Posts tagged Books

Posts tagged Books
5 notes &
Apparently, we’re still judged by the books we read,” Krystal writes, “and perhaps we should be.” But I’m not sure I agree. Somewhere in its history, reading novels has gotten all tangled up with questions of social status, and accepting the kinds of pleasure that genre novels offer us has become — how perverse are we? — a source of shame. What is it, exactly, that those pleasures are guilty of? Novels aren’t status symbols, or they shouldn’t be. Maybe it’s the last vestiges of our Puritan heritage: if it’s not hard work, it’s sinful. Maybe it’s just that we’re self-loathing capitalists, and anything associated with commerce, as genre fiction is, is automatically tainted and disqualified from having any aesthetic value. Either way our attitude toward genre fiction smacks of mass cultural neurosis. I don’t argue — as some critics do — that literary fiction and genre fiction are merging. They have their own generic identies, their own distinct sets of conventions, and to smoosh them together would be to sacrifice some of our precious literary biodiversity. But I’ve become very suspicious of their arrangement in a hierarchy, one above the other.
From “Literary Revolution in the Supermarket Aisle: Genre Fiction Is Disruptive Technology” by Lev Grossman
Probably everyone has read this by now, but just in case you missed it…
4 notes &
Back cover of Code Name Verity by Elizabeth Wein (I’ll gush about this book at length at the other place soon; probably tomorrow)
This was basically M testing his new macro filters, but the end result actually captures the mood of the novel perfectly. I love it.
4 notes &
I hadn’t played with Wordle in quite a while - here’s one of the past two years of my main blog. Looks about right.
7 notes &
I’m going to continue to read books based on my interest, not on publisher categories. I’m going to continue to read widely across all genres. I’m going to read for a variety of reasons: for windows and mirrors; for escape and for safety; to be reassured and to be challenged; for entertainment and for information.
I will not be ashamed of my reading choices (or, for that matter, my TV or movie choices) because someone else has drawn a line an arbitrary line in the sand about what people “should” and “shouldn’t” do in their personal reading and viewing lives. While I’m at it, other things that won’t be the subject of judging: music, games, sports — well, you get the idea. I’m no better or worse than the person who loves fashion or football, and to say I am because I read books is, well, shallow.
Heck, if all you want to read is adult literary fiction? That’s fine, too! Just as there’s no reason for me to not read young adult books, there is no reason for you to read them. Read what you want.
Liz B being awesome (as per usual).
7 notes &
Comfort & joy
4 notes &
I do not see myself as part of the marketing chain — a partner with authors and publishers marketing their books. I see myself as part of the reading chain — a partner with readers (and their gatekeepers), trying to find and match books with readers. Do the interests of readers, blogs, authors, and publishers sometimes overlap? Yes. Does that change my intent, my editorial control? No. I’ve always felt there should be a healthy tension, an independence, between blogs and publishers and authors, just like there is between mainstream media and publishers and authors. So, while publishers may indeed use things like media coverage and awards as part of their marketing, that doesn’t turn that coverage and awards into part of their marketing plan over which they have control.
Liz B, Send a Letter, Maria
One of a series of very interesting posts about last week’s events.
7 notes &
Wheel of Plot Twists at Finding Wonderland
14 notes &
85 notes &
I narrated the opening of “The Thirteen Clocks”, and they’ve animated it into something wonderful. Go to the site and click on Click here to watch now.
10 notes &
Had a lovely few days with Amy and Iris. I miss them already.
8 notes &
Could not resist.
49 notes &
A good day :D
9 notes &
But there’s one way, however, in which Madeleine defies believability: She has no true female friends. Yes, she has roommates and a sister with whom she once had “heavy” emotional conversations, but these relationships are characterized more by spite than affection. And, sadly, The Marriage Plot is just the latest story to forget to give its heroine friends. There are countless other Madeleines in modern-day literature and film: smart, self-assured women who have all the trappings of contemporary womanhood except a group of friends to confide in.
“What Jeffrey Eugenides Doesn’t Understand About Women”
Gah. I find this kind of reasoning really frustrating - not because I believe my favourite authors are above criticism, but because assuming that all women have the same experiences and that characters that fall outside what you deem to be the rule must be “unbelievable” is extremely problematic and smacks of essentialism. The title alone implies this universality of experience, as if women were a monolith.
Barkhorn certainly has a point that there could be more representations of female friendships in mainstream “literary” fiction - it would be especially nice not to see this result in the books in question being labelled “women’s fiction”. But her wording really bothers me, and her reading of the novel is completely at odds with my own. I didn’t think Madeleine’s relationships with her college friends and with her sister were characterised by spite, for starters. And I think it’s worth bearing in mind that her isolation and lack of friends is one of the things that make her miserable - the novel not only acknowledges this, but deals with it at length.
There are certainly novels out there that imply that women are incapable of being friends with one another because they’re “backstabbing” or “bitchy” or whatever other misogynistic slur you can think of, but this is not one of them, I don’t think. And it troubles me that Barkhorn’s main criticism is not that this adds to a trend of lack of representation (which would be fair enough, though more as a general comment than one on this particular novel’s merit or lack thereof), but that women like Madeleine must not exist. If we automatically assume that any novel that portrays an isolated woman is doin it rong, we’re creating further limits for what women can do or be, further rules concerning what’s “natural” or “normal” female behaviour, which is not exactly helpful.
I’m a woman not far from Madeleine’s age, and for most of my life I haven’t had very close female (or male) friendships. This isn’t because I hate other women, but because I’m not exactly a pleasant person to be around for long, because close relationships are very difficult for me, and because circumstances in my life have isolated me. I guess I’m not all that believable. Whoever made me up must not have understood women.
11 notes &
Eff yeah :D :D :D