Shortly after getting up I checked my Twitter feed — a weakness, to be sure — and saw that Alain de Botton was Tweeting quotes about anger. Here’s one:

Angry people call poverty on themselves and ruin on their homes, denying they are angry, just as the mad deny their insanity, Seneca -De Ira

de Botton — who is @alaindebotton, if you’re curious — had recently left an angry comment on the blog of Caleb Crain, who (negatively) reviewed de Botton’s book “The Pleasures and Sorrows of Work” in the NY Times. “You have now killed my book in the United States, nothing short of that,” de Botton wrote. “So that’s two years of work down the drain in one miserable 900 word review…. I will hate you till the day I die and wish you nothing but ill will in every career move you make. I will be watching with interest and schadenfreude.”

Which is heated, if not nasty. And it doesn’t fit with the Alain de Botton I saw at the Getty in LA just a few weeks ago, who came across as sweet and patient. He stood for hours on a chilly patio in order to speak to every person who wanted a book signed; it was a long queue at the end of his book tour, but he never got frustrated or exasperated.

So he’s either good at fronting, or Crain really pissed him off.

I’m inclined to think the latter, and I’m glad that de Botton said what he said. Not that I hate the review, am convinced this is de Botton’s best work or am even sure that he’s right about the damage done — but I think expressing anger is OK. Don’t like the review — say something! Such reactions shouldn’t leave reviewers cowering, but get them up on their feet, shouting their opinions, their reasons, their refusals to submit!

There is some kind of play-nice mentality going around that I’m not sure I believe in. Maybe we’ve lost our ability to argue without getting personal, or the skill of expressing anger with eloquence. I think that’s why de Botton was pulling what 140-character quotes he could about anger’s place in our lives.

That said, I’m not sure that going to Nietzche on how to live is ever a good idea.

The emotions of envy, hatred and lust are life-conditioning emotions which must essentially be present in every life – Nietzsche

It’s not untrue, but it feels uneasy, unresolved. Nietzche is good for some things — he’s always thought provoking, if not infuriating — but his ego-driven, brittle intellect didn’t make him much of a life coach.

My review of Andrew Mueller’s “I Wouldn’t Start from Here” is in the books pages of today’s LA Times. Here’s a bit:

A droll rock journalist turned travel writer, Andrew Mueller spent most of the first decade of the 21st century heading to places nobody wants to go: Baghdad, the West Bank, Serbia, Beirut, Bosnia, Libya. Australian by birth and Londoner by choice, he’s written about his trips for British newspapers and music magazines.

This book skips over most of the sensuous details of travel writing — exquisitely described meals, enviable hotel rooms — substituting tales of death-defying drivers and detailed descriptions of border checkpoints. Mueller wants to know why conflict is intractable in some regions and not in others. His sardonic, self-deprecating perspective makes for unstuffy company.

I did what I could, but I admit I’m finding it increasingly hard to write about 500-page books in 400-or-so words. If there had been more space, I would have liked to write about the issue of collective responsibility. He never points fingers, but his book brings people in Gaza, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Ireland and Pristina closer to the comparatively fortunate American/British/Australian reader.

There may be no answer to the question why, by circumstance of birth, someone is burying a brother as I’m making eggs. But the question that follows — what do I propose to do about it — is answered, by of all people, by Bono. “Celebrity is silly,” he tells Mueller in New York City, after one of U2′s post-9/11 shows — “but it is a currency of a kind, and if I can spend it, I will.”

Bono has been accused of being overly pious and self-important, but he doesn’t come across that way; rather, he comes across as someone who would really, really like to get a bottle of wine opened.

It is hard today, with a healthy level of cynicism, to find a solid foothold in talking about community and responsibility, words that sound overly pious and self-important. But Bono has a point, and while he’s in a rock star class of his own, we all have some currency. The question is, how do we spend it? Do I write a check to Amnesty? Is signing online petitions about global warming and debt relief enough? What affect might I possibly have on trigger-happy Blackwater security agents or ancient religious conflicts or my own government’s mixed-up foreign policy? How about I just buy champagne and watch the Oscars?

Which, by the way, I plan to do.

Mueller’s currency comes from his sardonic voice, and his willingness to travel to places that seem uninhabitable. And he spends that currency on the members of the Unrepresented Peoples and Nations Organization.  Skeptical slackers like me should read this book, because they’ll like it, and maybe get something out of it (although I still can’t figure out Kosovo and Belgrade). If I believe in anything, I have to believe that the writing — and the reading — is valuable, worthwhile.

But I do wonder if I’ve got a little bit more currency to spend.

In today’s LA Times, I review the new cinematic biography Douglas Fairbanks by Jeffrey Vance with Tony Maietta.

In my years researching early silent film, I’d always skirted around Fairbanks, who seemed just TOO BIG, saddled with the kind of fame that makes most stories flat and untrue. Who is the real George Washington? Who knows?

I think that Vance has done a good job of dodging the oft-told tales of Fairbanks, which he does by focusing on his films. He devotes complete chapters to Fairbanks’ most significant works: “The Mask of Zorro” (1920), “The Three Mustketeers” (1921), “Douglas Fairbanks in Robin Hood” (1922) “The Thief of Bagdad” (1924), “Don Q Son of Zorro” (1925) and “The Black Pirate” (1926), as well as “Douglas Fairbanks as The Gaucho” (1927), “The Iron Mask” (1929) and “The Taming of the Shrew” (1929, with wife Mary Pickford).

But in doing so he left me wanting a little more of what made the great artist tick. Vance makes the case for him as an auteur – yet when, late in the book, contemporaries’ quotes refer to him as a narcissist, I wonder how those things are connected. Was he a great artist creating great art, or a man obsessed with his own image (or simply himself), or some combination?

I watched some of my DVD of The Thief of Bagdad when working on the piece, and it was a reminder that words can’t really come close to what Douglas Fairbanks did. This book will give you some perspective on the realness of the stunts, the enormity of the sets, the dreamlike art deco of the art design — but it can’t ever explain the joy that radiates from Douglas Fairbanks as he leaps and grins.

So… look for some videos of the man in action to show up on Jacket Copy later today.

Back in web 1.0, I worked at a music industry dot-com that, at one point, was the #3 music site on the internet. We grew so fast that they tripled us up in our tiny offices in Encino. From the very day I started there were big meetings about going public, about stock options, and as the months wore on we jostled for friends and family shares so our loved ones could get rich with us. We rented out two floors of a building on Wilshire that had been E!’s. We would have sinage, the execs told us — they were very excited about the sinage.

But those offices were still being designed and prepped when we finally made it to the day of our IPO, so — at least this is how I remember it — the entire staff, too big for any room in our office, gathered instead at Sportsman’s Lodge, an old-school Valley banquet-ish place. Did they have us watching TVs? Or listening to the radio? People stood on chairs, in khakis or polo shirts or with tattoos or carefully tended dreads. We were going to hear our opening price announced, and then we’d listen to it climb. Or maybe that all happened later, the meeting hall and the crowd standing on chairs. When they tried to explain.

Because we went public the day the market tanked.

We didn’t know it at the time; we thought it was, maybe, just a slight dip. The NASDAQ had doubled its value in the year between March 1999 and 2000, going up and up and up and maybe down for a moment before heading up again. Its bigtime high was 18 days before my company went public, and when our IPO hit, the slide was on.

But we continued; we moved into the new space, which despite its fancy design afforded less privacy than sitting in each other’s laps in our old rabbit warren. We tried not to pay attention to stock reports. We went about our business promoting the Backstreet Boys, listened to a wild-eyed SEO expert discuss the tricks for being the top hit for “Britney Spears naked.” We heard lots and lots and lots about the still-in-the-works sinage. And for Christmas — or was it just because? — everyone got a copy of the book Who Moved My Cheese?

It was a horrid little self-help business book about coping with change. It couldn’t reach the end of a sentence without plopping in a couple of exhausted cliches then thumping on ‘em a little. It was an allegory about two mice — one with a can do attitude and another who got disheartened — who are looking for their cheese which, as you might have guessed, has been moved.

Who Moved My Cheese? was supposed to make us all feel better. About the whole dot-com bust thing. About not getting rich. I don’t know a single staff person, besides our deluded, disheartened executives, who found a single thing to like about the horrid condescending platintudinous book.

Except that now I find myself, oddly, remembering it because of the latest news about the Washington Post. The paper will get rid of its stand-alone book section, folding it in to the rest of the paper and keeping it online. Getting rid of the section is shitty, because may mean fewer reviews, because some people still prefer print over online, and lots of people who think about these things think an independent book section is meaningful.

But on the other hand, putting books coverage next to movie coverage might just encourage spillover, might just nudge books further into the slipstream of our multivaried culture. Maybe it’s exactly the right thing to do. Maybe books coverage will be enhanced by online media; maybe being able to Digg a book review wouldn’t be the worst thing in the world.

Mostly, though, the question of whether or not this change is good or tragic is moot. It’s happening. Books coverage is going looking different now than it did five years ago or ten years ago or 113 years ago, when the NY Times Book Review first ran. But that’s to be expected. And expect it’ll look different in 2010, and so on.

A lot of effort has gone into bemoaning book review changes and it’s hard for me not to think that, coming from book critics, it’s both self-serving and a little cheesy. And it’s certainly less interesting than engaging with books.

Hi ho the derry-o.

I got to review Ben Greenman’s Correspondences for the LA Times book section this weekend. It really is as cool as all the New Yorkers say. The writeup is short, so, well, here it is:

Correspondences by Ben Greenman (Hotel St. George Press, 250-copy limited edition) is a beautiful, letterpressed, book-like object containing seven short stories that literally unfold before you. The case is earth-colored cardboard with a wine-red sleeve, almost like a box of stationery. The first story, “What He Was Poised to Do,” is revealed as you open the case; the text includes numbers corresponding to postcards the characters write to one another. You might expect to find those postcards inside; instead there is a blank one there, inviting you to fill in one of those from the story. This is a challenge, because Greenman’s writing is wonderfully intimidating, bountiful yet compressed; one willing lover is “like a penny rolling across the floor.” Maybe you ought to read the other stories first? Each story involves letters — to lovers, friends, a daughter — but few correspondents hope to receive anything in return. Yet one story is set on the impossible border of India and Australia and focuses on a karmic boomerang business (talk about karmic return). The enclosed stories are printed on opposite sides of accordion-style inserts — “Hope,” for example, is a story that is paired with another that has little, a reminder that correspondence is a kind of relationship, connection. “Correspondences” is a gorgeous collection of short stories, integrated in its content and construction, yet unfinished; it waits for your postcard to arrive.

If there’s one thing I should add, it’s that I’m damn glad my editor had a real copy of the book, because the experience of the whole project is framed by that component. If I’d written the review based only on the promo version that was sent to me, it wouldn’t have captured the experience — or importance — of unfolding.

I also got to write about Hollywood Foto-Rhetoric, a book of sixties-era photos of LA by Barry Feinstein accompanied by sixties-era poems by Bob Dylan. There wasn’t enough room to mention it, but the cover photo includes a woman who’s a 1963 dead ringer for Amy Winehouse in a blonde wig, cateye makeup, slumped on a couch. At a nudie photo studio.

My review of “Abortion & Life” by Jennifer Baumgardner, out on Akashic Books, is in today’s LA Times. It opens:

THE COVER is striking: a very pregnant blond with her arm around a dark-haired woman whose T-shirt reads “I had an abortion.” The dark-haired woman’s hand is on the other’s belly; the women look at each other, smiling. With the acrimonious arguments over choice, this photograph, this moment, seems almost impossible. Can two women who’ve made opposite choices about pregnancy really talk to each other?

It is a foggy morning here in LA, but I’m sure the sky will clear by the time the West Hollywood Book Fair gets underway. Mark Sarvas’ panel is at 10:30am; I’m on one at 3pm. And there are many, many in between.

Distracted by the bad news this weekend, I forgot to mention that my review of “txting: the gr8t db8” by David Crystal was in the LA Times on Sunday.

I looooove writing for the LA Times and this book was much fun. It’s pop-linguistics, if there is such a thing, lots of interesting factoids without the burden of too much research.

But sometimes the paper makes decisions that baffle me. After the last version of the review that I saw, every bit of copy that I had put in txtspeak — those that they hadn’t already converted to words, like “text” for “txt” — was italicized.

The whole point of the book is that using text messages is a natural part of our engagement with language. That it is a part of English, not something to be treated as a foreign language. Here’s an unitalicized paragraph, which I include here to relieve the knot forming near my left shoulder.

Text messages are not the fearsome products of limber-thumbed, anti-literate teenagers but an extension of long traditions, Crystal argues. He connects logograms like “2day” with rebuses, which date back to ancient Rome. Initialisms like IMHO (“in my humble opinion”) and JK (“just kidding”) owe a debt to, of all things, IOU. Recorded in 1618, it’s one of the earliest found in English. And while xtrctngvwlsfrm wrds may be unusual in English, it’s not in Arabic and Hebrew.

hayden childs at metropolis books

On Saturday, three authors read from their entries in the 33 1/3 album-focused series: above, Hayden Childs reading from his book on “Shoot Out the Lights” by Richard and Linda Thompson. I didn’t get pictures of Kim Cooper (Neutral Milk Hotel’s “In the Aeroplane Over the Sea”) or David Smay (“Swordfishtrimbones” by Tom Waits). From what I understand, the reading followed a bus tour of Tom Waits sites around Los Angeles; I came for the books. Let me say, as I’ve said before, Metropolis Books is a fantastic bookstore in downtown Los Angeles. Tons of literary fiction, beautiful cookbooks, all the best about-LA books in a space that’s the size of Vroman’s greeting card section but still manages to include some comfy seating. Go there, my fellow book-loving Angelenos.

On Sunday my review of John Berger’s From A to X ran in the LA Times. Although this takes me by surprise, I believe I captured it better than Ursula K. Le Guin.

Big congratulations to Laila Lalami, who has finished work on her first novel, Secret Son.

Of the list of literary maneuvers, I like “Pulling an Austen” best: gossiping about socially sensitive topics, falling for someone who seems complicated but is in actuality a dark-haired douchebag. (via)

I was excited to learn that Kassia Krozser (aka Booksquare) would be on PBS’s News Hour tonight. Hooray for book bloggers! Also exciting: she would be appearing with former LA Times book review editor Steve Wasserman.

(She couldn’t see him, though: instead of having him on a monitor, they had a picture of Ren — or was it Stimpy? she couldn’t recall which was which — in his place.)

As a contributor to the book review and a blogger for Jacket Copy, it’s been hard for me to hear about the changes at the LA Times. I wish that people weren’t losing their jobs. I wish the paper and its book coverage were not just surviving but flourishing. I wish that resources were boundless and column inches long. But I understand that the situation is tough at the LA Times, if not dire, and that if wishes were horses I’d be cantering up La Cienega by now.

On the show (mp3 here), Steve Wasserman spoke fairly about the issues of newspaper contraction and somewhat snidely about internet book criticism/coverage (“bloviating” is not nice). Then, near the end of the interview, Wasserman said:

The Los Angeles Times — as well as other newspapers around the country, the Hartford Courant, which only recently let its book editor go — has constricted its space not only in the print medium, but they have not added people to expand what they do online either.

OK, my dad faithfully watches the News Hour (he also reads this blog. Hi dad!). He is under the impression that I am freelancing with the LA Times to expand what it does online. Mr. Wasserman, you’re bumming my dad out.

See, you’re making him think I am a bad daughter, one who’s either fibbing about her responsibilities or is failing at them. Oh, I’ve done that before, sure — the time I forgot to mention, for a couple of months, that I’d dropped out of college, that was both a failure and a fib — but in this case, I’m hard at work at Jacket Copy. And I think it’s pretty good.

Check it out. Today we posted a man-on-the-street video about what Angelenos are reading. I think videos count as an expansion. Fun expansion, even.

I agree with you, content is king. Come and consume some bookish stuff online at the good old LA Times.

David Ulin will be on KPCC’s Air Talk with Larry Mantle today, around 10:30am Pacific — that’s 89.3FM in socal, online elsewhere. Ulin has also talked to Publisher’s Weekly about changes in book coverage at the paper.

© 2010 carolyn kellogg Suffusion WordPress theme by Sayontan Sinha