As the baseball season gets underway, it looks like this summer’s big off-the-field story will be steroid use. (More serious allegations are beginning to surface as the San Francisco Chronicle reports that federal investigators were told Barry Bonds, Jason Giambi, and Gary Sheffield all received performance enhancing drugs from a lab that is currently under investigation.) But last year’s story, the fallout from Michael Lewis’ book Moneyball: The Art of Winning an Unfair Game, still has legs. The March 1st issue of Sports Illustrated (on newsstands last week) contains a vociferous epilogue to Moneyball in which Lewis catalogs some of the more outrageous responses that his book received from baseball insiders. He takes to task particularly egregious offenders, like Joe Morgan, for continuing to dismiss the book out of hand. It’s a must read for anyone who was swept up in last summer’s Moneyball furor.
In an item posted last weekend, we wrote, "Senator Arlen Specter realizes that there's no way to endear yourself to Republican primary voters like writing for The New York Review of Books." The item should have read: "Democratic primary voters." We apologize for the error.
Reuters reported today that The New York Sun is in financial trouble, and may be forced to close shop before the end of the month, unless it can find a backer. In some ways, this isn't a surprising development. Global affairs, in the current, real-time sense of the term, require enormous resources to cover thoroughly, and economies of scale would seem to cut against a small-circulation newspaper. But the intellectual seriousness of the conservative-leaning Sun has helped it make inroads in an increasingly wide-open market: the book section.Under the editorship of the poet and critic Adam Kirsch (who has two books out this year), The Sun has become, for my money, the best newspaper book section in the country. Kirsch resembles James Wood in his donnish regard for literary tradition, but, more importantly, he shares with Wood an appreciation for the notion of writerly sensibility - and has been willing to assign books to writers whose well-honed sensibilities diverge from his own. Recent pleasures include Kirsch on canonical German Adalbert Stifter, Benjamin Lytal on contemporary master Marilynne Robinson, Otto Pinzler on the varieties of crime fiction, and Caleb Crain on the evolving English language. This breadth of interest and commitment to excellence (in reviewer and subject) are the key ingredients in the kind of book reviews worth reading. It would be sad, after such a promising start, to see The Sun go.[Correction: An attentive reader informs us that, although Adam Kirsch is "the book critic for The New York Sun", and is, in some sense, the book section, he is not the section's editor. That title, and presumably the role of assigning reviews, belongs to David Wallace-Wells.]
The creative writing class is a beautiful thing. The longest journeys begin with a single step, and (I’m sure) just like countless colleges and writers’ centers throughout the world, the classes I attended at The Irish Writers’ Centre were safe, exciting places to put one figurative foot in front of the other. Though clearly my metaphors need a little work… The established rules are pretty clear to anyone who’s attended school: do your assignments, listen to the other students, respect your teacher. But of course, society is also filled with unwritten rules, observed by most and flouted by others. Don’t sip your drink too loudly at the movies; don’t answer your phone during a gig; and, if you’re attending a writing class, don’t do any of the things described below. 1. "I didn't know we could do that!" Lesson number one begins with a writing exercise that I love. Students are asked to turn to their nearest classmate and ask three questions about their life, then take 10 minutes writing the opening paragraph of a story using some of these details. For example, if someone mentions that they travel a lot, tan easily, and like the ocean, you could (if you're a genius) use it as the opening to a story like John Steinbeck's The Pearl. It's a great warm up if there's a big enough group, and a chance for people to express themselves to a new class in a safe way. That is until people show resentment for classmate's use of imagination. To illustrate: One student was told of a classmate's insomnia, love for travelling, and fondness of Latin America. This gave birth to a Latin variation on The Hulk (or Jekyll and Hyde, if you're feeling even more generous). It was a lively, pulpy little piece and the closing line "when he slept, he became Rodrigo, and Rodrigo was not a nice person to know" evoked gasps and a few knowing chuckles: This young man had taken some bare facts and built the foundations of a fun -- if slightly derivative short story. There were backslaps all round, at first. "I didn't know you could do that!" one student spluttered, so outraged she could barely get the words out fast enough. "He...he used supernatural elements. That's not allowed! Is it?" What was the real issue? That he didn't follow her imagined parameters of the assignment? Or that her story was a literal shopping list of what she'd just been told? She had broken the first unwritten rule of creative writing classes: Don't get sore if someone else has a better idea. 2. "Oh, I haven't read it." Early in one beginner's class, we were assigned to bring in a book we wished we'd written. I resisted the urge to bring in something classy like Ulysses, or indeed Slash’s autobiography, and instead opted for High Fidelity by Nick Hornby. Another classmate brought in A Man in Full by Tom Wolfe. She praised it eloquently, saying how the fall of a tycoon was relevant, how Wolfe writes with the authority of a gifted investigative journalist, and how it echoes Wolfe's idol, Charles Dickens. "What do you like most about it?" asked the teacher. "Oh I haven't read it," she breezed, without a hint of embarrassment or contrition. She later went on to correct other people’s assertions and interpretation of Wolfe’s opus, utterly oblivious to the inconvenient fact that they had read it and she had not. You would think it doesn't need clarification, but apparently it does: When told to talk about a book you admire, it's best to choose one you've already at least opened. 3. "I thought it was sentimental." Outside of medicine and pharmaceuticals, which profession do you imagine is most affected by the existence of incurable diseases? I imagine it's creative writing teachers. In the first class I attended, the writing-about-terminal-illness cases were approaching 50 percent. Terminal illness is obviously a serious subject, but even the most powerful subject’s impact can be dulled with repetition, or when it’s used as a narrative short cut. You’ll be surprised how callous you become when numerous consecutive students read aloud their story about the elderly neighbor (kindly or cranky), known only for one hobby (gardening or withholding children's Frisbees) who succumbs to a disease that reveals their true colors (humor and/or courage). Making someone cry is as hard as making someone laugh, and, in both comedy and tragedy, it's painful to endure a piece of fiction that tries and fails. This brings us to a student we'll call “Anna” and rule number 3: Appreciate it when classmates are being polite. Her short story was about a precocious and grating young child who didn't like her aunt. The twist is (you're way ahead of me) that it turns out the aunt is fighting a serious disease. It was a mawkish, deadly serious piece of work, and the 4the illness-themed piece in one class. After she read it aloud, everyone gave polite, vague, and very gentle criticisms. Many tongues seemed to be held and bitten. Then it came time to read my debut opus, in which a boy realizes he's getting too old for stunts on his BMX. It was a little rough around the edges, but not the bike-crash I thought it was before Anna piped up. "I thought it was sentimental," she snipped, oblivious to the fact that she had just read out a piece that Nicholas Sparks would have deleted and re-drafted. "Yeah, it was mawkish," she continued, louder this time, "I didn't get it". “Hey listen, lady!” I didn't say. "The only reason you're taking such liberties is because you wrongly think your story is nuanced and insightful.” “And if we weren't so polite during this fragile and important learning phase, you'd know how leaden and syrupy your misery mope fest really was,” I didn't continue. “Thanks, Anna, that's really helpful,” I actually said, meekly and sadly combing over my every word to look for manipulative or sentimental passages I could re-write. Image Credit: Flickr/Elvert Barnes
A William T. Vollman reading in the Bay Area is parsed and dissected for meaning by Ed and Scott and ... the upshot? He didn't shoot, or pretend to shoot, anyone. I'm still unclear, however, as to whether or not he was wearing jeans.CAAF and Wendi point to an open letter from authors pleading with Oprah to turn the hallowed spotlight of her book club back to contemporary fiction. I say, forget Oprah, the Lit Blog Co-op's got you covered!
Every so often in a reader's life, he stumbles upon two books that complement each other like red meat and red wine. Such a happy accident befell me last month, when I happened to read Michael Lewis' Liar's Poker hard on the heels of Thomas Frank's One Market Under God.The Frank book, an evisceration of the free-market discourse and management culture of the 90s, was a fine read on its own: funny, incisive, and angry. And yet, in its argumentation, it at first struck me as inferior to Frank's more recent What's the Matter With Kansas? Like Lewis Lapham, who published excerpts from both books in Harper's, Frank has a tendency to preach to the choir. This often doesn't bother me; I sit right in the middle of that choir. When Frank demonstrates the tension between a free market and economic democracy, I say "Amen." When he decries the commodification of the counterculture, I shout "Hallelujah."When Frank gets down to naming names, however, I get uneasy. One Market Under God does not hesitate to lay the sorry state of the world at the feet of specific, individual evildoers, and I, raised to try to see the best in people, prefer to blame systemic ills. And so I'm not sure if Frank's depiction of scheming, iniquitous fat cats is a workable belief or a bit of populist wishful thinking.Or I wasn't sure, until I picked up Liar's Poker. Here Michael Lewis, himself a former stockbroker, takes us inside Salomon Brothers, the investment bank where he worked in the rip-roaring 80s. Lewis establishes his centrist credentials early and often, and generally eschews editorializing. It is especially appalling, then, (if weirdly engrossing) to discover that Salomon Brothers is full of...scheming, iniquitous fat cats!Liar's Poker is like a nonfiction version of Oliver Stone's Wall Street (IMDb). The visionary salesmen and traders of Solomon Brothers screw the little guy at every turn, and we get to see every dirty detail. They rip off investors, lie to the public, devalue successful companies, inflate worthless ones, lay off employees, throw phones at underlings, grope secretaries, consume conspicuously, and generally turn themselves into caricatures of the worst kind of capitalist exploitation. The free-market they promote is, in fact, far from free.In an ideal marketplace, knowledge is symmetrical. The vulgar version: buyer and seller are in possession of the same set of facts, and prices reach equilibrium according to the law of supply and demand. This is why there are laws against rolling back odometers, and against making false claims in advertisements. But investment banks, as Lewis portrays them, rely on the market's inefficiency at distributing information - its tendency to allow those most heavily invested in a market to control the flow of knowledge within and about that market - to buy below fair-market value, and to sell well above it.Of course, we are assured, such excesses have since been curbed by regulation. (This is part of the 90s market populism analyzed in One Market Under God, wherein Wall Street is brought to heel by Main Street.) Insider trading laws are now stringent, we are told; firewalls have arisen between the trading floors where commodities are sold and the equity departments where they are underwritten. But Wall Street is still raking it in, while Main Street drifts and eddies on stagnant wages.Perhaps the current investment bank bonanza is merely the financial industry's reward for its own newfound virtuousness. Still, the next time you hear an I-banker lamenting the regulatory climate, or claiming that Sarbanes-Oxley is driving all the moneymen to London, ask him what kind of bonus he got last year, and whether he's still living in New York. Then tell him you've got a bridge you're looking to sell...See also: Max's review of Liar's Poker
● ● ●
I've returned from my trip home with lots of booty. Many of these books have been added to my reading queue, which has swelled to encompass the entire length of the shelf on which it sits. Time to get reading. For Christmas I received a couple of military histories by the venerable brit, John Keegan, The First World War and Intelligence in War: Knowledge of the Enemy from Napoleon to Al-Qaeda. I'm excited about both of these. I know little of the details of World War I beyond that it was a gruelling and brutal trench war. I think I mostly know this from reading All Quiet on the Western Front by Erich Maria Remarque when I was in high school. The second is interesting because the issue of intelligence seems to have recently become much more important to national defense than firepower and bombs. I also was gifted a copy of John McPhee's book-length panegyric to the American shad (The Founding Fish as it were), a topic that would shatter me with boredom were it not for McPhee's otherworldly ability to write engaging, entertaining prose about any topic under the sun. My mother continued her tradition (one that has proved rewarding over the years) of giving me a serendipitous art book. This year's selection was Juan Munoz. I know next to nothing about Munoz, but, as is often the case with these art books that my mother gives me, I'm sure I will suddenly notice his work everywhere and by the year's end he will have become one of my favorite artists. My birthday rolled around, too, as it so often does, a mere eleven days after Christmas, and some more books came my way. You could count the number of poetry books I have on my book shelves on one hand, but with the addition of C. K. Williams National Book Award Finalist, The Singing, which includes one of my favorite poems from recent years, "The Hearth," I now have one more. I also was presented with a copy of Scott McCloud's fascinating meta-comic about comics and why we can't help but love them, Understanding Comics. Hope everyone had a great holiday, as for me, I had a blast, but I'm happy to get back to the grind, so to speak. Expect more soon, I've got lots to write about at the moment.