It’s Banned Books Week — time to celebrate your right to read Women in Love, Ulysses, and other notables from the ALA’s list of banned or challenged books. Though, according to the Wall Street Journal, this is a whole lotta hoo-ha over nothing.
Cheers to You, Madame Bovary
“No writer needs to be all the writers all the time”
Zadie Smith in conversation with Édouard Louis for the Document Journal. "Listening to the novelists Édouard Louis and Zadie Smith in conversation inspires a kind of hushed glee, a bliss familiar to eavesdroppers who encounter sublime discourse. " How can you resist?
No Lie
“One lie I tell is that we care, generally—human beings—about each other. We could not, I tell myself in the moments just before the night’s dark hour, create The Odyssey or King Lear or Thomas and Beulah without a profound sense of The Other. Surely, were it true this thing’s a joke, nothing more, and a cruel one at that, we’d have no Dickinson, no Yeats, no freakin’ Rumi, read by Bly, loud on an old tape deck while I shower.” Pablo Tanguay on the art of lying.
●
●
80 Books You Can Read If You Want To
Last week, I told you about Rebecca Solnit’s essay “Eighty Books No Woman Should Read,” which is a tongue-in-cheek riff on Esquire’s “80 Books Every Man Must Read” list. Now, here’s a fascinating rebuttal from Electric Literature in which Sigal Samuel ponders what might be gained by reading sexist old white guys.
2 comments:
Add Your Comment: Cancel reply
This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.
Serializing in the Digital Age
The University of Michigan Press will be serializing two novels on their Facebook account. Previously, authors such as Brandon J. Mendelson have experimented serializing their novels 140 characters at a time. He even has some tips for doing so.
Edan Lepucki’s Other People Pod
Our own Edan Lepucki sits down with Brad Listi for an Other People Podcast. If for nothing else, listen to them discuss Facebook addiction. Their discussion starts around the eleven minute mark. (P.S. you should also check out both Edan and Brad's Year in Reading posts.)
Wow–thanks for pointing out the Mitchell Muncy WSJ op-ed. Muncy seems to feel that a 10% success rate in book banning is negligible; one wonders how high the percentage needs to be in order to be significant. Regardless, saying that attempted bannings don’t matter simply because the books weren’t ultimately banned is a little like saying that attempted murders aren’t a problem because the victims all survived–or that attempted terrorist attacks aren’t anything to worry about because they didn’t succeed. And his conclusion–that Banned Books Week is actually a form of *censorship*–is mind-boggling.
I’ve written a much longer response to the Muncy piece here:
http://fictionwritersreview.com/blog/banned-books-week-an-act-of-censorship-say-what
Thanks again for bringing this up.