What Good Is Book Blogging?

Here’s a round-up of posts on the current purpose of book blogging.

  1. Elberry: “i don’t really understand why people read the blogs they do. i am often puzzled that anyone reads mine. Maybe they just look at the pictures.”
  2. Mark Athitakis: “But in terms of them being inspirations and models, I largely looked at them as models for what not to do. Not because I disliked them, but because I figured that they had already claimed their particular patches of turf, forcing me to avoid their most common habits. (No knee-jerk whining about the contents of the New York Times Book Review, I told myself; no dutiful mentions of the death of a Syrian poet I’d never read and never heard of until the obit popped up in my RSS feed.)”
  3. Michael Gilleland: “One could make the case that blogging, i.e. rushing into print, is bad for one’s style. Horace (Ars Poetica 388-9) recommended that writers postpone publication for nine years. Nevertheless, the discipline of writing something every day is salutary.”
  4. Benjamin Stein: “Blogging has not only brought back the pleasure in writing. It liberated me as a writer.”
  5. Frank Wilson: “In fact, book blogging seems to me to have restored to literary journalism a good deal of the passion and immediacy that had long been missing from it. It had become restricted to pretty much the same people writing pretty much the same thing about pretty much the same sort of books. Blogging has opened up the field immensely.”
  6. Miriam Burstein: “. . . book bloggers aren’t necessarily tied to the rhythms of publishing and marketing: you can write about a book when it comes out; you can write about it several years later; you can write about it a couple of centuries later. (This is not to say that publishers don’t see book blogs as a marketing opportunity, however.)”
  7. Terry Teachout: “To blog is to become a public figure. Ad hominem attacks go with the territory. If you can’t stand the flames, log off.”
  8. Brad Bigelow: On how blogging differs from similiar material in newspapers or magazines “The simplest answer is that someone asks a reviewer to write about a book. Aside from a few well-known bloggers, none of the rest of us gets asked by anyone to write about any topic. The other main difference is time. Book reviews almost always have to come out just before or after a book first gets published. One can post about a book whenever one feels like it. A good thing, because some of us have missed the deadline by decades.”
  9. Ron Slate: “Auden said a critic must differentiate between taste and judgment: I can know something is trash and still have a taste for it, and I can know something is well-made and not have a taste for it. Generally, attacks are perpetrated by nitwits who can’t tell the difference or who haven’t had a good breakfast.”
  10. Nigel Beale: Quoting Jonathan Swift “A commonplace book is what a provident poet cannot subsist without, for this proverbial reason, that ‘great wits have short memories’: and whereas, on the other hand, poets, being liars by profession, ought to have good memories; to reconcile these, a book of this sort, is in the nature of a supplemental memory, or a record of what occurs remarkable in every day’s reading or conversation. There you enter not only your own original thoughts, (which, a hundred to one, are few and insignificant) but such of other men as you think fit to make your own, by entering them there.”
  11. Levi Stahl: “. . . when I started blogging about books, I explained that I was starting a blog so that I would stop reading aloud at parties. I was only half joking”
  12. James Marcus: “In my book, Amazonia, I actually anointed Emerson as the First American Online. I think he’s a better candidate than, say, Montaigne, since he was a small-canvas artist whose unit of thought was the sentence: that seems very bloggy to me.”
  13. Patrick Kurp: “I’ve spent 30 years writing professionally, mostly for newspapers. This has instilled a fairly strict work ethic: meet deadlines, don’t wait for “inspiration,” write tight, humor editors but don’t encourage them . . . A blogger is a writer and a writer’s only obligation is to write well.”
  14. D.G. Myers: “. . . I am encouraged by the wit, knowledge, and book sense on exhibition in a few well-tended parks of the literary blogscape. But I am also discouraged about the future of book blogging. I no longer believe, as I once did, that book blogs might revive a free-wheeling and raucous literary culture.”

Happy Labor Day

Vinyl Ready Art - Holidays

I woke up this morning and the sun wouldn’t shine. I picked up my shovel and I walked to the mine. I loaded sixteen tons of Number 9 coal, and the strawboss said, “This is a Bible school. We don’t even use coal. Have you ever considered more productive uses for your time?”

OK, OK. It wasn’t sixteen tons. But I did work today (my annual orientation talk to the incoming students), while the rest of you were enjoying your bourgeois, degenerate cookouts and picnics. I don’t mind. I’m glad to do it.

Because it makes me better than you.

And when you get down to it, isn’t that what we’re all working for, really?

I did a little web searching about my new exercise regimen, “Walking with weights.” I found that fitness experts are almost unanimous in their opinion that it’s a very, very bad idea. High risk of injury. Likely to cause dangerous high blood pressure levels.

Just what I’d expect. I finally find a discipline that really makes me feel good, and it turns out to be a dangerous drug.

Too late now, though. I’m hooked.

Higher Ed Is for Faculty Comfort, Not Student Need

Teenage girl with head down on deskWorld has an incredible cover story on how a study program at the University of Texas was skunked by liberal faculty who care more about their careers than teaching students. It’s an example of liberalism undermining the ideas that prop it up or enable it to live, the results being uneducated students and purposeless colleges.

Talking about the program his designed, professor Rob Koons writes:

Our program was rightly perceived as a threat to the monopoly of what I call the Uncurriculum, which prevails at UT and at most universities today. It is the absence of required courses and of any structure or order to liberal studies. The Uncurriculum dictates that students accumulate courses that meet a ‘distribution’ standard—a smattering of courses scattered among many categories. Even within majors, the trend has been to eliminate required sequences. . . .

The Uncurriculum free-for-all gives undergraduates only the illusion of choice. In reality, the Uncurriculum model is entwined with the interests of the professoriate. If there are no courses students are required to take, there are no courses that professors are required to teach.

Professors at research universities focus on the accumulation of prestige through publication, the indispensable means for acquiring tenure and increasing one’s salary (through the leverage of outside offers). By allowing students to pick what they want to study, the Uncurriculum model eliminates a potentially great distraction from the quest for publications: the burden of teaching a required curriculum, unrelated to one’s own narrow research agenda. . . .

Rather than admit this self-interest, liberal arts professors at UT use postmodern and multicultural ideas to defend the Uncurriculum. These fashionable ideas form an ‘ideology’ in Marx’s sense: a system of ideas designed to cloak, rationalize, and defend an unjust set of relationships, namely, the exploitation of undergraduates and their underwriters (parents, taxpayers, and donors). . . .

Due to the Uncurriculum, the humanities are committing slow suicide. There has been a steady decline in liberal arts majors in the last thirty years (from over one-half to fewer than one-quarter of the total). However, the decline is slow enough to make little difference to tenured professors. . . .

The experience of the Western Civilization and American Institutions program underscores a sad truth about higher education in America—it is mostly run by and for the faculty. What it likes and dislikes trumps what would be best for students. Our system will never fully achieve its promise as long as that remains true.”

Messiah Number 4,872

I was amused to find a little bundle of booklets in my mail today at work. It was about half a dozen copies of a 39-page “novel” called …And God Created Love, by “Aytekin Kurtaran.” (A 143-page version is available on request.)

I resisted the temptation to read it through but, flipping through the pages, I found it to be the story of a “handsome youth” named Aytekin Kurtaran, and how he (with his beautiful lover), inspired by the true God, overcome all the evil powers that are making war, and establish a worldwide government and a worldwide religion, based on love. The author’s native language seems to be German. I can’t testify to the quality of the German prose, but the English translation is pretty rusty.

Apparently Mr. Kurtaran is confident that if he sends out copies to people all over the world, the simple logic of his program will convince everyone to visit his website (not much going on there) and join his campaign for world government and religious reform.

I’m a little embarrassed to speak so slightingly of the fellow. I’m guessing he’s extremely sincere. Perhaps he thinks his idea (one world government, one world religion) has never occurred to anyone before. Perhaps he imagines that, once we read his story, we’ll all slap our foreheads, say “D’oh!” and sign on.

What Mr. Kurtaran doesn’t understand is that his idea is not new. Far from being fresh and novel, it’s been done to death—lots of people’s deaths. Again and again, highminded and noble efforts to unify mankind in love (or something like love) end up in acres of bloody corpses.

There are few things so fearsome as a lover of mankind who just can’t persuade everyone to get with the program.

What Mr. Kurtaran doesn’t understand is that there’s something wrong with people. People are not good (but deluded), merely awaiting someone to tell them, “Love your neighbor and unite!” People are bad (and deluded). They need radical change.

If Mr. Kurtaran could take all human evil upon himself, be put to death, and rise from the dead, he might have a shot.

But even then, it wouldn’t happen as quickly as he hopes.

Sink That Sub!

Hand grenade According to biographer Terry Mort, Ernest Hemingway hated war, but knew one had to win once they were committed to a fight. So while part of a civilian patrol between the coasts of the U.S. and Cuba, the author would watch for submarines and plan to hit them with hand grenades when he saw one.

Didn’t That Movie Change Everything?

Filmmakers said The Dark Knight changed how superhero movies would be made in the future, so why haven’t we seen or heard about those new, influenced movies yet? For instance, where’s a good, dark Shazam flick?

I’ll wait for you stop laughing. No, no–take your time.

Note: Distorting Scripture is a sin

Kudos to Dennis Ingolfsland of The Recliner Commentaries for thoroughly fisking a video making the rounds claiming that Barak Obama’s name proves him to be the Antichrist, based on Luke 10:18.

Fourth: Now comes the “slight-of-hand” so to speak. In Luke 10:18 Jesus says he saw Satan fall as lightening from heaven. The video doesn’t give you the Hebrew word for “Heaven.” The Hebrew word for heaven is pronounced like “Shamayim (Shamayah in Aramaic).

Obviously the words “Barack Shamayim” don’t work well with the slander this video is attempting to perpetrate, so instead, the video does a little bait-and-switch by referring the listener back to Isaiah 14:12-19 which refers to the fall of Lucifer (Satan).

If you hold a high view of Scripture, as the person who made this video apparently claims to, you should never, never, never, twist its words and falsify facts in order to make a political point. Shameful.

Book Reviews, Creative Culture