Counterbalance

Scrambling at the LA Times

Things are getting quite scrambled and sticky at the LA Times as the fine folks at LA Observed have, you know, observed. 

The highlights if you're so frustrated (or terribly depressed) that you don't care to read the fine print:

• Editor of the Editorial Pages, Andres Martinez, resigned today...
• ...because the latest issue of his section (to be published Sunday) was killed by Publisher David HIller...
• ...who wasn't happy with the Brian Grazer-produced section (or, possibly more to the point, wasn't happy that Martinez was having an affair with Grazer's publicist.)

I would take pot shots and rant and rumble and say things like "Brian Grazer, are you kidding me?", but here's the thing: it's really crummy to watch your local paper -- one that by its very nature and the city it covers should be among the best in the country -- self-destruct before your eyes. 

UPDATE: LA Observed has a response letter from Andres Martinez.

Banville Bits & Blunders

Surely you know that I couldn't possibly have my lengthy, multi-part, rambling rendering of the Banville reading up and ready to go first thing this morning. Right? (Right?)  Yet, this time I must compete with Sarvas who has video and who actually asked a question and whose previous interview with Banville was cited by Tara Ison during her interview with Banville.  So. You know, I'll be the fill-in. The comedic relief. The mise en scène. But to give you just a taste of the evening that was...I offer a few paltry asides before the Sarvas event takes place. I'll then drum up my musings later this week and early next.  (I've still got Jane Smiley to do and she is, as I've said, LONG in all sorts of ways.)

• The announcer (a Brooke Astor-esque woman in her Chanel suit and flowing scarf and diamond earrings) introduced him as John Banfield. Twice. (How one could possibly deign to screw that up, I really don't know. I still haven't recovered.)
• My green note-taking pen leaked all over me and the carpet at the Mark Taper Forum. Good thing the carpet at the Mark Taper Forum is also green.
• While getting greedy in the "popular library", I found I'd checked out far too many books and had to make a quick trip back to the car to drop them off before I attended the reading (more on these later).  Who pulled up in a silver Mercedes SUV right in front of the elevator?  None other than the man himself. And here's the thing...he wasn't the passenger. He was driving!
• He's delightfully funny. Really. After being introduced by Brooke Astor and Tara Ison, he said he felt like Krusty the Clown coming on stage after two such gracious introductions. Which was generous, because I found both intros to be snoozy. But that's just me.
• He is nothing else if not truly Irish: he mentioned sins and guilt over a dozen times - even referring to his past books as his past sins. Satirically yes, but with a tad of serious.
• Banville Gem #1: "Even at its darkest, life is hideously funny."
• Banville Gem #2: "We have to be wary of prizes (book or any other) as a measure of our work. The only judgment is the judgment of time."
• Tara Ison was very jumpy and quite nervous. It seemed. I could be wrong. But wouldn't you be?
• Banville Gem #3: "If you write honestly, you will not be sentimental."
• Banville Gem #4: "Of course all the characters are me, I'm the only material I have. You're the only material you have."
• The audience questions, for the most part, were at least not embarrassing or painful. But they could have been far more insightful. John Banville - astonishing writer - and you want to ask him dull questions? Ugh. Sarvas asked the only proper question of the evening. I'll leave it to him to share that first. I'll do the fill-in later.
• It is always fun, at these higher profile readings, to try and figure out who Sarvas is. I've never known. We've never met. At all author events, I try very hard to be invisible. To document what takes place, but not insert myself into the unfolding.  So I always leave wondering...was he here? Last night, Tara Ison made mention of him, then said his name when he was given the microphone to ask his questions. So, alas,the secret is out. I've now laid eyes on him.  At least I think it was him.  The dead giveaway, though, was the stalkeresque man who was gravely enamored with Mark.  As I passed by, I overheard "Congratulations on the marriage. Congratulations on your book..."  Who else could it possibly be but Mark?
• And so, now, over to Mark until I get my act together tomorrow or the next day or the next...

But I will say this - it was such a delight to see an author I've admired for years read his work and then discuss it. It was akin to what seeing The Clash would have been like for me when I was younger. Or even now.  While so many parts of it could have been better -- none of it mattered.  All the irritants fell away as soon as he appeared on stage and did his thing. Better still: I'm inspired to write at the highest level possible...even if it turns out not to be possible for me.  That is powerful stuff.

Update: Sarvas has his take up now.

Black Swan Green After the Fact

My thoughts on Black Swan Green (for the LA Times Book Prizes nominee coverage we're doing) are up at LAist.  It is my first "formal" review and my concerns about doing such a thing are well-documented. We will have to see if the karma gods have it in for me now or not.

If something is amiss, if you disagree, if you feel I could have argued my point more cogently, or if I didn't have a point of view at all, please let me know.  While I was limited to a short form, I make no excuses. I tried to cover the aspects of the book that were most interesting to me...which means half the good stuff gets left out. I found it difficult to review a book that has been out for so long and has been reviewed by so many writers that I admire...I struggled to find something different to say, yet that's also not fair as the average reader who is new to BSG won't have the pre-knowledge of all the reviews that came before, what they covered, what they left out.  As a result, I fear there's nothing new to add to the conversation.  Yet I tried anyway. Perhaps a fool's errand. 

Lit Bits & a Bit About Jane Smiley

• I take issue with the LA Times' pending reduction of the Book Review section and the offensive addition of the Image section (which, curiously, isn't online after it premiered on Sunday).  What could say more about the state of LA than adding pages about image, fashion, style after spending the past year slowly hedging towards combining the book section with the opinion section...on Saturday?  I think I'd like to move back to SF.
• I was in the loo with Jane Smiley last night!  She's very tall, very slender and...very TALL. Wow. More on her reading and the curious Q & A that began with a man asking questions about her book - by page number.  "Um, yes...on page 410 you say...."  Never a good beginning to Q & A.
• I am the proud owner of The Red Parts & have devoured it in one sitting...almost.  30 or so pages left and well, wow. (A lot of wow-ing going on over here today.)
• I also picked up a few other gems at Vroman's last night: Remainder by Tom McCarthy, The Unbinding by Walter Kirn and Distant Star by Roberto Bolano.  Yum, no?
• I also picked up the latest New Yorker (I find I have to read this in print, not online, I don't know what that says about me, but it makes me quite late to the dance sometimes) and read Jonathan Lethem's "Lucky Alan" -- meh.
• Banville Benjamin Black is reading at the Central Library tonight. Tonight!

A Misunderstanding

I'll be picking up Maggie Nelson's The Red Parts this evening (still no word on which reading I'll attend) and can't wait to settle down with it.  I'm feeling a little off today, a little sore in the neck and back (result of one brutal snowboard fall or the dragging around of Against the Day, The Echo Maker and my laptop in my already overly heavy messenger bag for several days straight?), a little low.  Too many real deadlines looming when I'd rather be reading and writing.  This poem from Maggie Nelson captures my offish mood perfectly and reminds me why I cannot wait to read her new book:

A Misunderstanding

I thought Zen poems
were supposed to sound wise.

Now I'm going to buy
as much beer as five dollars

can buy and drink it
right here on the sofa.

from Shiner

Super-secret under-cover (or not so much) reason to get off the proverbial couch and away from the not-actually-consumed beer: Maggie Nelson will be reading at a Machine Project event on April 14th.  Now that's what I call a mood-altering piece of news.

Chad Kultgen or Jane Smiley?

As I've stated before, I simply cannot be in two places at once.  Which I know you know, but somehow I forget sometimes. The truth of it, the physics, the laws of nature working against me. And so.

It comes down to this: do I go see Chad Kultgen read from his debut novel The Average American Male or do I go see the celebrated Jane Smiley read and discuss Ten Days in the Hills? I've not read either book -- which is already a strike against me.  The strike against Chad, however, might be insurmountable.  You see, Chad is reading at Book Soup.  Ah, Book Soup. An excellent bookstore but oh-so-inconveniently-located.  The last time I attended a reading at Book Soup (Andrea Siegel danced so it was well worth it), it took me 1.75 hours to get there. I'm not kidding. Do I really want to make that kind of trek when I could easily slipstream my way up the 110 to the Jane Smiley reading at Vroman's in Pasadena in 20 minutes flat?

It's sad what attending an author reading in Los Angeles has come down to.  It's all about proximity and time of day. And sheer physics, of course...the bits that make it impossible to be in both places at once. A shame, really.

What Makes a Review Worth Your Review?

I have long been of the opinion that as a writer who writes fiction, it doesn't make much sense for me (karmic or otherwise) to formally review the fiction of others.  I've drawn the line at "formal" reviews, which allows me to tell anyone in print or blog or otherwise, how a certain book made me feel, which elements worked for me and which did not.  I've carefully walked this line for awhile...never stepping foot in the dangerous (to me) world of proper book reviews. Yet over the past few years, I've warmed to the idea that some authors are quite good - even great - at cogently arguing the merits or non-merits of recently published books.  I don't, however, think I'm one of them.  I also don't think I want to be one of them.

Before I can even examine why I don't want to be one of them, I should probably qualify the "formal" review.  What does that really mean?  In my definition, "formal" hinges on publication for a wider audience.  I don't think my comments about books I love or books I didn't take a shine to that appear on this blog are "formal" in the least. They are purely my opinion. While we can argue that all book reviews are shades of opinions, I think the reader of published reviews expects something different when the book is reviewed by someone who is employed to do just that...read a book and write a response. It seems to me there is a larger responsibility there.  Yet even as I type, I realize my own illogical thinking on this. If I'm posting any words about another writer on this blog or elsewhere, perhaps I also have a larger responsibility to make clear points, support those points with evidence, and stand behind my words.  If so, it's a frightening prospect.

As an avid reader and as a writer, I have much to say about books and writing and all the techniques writers employ (effectively or not) to create the worlds their characters live in.  I believe many of us do. I have no problem discussing these various techniques here and elsewhere...as part of a conversation...a conversation in which it is likely we will not all agree. Yet when faced with the new task of reviewing books for LAist (I know, I know, Kakutani-ish reviews and James Woodsian critique is not warranted - may in fact be loathed - in this venue), I find I'm freezing up. Putting it off. Freaking out. Why?

• I have such respect for truly critical critiques and proper take-downs that I'd rather leave that to the pros.  I feel that even attempting to wade in these waters when I know I don't have the chops is just foolish and wouldn't add anything of value to the conversation.
• I've read so many book reviews that are dull, that put me to sleep, that don't in any way do for me what I'd hoped they would do: illuminate aspects of a book I didn't know about, challenge my own thinking on a particular book/subject/author, link the context of the book to larger issues. (Which leads to the central point of all this: what is a book review meant to do? and is the function of it different given the venue in which its written? delivered?)
• I really do believe my karma will be shot to hell if I, writer of unpublished works, deign to critique the writing of published works. Perhaps this is an amateur stance, but it is always working on my brain, a program running in the background.
• A part of me thinks there must be a middle ground - a place in between where it is less about critical analysis and more about bringing attention to books in a positive way, expanding readership of all kinds of books, of all kinds of authors.  I don't mean to say that I'd prefer to write or read purely positive reviews - not at all. In fact, I think part of the problem is that the book reviewing world has become a place to churn out a yay or nay review and little else. Why must that be the case? Can't we do better in a simpler, less academic way?  In a way that is less elitist, less academic, more accessible to the very people who don't yet read widely but could if persuaded? Be all these things and yet not insulting to readers with brief summaries of books and little else? I think we can. I think we must.

So, I ask you, writers who are also reviewers: What elements make up a proper book review?  What do you feel a book review should do? Should not do? How do you approach book reviews when you write them?

And I ask you, readers: What are you hoping to find when you read a book review? What annoys you most? What engages you the most? What makes you keep reading them, if you do?

As I prepare my 200 word piece on BSG (see, a mere trifle! not even a "review"!), these larger questions keep popping up, presenting themselves before me, begging to be answered.  I'm well-versed on the state of the dwindling book review sections and I'm painfully familiar with both the trite little summary book reviews and the lengthy critical analyses that fill pages every week in papers, in journals, in magazines.  I'm fumbling around, though, for the terrain in between.  Is it there and I just can't see it clearly? Or is it a fictional place I should stop dreaming about and move on?

Lit Bits & A Bit about Snow

I've returned from my snowy holiday (which included 65 degree days - it is cooler back here in LA; strange to return to cool after leaving supposed, intended, hoped-for cool elsewhere) and am a-jumble. Five days in the snow affords the mind so much. Call it time without deadlines or much needed visual white space, but I've got a perspective now that I don't want to lose.  And oh, so, much to say.  Here are a few quick hits as I settle back in:

• LA is overflowing with excellent readings this week and I'll be hard pressed to be in several places at once. Wednesday is particularly tricky.  My commitment is to Banville and I've already reserved my seat.
• A nice addition to my ever-growing Irish lit list.
• Somehow, during my snowy pursuits, I missed Isabella's tag of Counterbalance for a Thinking Blogger Award.  I humbly bow, albeit rather after the fact.  Although, John Baker has an interesting take on all this link love...see the comments in particular. Whether truly legit or no, I firmly believe a good chunk of nominators/linkers did so with the best intentions.  Yay? Nay?
• I am preparing a very brief review of Black Swan Green for LAist as part of our ongoing coverage of LA Times Book Prizes nominees.  I have to say (as I've said before perhaps less succinctly), I'm not cut out for book reviews. More on this later today.
• The Millions delves a little further into a trend that has been bugging me as of late: assistant lit.
• The big reveal: I brought The Echo Maker on my wintry trip...and didn't even bother to crack it open. What is wrong with me?

More on snow and reviews and how learning to snowboard is akin to writing. More on all of it...as soon as my bruised knees are soaked, my quad pain has lessened and I'm able to properly face the day afternoon.

Slip Sliding Away

After writing three different posts that either Typepad or or this terrible mountain wi-fi ate up (I'm getting closer than ever to making the inevitable switch to WordPress), I've settled for a much shorter post.  To say this: I'll be slip sliding down the mountain again today.  It is warm, very warm. So warm we're all trying to figure out how to wear less clothes but not too little. I've never been boarding when its this hot...such a strange sensation to be hot when on snow. 

Now that I'm on my third trip to learn how to snowboard (after a lifetime of skiing I can tell you this is no easy feat and certainly not without the requisite tumbling, pain and soreness), I've finally rounded a critical corner.  There are so many parallels to writing - so many - that I have much more to say on the subject, yet my thoughts aren't fully formed.

I'll be back later this afternoon/evening with a few roundups and some lit bits.  Possibly a photo or two of this breathtaking mountain. I'll also reveal the book I decided to bring with me and my thoughts so far.

Until then, do enjoy all the fine folks at the left..right? No, left.  Cheers.

LA Times Book Prizes Fiction Nominees

My very brief summaries (what's the summary equivalent of a featurette? summarette?) of the five nominated books in the Fiction category are up at LAist.  My goodness it's hard to summarize hundreds of pages into a few short sentences and not sound like every other short summary already on record!  I'm quickly beginning to realize that I don't possess proper reviewing chops. I'm so much more into pieces of books, rather than the whole. I found it so difficult to zoom back up and quickly summarize everything I read in these books, everything I felt while living with these characters. Not sure how well that bodes for me as a writer...but I think its safe to say my writing career will never hinge upon outstanding critical reviews.

I'll be covering each category of nominees for the next eight weeks leading up to the handing out of the prizes on April 27th.  We'll presume, at least for the moment, that the awards will actually be held in Los Angeles.