Inter Alia #6: DeWitt Goes Digital

Inter Alia
January 8, 2008 | 1 book mentioned 9 2 min read

Related Books:

From anecdotal evidence, Radiohead’s In Rainbows experiment – distributing the album via website, on a “suggested donation” basis – seems to have been a success. As it begins to market In Rainbows through more orthodox channels – CD pressings, iTunes – the band remains mum about the total number of downloads and the average donation amount, but most of my friends who downloaded the album seemed to have settled on 5 quid – 10 bucks. Certainly, as a marketing concept, In Rainbows has burnished Radiohead’s reputation as The World’s Most Interesting Big Band. Now, it seems, the equally interesting novelist Helen DeWitt is trying something similar: releasing short stories subsidized via PayPal donations.

“Every once in a while,” DeWitt writes on her website,

The New Yorker’s, Harper’s asks me to submit some short fiction. I then have an inner debate. I never read the fiction in the New Yorker’s or Harper’s, and I tend not to submit stories to magazines whose stories I tend not to read. So the question is, what should I do? …It seems dishonest to write a story I would not want to read, so I send in a story or stories I’ve written and the New Yorker or Harper’s says it’s not quite what they’re looking for. I thought I’d publish a few stories on my website for the kind of reader who tends not to read the stories in the New Yorker or Harper’s.

Two stories – “In Which Nick Buys a Harley for 16K Having Once Been Young” and “The French Style of Mlle Matsumoto” – are then excerpted; with a $5 PayPal donation, a reader can download them in their entirety as Word documents. “If you’d like to customise the stories with images or your preferred formatting, you can,” DeWitt notes puckishly.

DeWitt’s iconoclastic first novel, The Last Samurai, made my “Year in Reading” list in 2007 – seven years late. Her second book, Your Name Here (written with Ilya Gridneff) has yet to find a publisher. I had mixed feelings about the excerpt in the Winter issue of N+1, but I admire DeWitt’s aesthetic gumption, as I admire Radiohead’s. And, as DeWitt points out, PayPal’s “30 cents + 3% on each transaction” fees compare favorably to the numbers game of traditional publishing.

I’m confident some Millions readers out there have some thoughts on the future of DiY distribution (which, it should be noted, dates back to Gutenberg). What, if anything, does DeWitt’s PayPal project portend for authors? For readers? As always, your thoughts are welcome below.

is the author of City on Fire and A Field Guide to the North American Family. In 2017, he was named one of Granta's Best Young American Novelists.

Inter Alia

Inter Alia #7: Up, Obama, or Deja Vu in South Carolina

Inter Alia
January 27, 2008 | 1 book mentioned 1 3 min read
This weekend, as part of a recent David Foster Wallace kick, I decided to revisit "Up, Simba," an 80-page essay on John McCain and postmodern politics. On assignment for Rolling Stone, Wallace spent the final week of the 2000 South Carolina Republican primary embedded in the McCain campaign. McCain ended up losing to George W. Bush, and shortly thereafter withdrew from the race. This year, however, a resurgent McCain looks increasingly plausible as the national GOP nominee. I was hoping that re-reading Wallace's essay (republished in Consider the Lobster) might offer some insight.Well, a funny thing happened on the way to enlightenment. Wallace's sympathetic portrait of McCain the man and conflicted take on McCain the legislator struck me as entirely credible, just as they did eight years ago. "Up Simba's" account of the tactical logic of primary politics, though, now looked positively prophetic... of the 2008 Democratic campaign.See if these phrases, scrubbed of their referents, ring a bell:"Something about [Candidate X] made us feel that the guy wanted something different from us, something more than votes or dollars, something old and maybe corny but with a weird achy pull to it like a smell from childhood or a name on the tip of your tongue, something that would make us hear cliches as more than just cliches.""[Candidate X] drew first-time and never-before voters; he drew Democrats and Independents, Libertarians and soft socialists and college kids and soccer moms.""The grateful press on the Trail transmit - maybe even exaggerate - [Candidate X's] humanity to their huge audience, the electorate, which electorate in turn seems so paroxysmically thankful for a presidential candidate somewhat in the ballpark of a real human being that it has to make you stop and think about how starved voters are for just some minimal level of genuineness.... The people are cheering for [Candidate X] not for him so much as for how good it feels to believe him.And then there's Candidate Y, who as a member of a presidential dynasty has been the front-runner until some early primary upsets. Whose "campaign advisors... are the best that $70,000,000 and the full faith and credit of the [party] Establishment can buy." Who "charges that [Candidate X] is fuzzy on policy, that he's image over substance." And who, in South Carolina, puzzles Wallace by "going negative." When Wallace asks a shrewd group of network news technicians for their analysis, and they illuminate the "solid, even inspired" logic behind the move:[Y's] attack leaves [X] with two options. If he does not retaliate, some SC voters will credit [him] with keeping the high road. But it could also come off as wimpy...[or as ] "appeasing aggression"... So [X] pretty much has to hit back, the techs agree. But this is extremely dangerous, for by retaliating - which of course... means going Negative himself - [he] looks like just another ambitious, win-at-any-cost politician, when of course so much time and effort and money have already gone into casting him as the exact opposite of that.... [The] race could quickly degenerate into just the sort of boring, depressing, cynical, charge-and-countercharge contest that turns off voters and keeps them away from the polls.Which pretty much captures exactly how I've been feeling lately about the Democrats.It bears saying that, in matters of policy, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton are more like each other than they are like McCain or Bush. It also bears saying that the strategic carping of the Clintons doesn't seem to have done them any good in South Carolina. Still, this year's Democratic primary race seems to be unfolding along weirdly familiar narrative lines. "Up, Simba," hamstrung by the Generation-Y affect of its tone, is not one of Wallace's finest pieces of prose. But if you're interested in a shrewd analysis of the presidential horse-race - in which no candidate is above the compromises and conflicts of politics - you might consider putting down the David Brooks and Maureen Dowd and picking up DFW.
Inter Alia
| 1 book mentioned 1 3 min read
Inter Alia

Inter Alia #1: Notes Toward a Sporadic Column

Inter Alia
June 15, 2007 | 1 book mentioned 5 3 min read
I'm still working out my relationship with the blog as a critical organ... I guess, in a way, we all are. My thoughts, as visitors to this site may have noticed, tend equally toward the associative and the forensic. And yet, as a gift to you, the reader, I'd like to carve out a space in which I can share some of my less strenuously worked-out thoughts about the state of the art of fiction, and about culture more generally. (Lucky me, you're probably thinking.)These "ideas," if I can call them that, may turn out on closer inspection to be completely bogus. And yet I'm feeling the need sporadically to turn the power of the blog as an instrument of feedback away from such epiphenomenal questions as, "Doesn't John Colapinto seem weirdly peevish and thin-skinned this week" and toward less sexy developments that may still have some bearing on American culture a year from now... or a decade from now. That is, I propose to engineer a column on literature here at The Millions that advances beyond "link-bait," even as it stays brief, casual, and interactive. I want to invite other writers working online, or stuck in the cubicle farm, to pick up on and respond to my less topical provocations, here or elsewhere, just as they might respond to a public gaffe by a former child star, or a book review in The New Republic.I'd like to call this column "Inter Alia," which is Latin for "among other things." It will appear irregularly, like a meteor shower (or perhaps more likely, an unwanted guest). It will be about the length of what follows.Inter Alia 1: Genre MadnessI'm going to raise a few questions, by way of experiment, about the continued relevance (or irrelevance) of notions of genre. It seems to me that the canonization of Philip K. Dick by the Library of America is a healthy development, and not just because it encourages snobs like me to consider speculative fiction alongside the main body of "realism" in our reading lives. It is also (I think) a manifestation of a long trend, with younger American writers gleefully sinking their teeth into the pop tropes of what was previously dismissed as "genre fiction," and "genre" writers like Dick being hailed for their literary merit. (Let's set aside for the sake of argument the high-low brinksmanship of Modernists like Joyce and Borges, similar in degree but different in kind). Kelly Link's Small Beer Press, e.g., has done a lot to remind us that the postmodern leveling of "high" and "low" culture distinctions is not just political - it can be fun. Simultaneously, "Literary Fiction," as Gerald Howard and others have argued, is moving from being a descriptor to being a genre in and of itself, with its own generic conventions. Call it lit-fic: a label no more a guarantor (or compromiser) of literary value than is "Western," or "Sci Fi."Michael Chabon, it seems to me, is one of several 40-ish writers working toward a unified-field theory that harmonizes the best of lit-fic and its discontents. And yet, notwithstanding the wisdom of John Leonard, who suggested at a panel recently that getting too hung up on a book's genre is a form of stupidity, I find myself struggling with The Yiddish Policemen's Union. On one hand, it's a staggering feat of imagination, and often a great read. On the other, the stylized cliffhanger chapter endings (cribbed from gumshoe novels and children's books and Saturday matinees), the sometimes cartoony dogpile of figurative language, the comic book characterization, and the almost parodically rococo plot seem to me to obscure the promise of a brilliant premise: an alternative postwar history that turns Alaska into a Jewish homeland.This may be nigglingly small-minded, and would be a mere footnote to a longer review. Chabon clearly invested years in The Yiddish Policemen's Union, and has taken significant risks, and I think he deserves a wide readership. But I want to be honest about my reading experience. If this were a children's book, like Summerland, or a melancholy lieder, like The Final Solution, I might swallow my resistance. But Chabon wants me to take to heart the adult sufferings of his hero, Meyer Landsman, and this particular book's generic patrimony interferes with my ability to do so. I keep feeling dismissed from the suspension of disbelief, like Adam and Eve booted from the garden. I keep feeling reminded of the book qua book. Am I just hung up in an old-fashioned need to classify, as I once accused Michiko Kakutani of being? Or are there certain compositional principles underlying the successful genre mash-up, the way a mash-up mp3 requires that two songs have affinities of key and tempo? And if so, how do writers put them into practice? How do readers evaluate a genre-straddling book by the standards of one genre without using the other as an alibi? Discuss.
Inter Alia
| 1 book mentioned 5 3 min read
● ● ●
Inter Alia

Inter Alia: Authority, an Anniversary, and Book Reviewing

Inter Alia
March 30, 2008 | 1 book mentioned 4 3 min read
In Infinite Jest, David Foster Wallace imagines a fungus that grows on another fungus; a nuclear reaction fueled by the byproducts of nuclear reactions; and movies whose audiences watch an audience watching them. For this kind of derivative process, he invokes the adjective annular, which the O.E.D. defines as "ringlike" or circular, but which presumably shares some roots with "annul" - to make into nothing. Last week, reading John Freeman's strange piece in the online Guardian (via TEV), I felt I was in the presence of annular writing: writing about writing about writing. I wade into yet another consideration of the state of book reviewing, then, at the risk of saying nothing about nothing. Nonetheless, I'm going to take this opportunity to advance a couple of propositions I've been thinking about lately.The first is that talk in certain quarters about crises in book reviewing, newspaper journalism, online recommendation systems, and so forth is really an extension of a conversation that's been going on for at least decades now: one about a more general crisis of authority. Ever since the wheels of modernity set to work on the fixed stars by which we navigate our culture, we've been trying to figure out what to look to instead. Technology is only just catching up with us.Those attached to tradition have always tended to look at the democratization of information warily. For example, I learned in this week's New Yorker about Walter Lippmann, whose 1922 book Public Opinion argued that the average American "lives in a world which he cannot see, does not understand and is unable to direct." According to Eric Alterman, Lippmann proposed that crucial decisions about that world be made by "intelligence bureaus," which would be given access to all the information they needed to judge the government's actions without concerning themselves with democratic preferences or public debate.This sounds like a nightmare, elitism reduced ad absurdam. Yet the assumption that the dispersal of the authority once held by, say, Edmund Wilson and The New York Times must, ipso facto, produce smarter decision-making doesn't hold water either. The information superhighway may lead to enlightenment, but it offers exit-ramps to every conceivable variety of cant.For a while now, I've had the nagging feeling that there's a third way we've been neglecting, some kind of solution to the crisis of authority. And then, in the Alterman article, I found another reason to love John Dewey. To wit:Dewey did not dispute Lippmann's contention regarding... the public's vulnerability to manipulation. [But] the foundation of democracy to Dewey was less information than conversation. Members of a democratic society needed to cultivate what the journalism scholar James W. Carey, in describing the debate, called "certain vital habits" of democracy - the ability to discuss, deliberate on, and debate various perspectives in a manner that would move it toward consensus.This, I think, is why book reviews play a vital, if circumscribed, role in any democracy. I'd also like to think (not coincidentally) that this is the project that we - you and I - are engaged in here at The Millions. Five years into a conversation Max started, I'm consistently impressed by the civility, acuity, and enthusiasm of those who comment on the site (as I invite you to do below). Which leads me to my second proposition: the problem with pre-modern notions of authority has always been that they're non-consensual. For all its failings, the web is one arena where authority is earned instead of inherited. And so, on the occasion of our fifth anniversary, I'd like to thank you for granting authority, in whatever measure, to us.
Inter Alia
| 1 book mentioned 4 3 min read
● ●
Inter Alia Screening Room

Inter Alia #18: Julia Child and the Ethical Appeal

Inter Alia Screening Room
August 19, 2009 | 1 book mentioned 5 4 min read
It's not often we think of recipes as a form of literature, but they are as formally exacting as the Spenserian stanza. And, as anyone who's ever ruined $40 worth of lamb knows, the stakes are higher. So Julia Child turns out not only to have been a kind of unfussy feminist; she was also a terrific writer.
Inter Alia Screening Room
| 1 book mentioned 5 4 min read

9 comments:

  1. The Last Samurai brought me so much pleasure–and thought–as a reader that I'm willing to follow DeWitt wherever she goes for the foreseeable future. I keep giving the book as a gift to friends, and I have yet to disappoint one.

    But perhaps I don't mind Word files as much as most folks because my wife is a designer and can with very little effort turn a Word file into something that's pleasant to read?

  2. I admire DeWitt's work, and I certainly don't put myself in her class, but you've just noticed that writers are publishing independently online? Or is it only writers who have already published conventionally who merit your attention?

    As you can imagine, I'm very saddened – and frustrated – that even lit bloggers, who mostly use the internet as their vehicle of choice, seem to stigmatise indie writers, writers who in fact ought to be considered their 'colleagues in arms'!

  3. Lee – didn't mean to frustrate or sadden you. Though I had anticipated some reactions of this sort, I chose to excise a final paragraph of this piece that would have said, in effect, "But really, bunches of fiction writers are publishing independently online, so this isn't a big deal." I think the kind of quick-and-dirty PayPal mechanism DeWitt chose is interesting – and that her stature as an artist makes this a big deal. Are there particular online-indie writers you admire who you'd like to bring to our attention, or who deserve a similar stature? Writers who have already taken a whirl in coporate publishing? Writers who wouldn't, if they had a chance? This was exactly what I was hoping someone would do: point us to the good stuff.

  4. From the corporate/establishment publishing side, you could start with Elfriede Jelinek (in German):

    http://www.a-e-m-gmbh.com/wessely/fneid1.htm

    There's of course lots of SF or fantasy stuff around, and certainly good short stories (try Nicholas Hogg, Kelly Link, Peter Wild for a start). Online novels are often disappointing, but this one looks promising:

    http://mmgl100.wordpress.com/

    And here are two by children's author Penelope Farmer:

    http://liftingtheworldtvtgctg.blogspot.com/2007/01/chapters-one-and-two.html

    http://grannyp.blogspot.com/2007/06/going-mental.html

    As to stature, and just how we decide who deserves it, well, I'm not about to start on that one!

  5. Garth, I forgot to add that I for one have no interest in corporate publishing – or at least would only be interested in publishing conventionally if I were permitted to serialise or issue my fiction simultaneously online. After having spent eighteen years in Zimbabwe, I take great pleasure in seeing my first (and very flawed!) YA novel Mortal Ghost being downloaded to faraway places, places a book wouldn't – or couldn't – reach. But I will freely admit that most writers are still, in their heart of hearts, dreaming of conventional recognition (and a living wage).

  6. The last comment, I promise!

    Litlove, who blogs at Tales from the Reading Room, has just started a new blog called The Best of New Writing on the Web, which some of your readers might like to keep an eye on:

    http://tbrbooks.wordpress.com/

    She will soon be compiling an issue with excerpts from online novels.

  7. This post cost me $17. $5 for the stories (and a graceful email from the author) and $12 for the N+1 with the excerpt of Ms. Dewitt's new novel.

    I might have totally missed this if not for you, so thanks.

  8. These anti-capitalists always make me scratch my head. Like the Hollywood elites made rich and famous by virtue of capitalism, they believe it to be the worst system on earth, not to mention their country that endorses it.

  9. Pingback: Publications « Garth Risk Hallberg

Add Your Comment:

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Inter Alia

Inter Alia #2: George Packer and the Fetishization of Politics

Inter Alia
July 5, 2007 | 1 book mentioned 11 3 min read
Generally, the appearance of a new in-house blog at one of the country's major media organs arouses in me roughly the same degree of enthusiasm I feel when the Yankees sign yet another star free agent. Granted, there are some fine journalists doing casual posts for The Atlantic and The New York Times (and presumably for less money than Matsui). But with various parent corporations already feeding me much of what I read in print or see on the tube, I'm content to reserve my time online for voices from outside The Glittering Heart Of It All. That said, I was pleased last week to see that The New Yorker's George Packer has launched a blog.You see, I'm one of the "predictable" yahoos who happens to feel that Packer's coverage of the Iraq War and its discontents has been more incisive, forthright, and morally engaged - more, in a word, serious - than almost anything else in the major- or minor-league media.It is true that Packer has declined to flagellate himself publicly for his initial support for the war. Nor has he attempted to dissemble. His "ambivalent," liberal-interventionist stance is announced early (and without undue pride) in his book, The Assassin's Gate, whereas the paragraph that summarizes every last damned wrong thing about the war is held until well after page 400. Indeed, it is part of the structural and ethical intelligence of The Assassin's Gate that most of what comes in between focuses on the people Packer interviews and the things he sees. As Lawrence Weschler might put it, Packer "reports the s--t" out of this story, without trumpeting the risks he runs to do so.That The Assassin's Gate emphasizes the tactical as well as moral folly of the war may suggest to ideologues of a different stripe that Packer still sees the war's goals as "noble." A considerably more nuanced reading of the book suggests that Packer hopes to illuminate anew how hell is reached through good intentions as well as bad. Which is crucial in an age that has, in Frederic Jameson's formulation, forgotten how "to think the present historically" - that is still shucking and jiving about what went on five years ago. In struggling to correct for ideological bias through the careful accumulation of evidence, Packer managed to convince me (who marched against the war) that the harm of our continued presence outweighs our responsibility to buy what we broke. His subsequent reporting has strengthened, not softened, this conviction.Though I recognize that aiming for the Ideal may be the surest way to change the Real, I'm not certain that the ideological purity tests rampant among my fellow leftists haven't contributed to a political muddle that continues to permit this war. Indeed, they sometimes strike me as a form of blindness. In declaring his own politics as such and then reporting facts that expose them as misbegotten, George Packer has been, it seems to me, precisely and honorably opposed to Christopher Hitchens. And for that matter, George Bush. Moreover, though a pageant of public contrition may be something we've come to expect from our presidents, of our reporters we should merely ask them to report. On the evidence of his first few postings to "Interesting Times," George Packer continues to do just that.(Click here to read "Inter Alia #1: Notes Toward a Sporadic Column.")
Inter Alia
| 1 book mentioned 11 3 min read