In which a group of graying eternal amateurs discuss their passions, interests and obsessions, among them: movies, art, politics, evolutionary biology, taxes, writing, computers, these kids these days, and lousy educations.

E-Mail Donald
Demographer, recovering sociologist, and arts buff

E-Mail Fenster
College administrator and arts buff

E-Mail Francis
Architectural historian and arts buff

E-Mail Friedrich
Entrepreneur and arts buff
E-Mail Michael
Media flunky and arts buff


We assume it's OK to quote emailers by name.







Try Advanced Search


  1. Seattle Squeeze: New Urban Living
  2. Checking In
  3. Ben Aronson's Representational Abstractions
  4. Rock is ... Forever?
  5. We Need the Arts: A Sob Story
  6. Form Following (Commercial) Function
  7. Two Humorous Items from the Financial Crisis
  8. Ken Auster of the Kute Kaptions
  9. What Might Representational Painters Paint?
  10. In The Times ...


CultureBlogs
Sasha Castel
AC Douglas
Out of Lascaux
The Ambler
PhilosoBlog
Modern Art Notes
Cranky Professor
Mike Snider on Poetry
Silliman on Poetry
Felix Salmon
Gregdotorg
BookSlut
Polly Frost
Polly and Ray's Forum
Cronaca
Plep
Stumbling Tongue
Brian's Culture Blog
Banana Oil
Scourge of Modernism
Visible Darkness
Seablogger
Thomas Hobbs
Blog Lodge
Leibman Theory
Goliard Dream
Third Level Digression
Here Inside
My Stupid Dog
W.J. Duquette


Politics, Education, and Economics Blogs
Andrew Sullivan
The Corner at National Review
Steve Sailer
Samizdata
Junius
Joanne Jacobs
CalPundit
Natalie Solent
A Libertarian Parent in the Countryside
Rational Parenting
Public Interest.co.uk
Colby Cosh
View from the Right
Pejman Pundit
Spleenville
God of the Machine
One Good Turn
CinderellaBloggerfella
Liberty Log
Daily Pundit
InstaPundit
MindFloss
Catallaxy Files
Greatest Jeneration
Glenn Frazier
Jane Galt
Jim Miller
Limbic Nutrition
Innocents Abroad
Chicago Boyz
James Lileks
Cybrarian at Large
Hello Bloggy!
Setting the World to Rights
Travelling Shoes


Miscellaneous
Redwood Dragon
IMAO
The Invisible Hand
ScrappleFace
Daze Reader
Lynn Sislo
The Fat Guy
Jon Walz

Links


Our Last 50 Referrers







« Books and Sales Redux | Main | Tip Jar Hitting »

August 31, 2006

Rewind: More on Books

Michael Blowhard writes:

Dear Blowhards --

On vacation in Lotusland, I'm finding the siren song of the hot tub sweeter this morning than the appeal of blogging. So, fond though I am of generating new posts, I'm going to baby myself and link to an old one instead. Since we've been comparing notes about books and publishing, here's a related post from a while back: my version of the future of books, book publishing, and book reading. Hey, here's another. A little repetitious, OK, but such are the perils of blogging ...

Best,

Michael

posted by Michael at August 31, 2006




Comments

Hey, Michael,
The link you have to "Here's a related post" is..... http://www.2blowhards.com.

...where I start I end up at the end.....

Posted by: DarkoV on August 31, 2006 8:24 AM



Oops, sorry, fixed, thanks. The hot tub really seems to have melted my brain.

Posted by: Michael Blowhard on August 31, 2006 10:46 AM



Michael I've long appreciated your thoughts on books, lit, the business of books vs hallowed vision of pure literature, et al. You're like the sausage maker at a convention of sausage aficionados. The aficionado can go on and on about the smells textures and succulence of various brands - but you're in the corner shouting - "but you should see how it's made!"

When it comes to art - and for our purposes books as art - I have to go with the aficionados. Art is something mankind has been doing from the beginning - it seems to be a tool of self-knowledge and joy. And it is something produced by an individual for individuals.

I don't see where technology changes that. You keep mentioning lines or blocks of prose without graphics as an outmoded means of learning and enjoyment. Remember that prose itself is a kind of technology. It has changed since Shakespeare's time and changed a lot since Chaucer's but we are still susceptible to their power as writers of English.

You talk of getting a fiction dose or hit and that a two hour movie or TV miniseries will do just fine for that. But a block of literary prose is not just a fiction hit; it is not just a cool plot about cool made-up characters. It is a voice, with an intimacy and interiority that movies and graphics cannot easily convey.

I have now swithced tracks, I see, to another vital 2BHs conversation, "What is literary ficiton anyway?" with MBH defending genre writers to the death. I don't want to go there just now (though that is one of my favorite topics here).

Lose the comparison in numbers between the mass audience for the TV show "Friends" and the readers of James Joyce (or Letham or Grisham and other quality lits). You could make the same comparison between the weekend crowds in the Roman Coliseum vs the number of readers of Ovid's Metamorphosis. It's a lousy comparison. Cheers.

Posted by: Das on September 1, 2006 1:31 PM



Note to Michael of 2 Blowhards:
Michael I've long appreciated your thoughts on books, lit, the business of books vs hallowed vision of pure literature, et al. You're like the sausage maker at a convention of sausage aficionados. The aficionado can go on and on about the smells textures and succulence of various brands - but you're in the corner shouting - "but you should see how it's made!"

I respect your time in the sausage mills but I don’t understand what you are saying. Are you saying:
A) Our age is so rich in electronic gizmos that distraction rules the day and nobody reads books anymore -
B) Electronic gizmos themselves fulfill the need for artistic contact; needs that were previously filled by blocks of text in books –

??

You lose me even more when you compare literary books to popular TV shows, miniseries and movies. You say that young people now get their fiction-fix through a two-hour movie or sitcoms like “Friends” or (even more up-to-date) via web worlds like the Sims. What drives you to make such a silly comparison? What does “Moby Dick,” an intense, thoughtful exploration of life and death (and whales), have to do with a TV sitcom with its canned laugh tracks reliable inanity? Things in “Moby Dick” were made up and things in “Friends” were made up but points of intersection don’t go much beyond that. Do readers approach literary fiction just to get a hit of made up stuff – a fiction hit, as you say? Literary fiction delivers an intimacy - an interiority - that TV and movies – for all their made up stuff – do not deliver on. I’m sure your counterparts in first century Rome complained about the weekend crowds in the Coliseum compared to the small readership of Ovid’s “Metamorphosis”.

The quality lit that the publishing industry passes on to us today might not be that great but the need for it is not fake. And remember: language itself is a kind of technology. English has changed since Shakespeare's time and changed a lot since Chaucer's but we are still susceptible to its power in the hands of these writers. Will electronic gizmos obliterate language itself as a link between hearts and minds?

Posted by: Das on September 1, 2006 4:40 PM



Sorry - I didn't understand how the delay works in posting messages so I delivered up a variation on the theme of my questions to you Michael...

Posted by: Das on September 2, 2006 10:46 AM






Post a comment
Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:



Remember your info?