of Glyver’s confession, signalling to the reader that the road ahead will travel through some dark places.

Michael Cox populates his novel with a rich supporting cast of characters.  There’s Le Grice, the taciturn soldier and athlete who is Glyver’s friend in London.  There’s Glyver’s employer and benefactor, Mr. Tredgold, a lawyer whose firm provides the best defense money can buy, legal or otherwise.  There’s Bella, the prostitute who harbors great affection for Glyver.  And of course, there’s Phoebus Daunt, the criminal poet, who is the focus of Glyver’s hatred and the target of his vengeance.

The Meaning of Night is a historical fiction that not only captures the feel of the time in its setting, but also adheres to many of the forms and traditions of Victorian fiction.  The plot structure and dialogue often echoes Charles Dickens and Wilkie Collins.  Indeed, these authors even figure into some of Glyver’s literary digressions.  And the novel is full of digressions.  Those who like a streamlined narrative that hurtles towards a quick resolution would do well to keep this novel at arm’s length.  Glyver is a man of letters, a confirmed bibliophile with a love of obscure texts.  Many of these literary allusions are illuminated by the footnotes included by the “editor.”

To say much more of the plot would be to spoil a great mystery.  And The Meaning of Night is just that: a mystery.  In much the same way that our earlier reading of The Stolen Child revealed other facets of the fantasy genre, our reading of The Meaning of Night showed us another side to the mystery genre.  The Meaning of Night is a mystery hammered into the framework of historical literature.  It is comparable in many ways to Iain Pears’ An Instance of the Fingerpost and Caleb Carr’s The Alienist, two other great historical mysteries.

The Avid Readers will meet again on July 3 at 6:30 to discuss E. L. Doctorow’s The March, another work of historical fiction, set this time in the American Civil War.  As always, newcomers are welcome.  Copies of The March  are available for extended checkout at the Information desk in the library.  Drop in and pick up a copy, and we’ll see you at the next discussion.

Fiction…in bite-sized chunks

June 3, 2008 at 9:14 pm | In Books! Books! Books!, Uncategorized | 1 Comment

By now, we’ve heard so much about western society’s shrinking attention span that I believe most of us are willing to take it for granted.  The blame gets passed around to television, video games, and the ubiquitous internet boogeyman.  And it’s good fodder for discussions that involve the shaking of heads, the wringing of hands, and the wise stroking of beards.  But I’m not willing to wholeheartedly throw my lot in with the woe-is-me-alas-our-downfall crowd.  I have reason to believe that all hope is not yet lost.  Working at a library as I do, I’m witness to the reading habits of the public.  And this is what I see: tweens and teens lugging around doorstop-sized Harry Potter books, young adults filling up waiting lists for Stephanie Meyer’s latest epic, and adults choosing tomes by Stephen King, Robert Jordan, and Ken Follett (just three authors who have dealt in enormous word counts in their latest novels).  The Avid Readers book club just finished putting to bed Michael Cox’s The Meaning of Night, which weighs in at a healthy 700+ pages (although the jury is still out on how that particular work fared…expect an update soon). In short, it seems that people are still willing to unplug long enough to get lost in a good long book.  And while that does my heart good, I wonder if something has gotten lost in the shuffle:  the short story.

Some of my favorite authors dealt wrote extensively in the short fiction format: H. P. Lovecraft, Edgar Allan Poe, Robert E. Howard, Anton Chekov, Richard Matheson, Robert Bloch, and Philip K. Dick.  Stephen King is gearing up to publish a new collection of short fiction (some fans, myself included, maintain that some of King’s greatest works are his short stories), promising to bring short stories to the bestseller list.  And magazines like McSweeney’s, Weird Tales, and Harper’s still publish short fiction.  What does all this mean?  Short fiction is still out there, and although it is not the moneymaker (for both authors and publishers) that it once was, short fiction still finds an audience.

It seems strange to expound on the virtues of the short story in an age where the attention span has, if not exactly shrunken, been radically dissected by the myriad demands that our rapidly expanding technology has placed upon our senses.  It seems counterintuitive that single-sitting fiction has lost its appeal in this age in which people insist that they’d read more if only they had the time.  I have been on a bit of a short story kick lately.  I polished off Ray Bradbury’s The October Country and have spent time cherry-picking in The Black Lizard Big Book of Pulps: The Best Crime Stories from the Pulps During Their Golden Age.  Most of the stories are ideal for one-sitting readings.  You can gulp down several on a lunch break.  You can read one in the time it takes to brew and drink that evening cup of tea.  It seems that if those who complain that they have no time for reading would perhaps give short fiction a try, they might soon rediscover their love for reading.  And then…who knows…maybe they’ll end up lugging that huge Neal Stephenson book out of the library without even giving a second thought to the television they’re missing or their sadly neglected blogs (ha ha ha).

An Embarassment of Riches?

May 27, 2008 at 9:24 pm | In Books! Books! Books!, Uncategorized | Leave a Comment

I read a news report from London this morning that details how Doris Lessing views her Nobel prize for literature as “a bloody disaster.”  Lessing goes on to say that the amount of media attention she has received in the wake of winning the prize has siphoned away much of her writing time, and that it is now unlikely that she will ever write another novel length work of fiction.  Lessing cautioned young writers to appreciate their literary gifts, saying, “Use it while you’ve got it because it’ll go.  It’s sliding away like water down a plughole.”

It’s the kind of story that normally would have struck me as a bit sad.  Anyone who’s everwritten knows that the muse is often fickle and that hitting a solid wall of writer’s block is one of the most frustrating experiences one can have outside of a DMV or a calculus class.  This story didn’t bother me so much.  Why?  Lessing is 88 years old, has published 50+ novels, numerous volumes of short stories, memoirs, and even plays.  All writers should be so lucky, to maintain literary relevance for a period of time during which most authors would have found themselves well past their sell-by date.  And to have enjoyed acclaim in multiple formats and mutliple genres…well, perhaps what Lessing suffers from is simply an embarassment of riches.

I admit that I have only a passing familiarity with Lessing’s works.  I do know that she began began writing science fiction some years into her career, only to be chided by some critics.  I also know that she is often called a feminist writer, a label about which she was apprehensive.  I also know that she has enjoyed much more critical acclaim and longevity than many of my favorite writers.  Robert E. Howard, H.P. Lovecraft, Philip K. Dick, Edgar Allan Poe, and Raymond Chandler all died well shy of their 88th year.  But then again, they never had to feel the pain of the muse slipping down the drain, and maybe that’s a pain most writers would rather be spared…at any age. 

Next Page »

Blog at WordPress.com. | Theme: Pool by Borja Fernandez.
Entries and comments feeds.