2022: Articles on writing, authors and publishing

The legacy of Hunter S. Thompson and "Gonzo" journalism:

https://lithub.com/on-the-legacy-of-hunter-s-thompson-and-gonzo-journalism/?utm_...

Interesting look at Stanislaw Lem:

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2022/01/17/a-holocaust-survivors-hardboiled-s...

>2 CliffBurns: Interesting. His German agent is probably Franz Rottensteiner, who still lives in Vienna.

A Polish colleague of mine, in his early 30s, was astounded one lunchtime to see me looking at Lem's website. Apparently, Lem is taught in Polish schools, where he is accorded the sort of status British schools give to Shakespeare or Dickens, and taught equally badly.

Guillermo del Toro's latest movie, "Nightmare Alley", is an adaptation of a classic noir novel. Here's an article about it and its troubled author:

https://crimereads.com/william-lindsay-greshams-nightmare-alley/

A sad statement of our times--books are becoming obsolete, reading perceived as "totally 20th century":

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/ottawa/cornwall-200-000-books-barn-red-cart-books...

Reading John Cooper Clarke's memoir, thought I'd share this with the gang. JCC at his best:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g-aVtKEhpO0

Books to look forward to in 2022:

https://crimereads.com/all-the-scifi-noir-and-speculative-thrillers-you-need-to-...

Good piece on W.G. Sebald:

https://reallifemag.com/w-g-sebald/

L.F. Celine. Horrible human being, great writer. Would you read him or not?

https://newrepublic.com/article/165121/ghosts-celine-french-novelist-fascist-ant...

The best possible response to book banning:

https://www.cbc.ca/news/entertainment/maus-sales-graphic-novel-holocaust-tenness...

During lockdown, Werner Herzog wrote 2 books:

https://www.newyorker.com/culture/the-new-yorker-interview/werner-herzog-has-nev...

The heyday of crime comic strips:

https://crimereads.com/history-newspaper-crime-comic-strips/

Jonathan Lethem on Stanislaw Lem:

https://www.lrb.co.uk/podcasts-and-videos/videos/lrb-films-interviews/five-lems?...

Good piece on how long it took his home country to embrace Primo Levi's work as much as the rest of the world did:

https://lithub.com/how-and-why-primo-levis-work-was-once-rejected?utm_source=Sai...

What's that saying about being a prophet in your own land?

Will Self wonders if a close reading of contemporary Russian literature might have given us an inkling of Putin's true intentions in Ukraine:

https://www.theneweuropean.co.uk/found-in-translation/

The great George Saunders gives writers advice on how to come up with satisfactory endings for stories:

https://georgesaunders.substack.com/p/ten-ways-of-thinking-about-endings?s=r&amp...

Werner Herzog, the writer:

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/06/08/movies/werner-herzog-twilight-world.html

It's pretty hard to rationalize plagiarism:

https://www.theguardian.com/books/2022/jun/10/miles-franklin-prize-removes-novel...

I draw some comfort from knowing that possibly one day, in the distant future, my books will be considered "lost classics":

https://www.theguardian.com/books/2022/may/30/the-big-idea-could-the-greatest-wo...

(Better lost than never existing at all.)

If you thought William Burroughs was far out, you haven't been reading Vladimir Sorokin:

https://harpers.org/archive/2022/06/vladimir-sorokin-the-shock-jock-of-russian-l...

Re: #18

John Hughes responds to accusations of plagiarism:

https://www.theguardian.com/books/2022/jun/16/john-hughes-i-am-not-a-plagiarist-...

>21 CliffBurns: His example of plagiarism is two completely different sentences. Does he not get the concept?

>22 iansales: I think it's a strange sort of mea culpa, where he's KIND OF explaining but never really succeeding. It's sort of like, "Yes, I stole scores of passages, BUT..."

The only way someone should react when legitimately shown that he/she has lifted someone else's work is immediately apologize, sincerely and abjectly, on bended knee, radiating contrition.

Yet I can't think of a single instance where that was the case--even one of the journalists I most look up to, Chris Hedges, had to admit to plagiarism and, again, he was far from remorseful, more like defiant and pompous. I've never forgiven him for it.

>23 CliffBurns: Johann Hari had an award taken off him when he was found to have plagiarised. He promised to pay back the prize money, but never has. And now he has a new book out, being promoted by all his journo mates, which apparently dangerously misrepresents research on depression.

A new novel by the notorious L.F. Celine--a good day for literature or a case of exalting a poisonous legacy?

https://www.newyorker.com/culture/cultural-comment/a-newly-discovered-celine-nov...

More on Vladimir Sorokin:

https://www.ft.com/content/1f4bd315-7753-4e7a-be4e-0ea7e31522b9

We all need to be reading Flann O'Brien. Anthony Burgess says so:

https://bostonreview.net/articles/roger-boylan-we-laughed-we-cried-flann-obrien/

>27 CliffBurns: Thanks for that, Cliff. i acquired a copy of The Third Policeman on my trip to Dublin three years ago, and it is approaching the lower slopes of Mount TBR.

Not sure what to make of this. Thoughts?
https://reason.com/2022/07/05/rise-of-the-sensitivity-reader/

I loathe the notion of conceding creative autonomy over my work to ANYONE.

Not for any price, not for any reason.

Period.

I'm waiting for the conversation that goes "My sensitivity reader disagrees with your sensitivity reader."

Utter perversion

Initially outraged then upon further reflection, still outraged.

Going to have to disagree. I see no problem in ensuring my fiction is properly researched. If that means using a sensitivity reader so I haven't misrepresented someone in my fiction, then I welcome the opening of channels that allow me to make sure that sort of stuff is absolutely spot-on.

There's "research" and there's "social vetting". I agree with Robert: it's totally subjective. "My sensitivity reader disagrees with yours".

If folks don't like the way my books are written, the way I portray characters, don't read 'em. Or write your own books, sensitive and deferential and empathetic...and no doubt as boring as a Sunday night in Rosetown, Saskatchewan.

According to the article and attached video this 'sensitivity' disagreement has already happened. It's more of the 'what can I be offended about' drive.

>34 iansales: The problem isn't in the basic premise, but the execution. The fact that whatever a sensitivity reader says is basically mandatory because the publisher will insist on it makes it censorship. There's no two ways about it, censorship is being reintroduced in 21st century. How about that? You're not allowed to write what you want regardless whether the sensitivity reader has a good point or not. If it was just advisory, then you could take it on board and decide for yourself whether in the context of your work it makes sense.

Which brings us to the second huge issue - qualifications of sensitivity reader. I see no mention that they need any other than being a part of certain demographic. Are we seriously going to assume anyone of a certain race is an authority on all issues pertaining to that demographic, especially if they have no background in literature? They will kill any work even remotely about controversial issues because it will inevitably offend someone. I bet you sensitivity readers would not have Lolita being published, or more precisely lazy clueless publishers would because they'd base their decision on it.

>37 SandraArdnas: I have seen countless books by US authors set in the UK that get stuff wrong (multi-award-winning Connie Willis, for example). I'm now seeing books written by non-Swedes, sometimes books translated from Swedish into English, that get things wrong about Sweden. It's hugely annoying. But it's peanuts compared to people who find their entire identities misrepresented in fiction, no matter how well-meaning the author. Sensitivity readers are not there to judge the literary merit of a work, and so need no qualifications or background in literature. They're there to compare their cultural knowledge and lived experience against that depicted by the author.

Or are you advocating we should go back to coding evil villains as gay, transgender people as psycho murders, black people as ignorant savages, Romani as petty thieves, and so on?

>38 iansales: Why are you ignoring the fact their input is not advisory? You obviously find that peanuts too. I don't. I find it criminal and preposterous.

Sensitivity readers must have basic understanding of literature if they are to judge what is thematising a controversial subject. Hence, the Lolita example. They simply have to understand what the author is doing and when to even be able to give proper advice, and even then their say should not be mandatory. If they are clueless about writing, they'll often be completely off mark. So no, merely being a part of some demographic is not enough.

Finally, I am against coding any types. That includes types sensitivity readers find pleasing enough. Are you advocating no villain may ever be any of those categories? They'll all be strictly white males, for whom I suppose there are no sensitivity readers to object?

"Yes, Mr. Twain, a word or two with you about this book of yours, HUCKLEBERRY FINN..."

If a sensitivity reader was handed a pile of tomes by L.F. Celine, Wm. Burroughs or Sorokin, their heads would explode like dynamite-packed pumpkins.

>40 CliffBurns: A trigger warning for violence against pumpkins, Mr. Burns.

>39 SandraArdnas: First, the use of sensitivity readers is not yet industry standard. Second, in many cases, writers are using sensitivity readers *before* they submit their manuscript to their editor. Third, it is not criminal to moderate your language so it doesn't offend - that's what hate speech laws are.

Anglophone literature is rife with coding - from goblins coded as Jews in Harry Potter to the gay paedophile villain Baron Harkonnen in Dune. Why should we continue to do this? Why should anyone *want* us to continue to do this? There are ways to write goblins that is not antisemitic, there are ways to write archvillains that doesn't use their sexuality as an indicator of their evil.

And, guess what, it's not all about white males anymore. They've had free rein for centuries at dictating how other groups are depicted in literature, no matter how inaccurate those depictions might have been. (And I say "they", when I mean "we", as I'm a white male myself.) If a person can't write another group in a way that is not appropriative or ignorantly offensive, then they have no business writing.

>40 CliffBurns: Historical books have been edited to remove content found offensive for centuries. Even the Bible has been edited in the past to make it more palatable to readers of the time - including producing it in English in 1535, for example. Huge scandal when that happened. Lots of British children's books have had racist language removed in recent years. I'm pretty sure there are US and Canadian examples too. It's been normal practice for several decades.

>42 iansales: OK, I have to ask have you read the article. Because your scenario is a utopian one in comparison and one that few if any people would object to. As for industry standard, here's to hoping it never becomes one. Whether an author will employ a sensitivity reader on their own is within their autonomy. Getting a random one imposed and their input dogma is quite another thing.

Guess what, not you or anyone else is to dictate what an author should write. You're free to read or not read according to your tastes, you're free to criticize what is published, but you are not free to decide what is or is not to be published at all. It's a travesty. You're so enamored with ideological speak that you refuse to consider anything outside it, including the fact the very practice you espouse isn't exactly sunshine for authors from groups you staunchly pretend to defend, which you'd know if you read the article and paid attention. But apparently, ideological battles is all that matters and it will miraculously turn out well in the end.

>43 SandraArdnas: you're right, I'm not going to read an article in a magazine that has a section titled "Cancel Culture". It's right-wing bullshit.

Editors and agents dictate what authors write all the time. Publishing professionals also decide what to publish and what not to publish - and they usually don't make their decisions based on literary merit but on commercial factors. Some books have been killed at the editing stage because powerful book chains said they won't be placing any orders. Some writers even let their readers dictate what they write - Dickens famously did it over 100 years ago. PR firms and spin doctors dictate what some writers can write (especially when it comes to biographies and ghost-written books). If you think authors are free to write what they want, without consequence, then *that* is a utopian scenario.

>44 iansales: I was not under the impression it was any wing at all based on this article, but the very things you argue here exemplify cancel culture. You'll cancel those who do not conform to what you consider imperative. Apparently, no price is too high for that. Shudder.

As for publishing policies, yes, many things are in the gutter because more often than not profit is the only issue. We do not need another nail in that coffin. Unless you want only commercialized recycled superficial books published, you need to give a thought or two to those policies, rather than citing them as an excuse for new poor ones.

Editors worth the name do not dictate, they pick and choose the best from whatever area they publish in, they steer where necessary and make other editorial decisions. And that exactly is the problem here because they are not living up to their profession. Editor should certainly be qualified to evaluate the input of sensitivity reader and make a personal decision, instead of playing PR games. Just as they should promote diverse authors if they want diversity. But they don't. They bludgeon whatever authors are publishing with them to pack their books with a whole array of characters so that they can boast being all PC. That's certainly a way to get authentic stories that are an integral vision of an author `/sarcasm. But hey, it's much easier and cheaper to bludgeon someone who you've already promoted or who made a name for themselves then finding authentic voices who write those on their own. I bet you think that's progress and good policy too.

The many faces of Fernando Pessoa:

https://www.thenation.com/article/culture/fernando-pessoa-biography/?utm_source=...

Excellent piece on Thomas Ligotti:

https://www.thebulwark.com/thomas-ligotti-and-the-horror-of-existence/

Mike Davis is dying, but still a man to be reckoned with:

https://www.latimes.com/lifestyle/image/story/2022-07-25/mike-davis-reflects-on-...

Herzog continues to fascinate:

https://www.theguardian.com/film/2022/aug/07/werner-herzog-twilight-world-fire-w...

Italo Svevo, the "Italian Proust":

https://www.nybooks.com/daily/2022/08/24/the-italian-proust-svevo/?utm_source=Sa...

The troubling life and legacy of L.F. Celine:

https://www.lrb.co.uk/the-paper/v44/n16/michael-wood/war-in-my-head

Always wondered what happened to Harlan Ellison's estate:

https://boingboing.net/2022/10/03/harlan-ellison-auction-includes-the-worlds-mos...

>52 CliffBurns: Saw Harlan at a convention some years ago. The convention chair was a Scot who himself had a reputation for bluntness and iconoclasm. He was also an accomplished pianist. The con hall happened to have a grand piano, and whilst waiting to introduce Harlan (who was, of course, late), suggestions were made by the audience as to appropriate walk-on music. The audience eventually settled on Carly Simon's "You're so vain" but the con chair chickened out and went with the theme music from "Rocky" instead.

Love those Ellison stories. Everyone seems to have one...good and bad.

Annie Ernaux, Nobel laureate:

https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-63156199

I have to say, I am completely unfamiliar with her work.

An independent press with 4 Nobel Prize winners:

https://www.theguardian.com/books/2022/oct/10/four-nobels-and-counting-fitzcarra...

The GREAT George Saunders:

https://www.gq.com/story/george-saunders-is-here-to-help

Illuminating piece on Wallace Stevens:

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/05/02/the-thrilling-mind-of-wallace-stev...

>58 CliffBurns: Recently heard the anecdote about Stevens and Gwendolyn Brooks. Really quite nasty.

>59 justifiedsinner: Stevens could be a dick if he had been drinking, no question. Poets are odd people at the best of times.

>60 CliffBurns: I don't think he was drinking at the time. He was in a panel of judges for a poetry prize and they were waiting for the arrival of another judge who was running late. While waiting Stevens perused the photos of the previous winners. Who's the coon? He asked the others. Seeing they were somewhat put out he said, I know that's not a thing to say about a lady, but who is she?

Poets can be racist arse-holes at times too.

I was unaware of that anecdote. Agree: poets are no better and no worse than the rest of us.

Sadly.

And I wish that wasn't so.

Lovely piece on Mike Davis, who will be sorely missed:

https://lareviewofbooks.org/article/remembering-mike-davis/?utm_source=Sailthru&...

There's a new autobiography of Kathy Acker:

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2022/12/05/kathy-ackers-art-of-identity-theft

Will Self on Franz Kafka:

https://www.theneweuropean.co.uk/will-self-on-kafka-diaries-new-translation/

Barry Gifford, talking about noir and his Black Lizard imprint:

https://crimereads.com/barry-gifford-on-the-history-of-noir-and-black-lizard-boo...

Two great articles, one on the Bloomsbury group, the other on the collected letters of John le Carre:

https://lithub.com/how-a-group-of-intellectual-outcasts-broke-barriers-in-early-...

https://thebaffler.com/salvos/the-father-of-all-secrets-adler-bell?utm_source=Sa...

Robert Gottlieb, on the art of editing great writers:

https://www.npr.org/2023/01/03/1146641641/robert-gottlieb-caro-power-broker-turn...