Entries from March 2008
SMITH magazine is a welcome discovery for a scribbler like me. It’s an online magazine that acts as a “home for storytelling of all forms and kinds, with a focus on personal narrative. We believe everyone has a story, and everyone should have a place to tell it.” Admirable!
SMITH recently published “Not Quite What I Was Planning: Six Word Memoirs by Writers Famous and Obscure” and I’ve passed pleasurable minutes reading some of the entries. Consider this, the profound:
Diapers, rompers, shorts, jeans, suits, diapers.
Or this, the silly (but still a little profound):
Business school? Bah! Pop music? Hurrah
And this, the moving and profound:
I still make coffee for two
Enter: Lizzie Widdicombe’s review in the New Yorker, an exercise in literary discipline. It opens:
Brevity: a good thing in writing. Exploited by texters, gossip columnists, haikuists. Not associated with the biography genre. But then—why shouldn’t it be? Life expectancies rise; attention spans shrink. Six words can tell a story. That’s a new book’s premise, anyway.
Do you get it? The entire review is composed of six-word sentences! I know because I counted each one, with my eyes.
I need to bring this Widdicombe person on as a guest blogger. I wonder if, in place of her position as a staff writer at the most prestigious magazine in the nation, she’ll accept $100 a week and unlimited use of my David Sedaris home library. Lizzie, if you’re reading this, let me know.
Categories: Best of the Interweb
Tagged: brevity, new yorker, six-word memoirs, SMITH, wit, writing
And to think, back in Hester Prynne days, I would’ve been burned at the stake.
Read it here.
Categories: Comment
Tagged: Barack Obama, election, left-handed persons
People are talking about Gov. Eliot Spitzer’s catastrophic implosion everywhere today – in the elevators, on the street, huddled around water coolers (it’s true, I witnessed one such water-vessel caucus). The media is frenzied. The blogosphere is crapping its pants. These are the kind of lurid, juicy scandals that we love so much because it offers an opportunity to chatter publicly about the taboo. A secretary in my office told me confidently, “That’s nothing special. There’s dozens of brothels uptown in all those fancy townhouses.” I can only imagine.
And that’s the point, isn’t it? I see two threads in the Spitzer narrative. First, the voyeuristic details that were front-and-center when the story broke; details like Spitzer’s code name, Client 9, and the eerily mundane phone conversation between the call girl and her handler (“I mean it’s kind of like…whatever…I’m here for a purpose…”) bring this story out of the stratosphere of power and into normal life. These are exactly the kind of minute particulars a fiction writer sweats blood to dream up.
Perhaps more compelling, however, is the familiar story of power that leads to hubris that leads to a fall. Spitzer was powerful, but also egotistical. He embraced the nickname Eliot Ness, no doubt for the theatrical value, but I got the sense from various profiles that he actually believed it. The unwashed masses, myself included, derive a small, hard packet of moral self-satisfaction from shaking our heads and thinking, Jeese, I’d never do that, all the white wondering I wonder what it’s like to have that kind of life.
In any case, Slate has some excellent advice for those of you licking your greedy, exploitive lips at the prospect of pimping $3,000-an-hour prostitutes.
Categories: Comment · Fuckups · Life is Like a Bad Movie
Tagged: client 9, Eliot Spitzer, narrative, New York, scandal
Cutting Through the Hype
March 26, 2008 · Leave a Comment
Originally posted on One City, blog of the Interdependence Project
Regular readers know I’ve been swept up in the cacophony of chatter surrounding the race for the Democratic presidential nominee. Some of my commentary, I feel, has been worth reading, mostly for it’s entertainment value. Some, not so much.
On my morning blog cruise, I read this post by Marc Ambinder of The Atlantic. He says,
Curious, I read Blumenthal’s analysis of Gallup and Rasmussen’s polling data for the last 8-odd weeks (a warning to liberal arts types – it’s not technical, but it does contain numbers), and I realized just how wrapped up in the media hype I’ve been. I came away with the following conclusions:
1. Accounting for statistical methods, Obama and Clinton are essentially tied in the polls. They have been for weeks. This means:
2. The media has been using meaningless ups and downs in the polls to create fake news. Example: Last week’s mini-media-storm on Obama’s poll numbers immediately before and after his speech on race (given to address the also-meaningless Rev. Wright controversy).
3. Conclusion: Don’t trust the media. And don’t trust me. Discourse about actual policy has been hijacked for the past several weeks by empty drama.
A corollary observation: Obama’s oft-touted momentum may also be largely illusory. It feels real because I’m surrounded by ObamaHeads; I also seek out campaign videos and visit Obama’s campaign website (what better place to shore up my feeling that my guy is winning?). The reality of the race, however, is told in the popular vote and the delegate count, and Obama is winning both (although not by a great margin).
Endgame: It is mathematically extremely unlikely that HRC can catch up in pledged delegates, and politically highly unlikely that Superdelegates will defect to her en masse, thus handing her the nomination. In other words, it’s not a close race, it’s a done race. Everything else is narrative.
I’m no longer worried about Hillary rising in the eleventh hour like a zomboid Obama-killing robot; I’m worried about my own impressionable brain soaking up spin like a dry sponge. I am the liberal blogosphere’s ideal consumer and, in a way, I feel like I’m just waking up from a bad dream, where the landscape is constantly shifting, voices are shouting discordantly, and advertising is the only real constant.
Bio: Scribblerist writes for whoever will read him, like an ugly puppy that nobody wants. He holds no degree in Political Science from Harvard and is singularly unqualified to comment on matters political.
Update: The incomparable George Packer cuts down the hype with style.
Categories: Comment · Dept. of Frustration
Tagged: democratic primary, George Packer, Marc Ambinder, Media, polls, spin, statistics