Archive for June, 2010

Recommended Reading: “Day for Night” by Frederick Reiken

Tuesday, June 29th, 2010

Many book critics experience burnout. For the months preceding my recent return to the reviewing stage, I believe I was finally getting a taste of that occupational hazard. I was reading — I never, ever stop reading — but I couldn’t summon up anything to say about the books I read. 

At least, that’s what I tried to tell myself. In reality, each time I read a review written by someone else of a book I’d loved (or loathed!), I would think “Oh yes! But what about this scene? You weren’t skeptical of that character?” And so on, and so forth. 

I wasn’t lacking in things to say. I was lacking the energy to say them. Burnout.

Fortunately, that particular period of burnout is in the past. I knew this for sure when I finished reading Frederick Reiken’s “Day for Night” (Reagan Arthur Books) and found that my fingers almost itched to hit the keyboard and talk about it.

Here is a novel that defies description, yet makes the reader long to describe it; a narrative that breaks rules, yet ultimately follows them; it starts with one world, yet conjures another that is both too near and too far from our modern experience.

Reiken begins in contemporary Florida: A woman named Beverly, her boyfriend David, and David’s son Jordan are on a vacation in Homosassa, about to take a swim with manatees. (Most of the modern parts of the book are set during the mid-1980s, which seems odd at first but quickly assumes its time-sensitive importance.) On a whim, Beverly goes to listen to their dive guide’s band at a local bar, and he shares an odd, marvelous sight with her: A submerged merry-go-round. 

That’s about all. The next chapter introduces us to new characters, including the dive guide’s sometime-girlfriend and band frontwoman, Dee. Ahhh, the reader thinks. A series of linked short stories. I’ve read books like this before. What will I learn about Dee? About Tim? What’s going on with her odd Utah family? Oh goody, a nice juicy horror tale about occult ritual abuse.

All wrong. It’s as if Reiken is re-layering an onion: The whole of the story will only be revealed by combining partially opaque, partially transparent layers filled with characters whose lives overlap both deliberately and serendipitously. Yet those layers truly do make up a whole. We know that Beverly spent her early childhood in Poland, and that fact is as important to the last few pages as it is to the first. Reiken accomplishes something quite elegant, usually only seen in the most puzzle-like mystery novels: He has a surprise (more than one, really) and he reveals it in his own time while never playing games with or attempting to trick the reader.

A few things can be told: This is essentially a book about the Holocaust. However, it is not a book that takes place during that horrific event, except for a few pages. It’s a book about the Holocaust’s reverberations — mostly bad, but a few good, because what interests Reiken is human connectedness, how each generation follows the many that have gone before, like so many horses on a carousel (that cover image is not an accident).

While each first-person chapter is compelling, I found something else equally so: Reiken’s use of natural locations, from marsh to ocean to Dead Sea to forest primeval. For his characters, whether male or female, old or young, recent or past, these places offer safety, renewal, and meaning. Those places are, of course, not wholly knowable. Since Reiken (who, as Julie Orringer noted in her Washington Post review, tips his hand early on about how we are all interconnected but may not know it) is playing with linear narrative, to understand “Day for Night,” readers have to abandon being able to know everything. We have to surrender and trust in Reiken’s vision.

Of course, his characters are in the same position – except that they don’t always have anyone to trust. Is God there? Or are other people all we have? Ultimately, this is a huge question that Reiken takes on in an inventive, beautiful, and relevant way. “Day for Night” is a novel that will win awards. More important, it’s a novel that should be read.

The Millennium Effing Trilogy OR Why I Dislike Stieg Larsson’s Books

Monday, June 28th, 2010

This morning, literally minutes before someone on Twitter posted Nora Ephron’s cheeky sendup of Lisbeth Salander and “Kalle Fucking Blomkvist” from The New Yorker, I told my friend R.:

me: I finally finished HORNET’S NEST and hated it so much 

myfriendr: Expository.

Turgid.

me: Tell don’t show, the Stieg Larsson motto!

myfriendr: the whole book was tell, tell, tell. Not a single scene rendered.

NB: R.’s AIM name has been changed to protect him, because he truly is innocent — he is not about to go on record saying that he dislikes The Book That Saved Publishing 2010. 

I share that exchange with you as a way of showing you — take note of that, “showing you” — that I have been annoyed about the Stieg Larsson phenomenon for a while. 

Before you flame me, dear readers, let me state a few facts:

1. I have read all three of the Stieg Larsson Lisbeth Salander novels in their entirety. 

2. I am an avid mystery reader.

3. I have read a great deal of Swedish mystery fiction, including most of Mankell, a great swath of Sjowall/Wahloo, and all of Peter Hoeg, and some Jo Nesbo. 

I just want to forestall the inevitable “If you’d read the books, you’d know how good they are!” and “You must just hate mysteries” and “You obviously don’t get the Swedish crime fiction mentality” comments. I’ve read the books, I love mystery novels, and I have even interviewed Henning Mankell in person. 

Now let me explain what it is I truly don’t like about Larsson’s books, and then you can feel free to flame me for those opinions.

If you’re reading this blog, you probably already have heard the phrase “Show, don’t tell.” It’s thrown at writers of every age and stage. Even elementary-school students are reminded that they can show that a character is angry instead of simply stating “He was angry.”

Of course, it isn’t as easy as it sounds to “show” rather than “tell.” If it were, there would be far more beautifully written books. Unfortunately, because people believe that they are “showing” things simply by writing them down, there are many, many badly written books. 

I won’t try to argue about whether or not Stieg Larsson is a good writer or a bad writer. What I will argue is that his Millennium Trilogy is rife with telling: “He was anything but pleased.” “In spite of his respect for Astrid Lindgren — whose books he loved — he detested the nickname.” And so on and so on. We never “see” anything in Larsson’s books, because the author is too busy describing the most mundane moments. Why do we need to know exactly how Lisbeth Salander puts her groceries away? The passage to which I refer from “The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo” does not in any way enhance our understanding of her much-mentioned but never confirmed Asperger’s Syndrome, or any of the other DSM-IV categories into which she might fall. It simply tells us how she puts the groceries away.

But the most important thing about the “Show, don’t tell” rule is that by showing and not telling, authors allow readers to take an active role in stories. One of the things I most detest about commercial fiction, even at its best, is that by telling us things it takes away our ability to feel those things, to imagine those things, and to react to them with authentic emotion. 

I welcome YOUR authentic emotions, now, about The Millennium Trilogy. Thanks for reading!

The Unbearable Lightness of Writing: For #215800

Tuesday, June 22nd, 2010

Note; For more information about #215800, read this post from me and check out the entire experience at Bindu Wiles’ blog.

Today marks two weeks in the #215800 yoga/writing practice challenge, and I’d like to talk about endorphins.

We all know about “runner’s high” and the endorphin addiction that result from hard, consistent exercise. However, since my yoga choice for this challenge is spending 30 minutes, five days a week, in savasana or “corpse” pose, I’m not exactly chasing an exercise rush.

No, mine is a “writer’s high.” I’ve heard about this for years and years, known that many writers experience that elusive concept of “flow” — but I’d never found a process that worked well enough for me to get there.

I spoke in a previous blog entry about how powerful it has been for me to combine mindfulness with writing. In the past two weeks, I’ve written over 8,000 words on my novel in progress. Considering I hadn’t touched that “in progress” work for three years, that’s a lot of new material.

More important, though, is my experience of writing those words. It hasn’t been effortless. Like good, hard exercise, it’s taken determination and some huffing and puffing! Yet, like that exercise, once I’m in to the flow of writing, I don’t notice the work as much as I do the progress.

That’s why I’m paraphrasing the great Milan Kundera’s title, here: The work is hard — “unbearable” — yet I experience it as flow — “lightness.” 

May your own writing or reading go with the flow today! Peace be with you.

Recommended Reading: “The Ice Princess” by Camilla Läckberg

Thursday, June 17th, 2010

Contrary to popular opinion and press, people do talk about books in everyday life — at least they do in bookstores. I was in one of my fave local chain stores yesterday (a Virginian cannot always get to Politics & Prose!), and had a fairly spirited and informed discussion with a clerk and two other customers about

"The Ice Princess" by Camilla Lackberg

Swedish crime fiction. It happens that The Washington Post ran a long piece yesterday on this very topic, but that’s not how the conversation began. It started because one woman was buying a Stieg Larsson novel and I asked her if she’d read “The Ice Princess” by Camilla Läckberg, yet. 

“That book was mentioned in the Post today!” she said. (I won’t go into detail about the article except to wonder: How could they not have mentioned Maj Sjowall and Per Wahloo?) I told her I’d read Lackberg’s first American release a few weeks ago. Before I knew it, four of us were off and running, chatting about l’affaire Larsson (Will his life partner ever give up the partially finished fourth manuscript? Did you see the movie? etc.).

I realize that I haven’t posted any reviews of anything in a long time here, but that’s going to change — and I think talking about “The Ice Princess” is the perfect way to kick off that change, because while I really enjoyed the book, I have some cavils with it, too.

I realize that I haven’t posted any reviews of anything in a long time here, but that’s going to change — and I think talking about “The Ice Princess” is the perfect way to kick off that change, because while I really enjoyed the book, I have some cavils with it, too.

Others did not have the same cavils: Publishers Weekly and Booklist both gave “The Ice Princess” starred reviews. I think that may be due to the sheer joy of reading a Scandinavian crime novel that is written by a woman — a young woman, with a modern sensibility. Some of the things I liked best about Läckberg’s book were its feminine preoccupations. You may find a mystery protagonist obsessing about which lingerie to don for a romantic evening silly, but I found it a refreshing change from middle-aged detectives smoking and drinking beer.

The protagonist here is not male and not a detective; she’s Erica Falck, a thirty-something nonfiction writer who returns to her hometown of Fjällbacka in order to clear out her family home after her parents are killed in an auto accident. When she finds an old friend hideously dead, another old friend, Patrik (conveniently a police officer), gets involved. 

Then Erica and Patrik get involved — and while there’s plenty more going on in this novel, with the Swedish equivalent of Southern lit gothic characters creeping around, I found the mature affair between these two to be one of the highlights of the book. Läckberg doesn’t play games with the reader about her lovebirds. They’re not deliberately kept apart or forced to flirt through this book so that we can have them consummate their relationship in another volume. Both a little gun shy, Erica and Patrik are a thinking woman’s Sam and Diane. 

However, it’s not just the romantic relationship that drives this book — It’s also the relationship each and every one of us has with our family and hometown of origin. There’s some repetitive writing and dialogue in “The Ice Princess” (I could not possibly blame that on Läckberg without being able to read Swedish) and some wooden characterization (e.g., the matriarch of Fjällbacka’s most illustrious family, Nelly Lorentz, is nearly a Grimm’s witch), but the push-and-pull Erica feels about her past makes this a book with a decidedly different “Swedish crime” bent.

Solitude: For #215800

Tuesday, June 15th, 2010

Many of my friends are single, and some of those single friends have always been thus: Never married, partnered, whatever. I’ve learned that I and those friends have very different approaches to social obligations. For many people who live alone (some of them work alone, too, telecommuting from houses and apartments), getting out of the house with others, or even having people in for dinner, is a treat. This isn’t because they are necessarily lonely. In fact, most of the people I know who live alone are quite happy with their own company. 

No, it’s because that social obligation is a break from the normal routine. So today was for me. My husband took our two teenaged (well, one will be 13 in a few months!) daughters to a regional big loud overcrowded too-hot amusement park. All three of them know better than to drag me along. The last time they did so, I wound up perched on a fiberglass toadstool in the kiddy section, trying to get cell phone reception so I could talk to a magazine editor in New York.

The noisy trio departed this morning at nine and won’t be home until that hour tonight. I had no meetings scheduled today, and so time has unfolded with the kind of calm dignity that it has when there are no unwelcome interruptions. I put the dogs out and let them back in. I made and took some business calls. I did some writing for work and my usual amount of tweeting. Since I’m following this #215800 discipline, I spent 30 minutes in a yogic corpse pose doing prana breathing. I broke for lunch and a short reading session, did some more work, and suddenly it was six o’clock: Time to feed the dogs, rustle up some dinner for myself, and think about my evening.

Sounds good, right? It was! What a calm, productive, and lovely day.

I. want. more.

What struck me, especially during the suddenly quiet morning hours, was how much I craved a day without obligations. The odd thing is that I don’t necessarily have that many obligations! Although I am married and have two children, but spouse and daughters are remarkably and blessedly self-sufficient. They do not require me to care for them first and myself second.

However, they do generate a lot of energy and noise when they’re around. There’s always a television on, a radio blaring, voices, footsteps, clanking cabinet doors… This is all normal. Happy, even! But after a week of practicing mindful yoga and writing, I decided to let myself want the silence. The more of it I get, the more content and relaxed I am. 

In other words, I would like this break from my routine to be part of my routine. It is probably time for me to start thinking about applying for a writer’s retreat. I welcome anyone else’s thoughts about solitude and creativity! I hope your Tuesday has come to a quiet end.

Liturgy and Energy: About #215800

Saturday, June 12th, 2010

Last week, after a long, long weekend of activity and stress (I had my parents-in-law visiting and my eldest daughter was preparing for her senior prom), I tweeted “Yea, verily, today is a day of rest.” One woman responded and said “What a great word; we don’t hear ‘verily’ all that often.”

She’s right — but some of us heard it early and often, at church. When I was a wee lassie, the Episcopal Church in which I was raised still used what is now referred to as The 1928 Prayer Book, and it was full of deeply connotative language, including words like “verily” and “yea” and “unworthy.” I was even taught, pre-confirmation (by that time, the Church had a new Book of Common Prayer), to strike the left side of my chest a certain number of times during the Great Confession to “acknowledge and bewail my manifold sins and wickednesses.”

The thing is, I remember that so well, and now I know why I remember it so well: Whenever I combine an action with words, it sticks with me. I believe this makes me a “kinaesthetic” learner (I’d always believed I was a visual learner, but that is probably because I’ve always been pretty sedentary — you can’t realize that movement helps you when you’re sitting still).

A few weeks ago I began to consider how and why certain pieces of the sacred were affecting my life. I won’t go too far into my musings, because that would be boring — the important thing is that I realized for writers of nearly all stripes, early experiences with worship and ritual strongly influence our work. No wonder I am at ease throwing phrases like “Yea, verily” around. I learned that “foreign” language at a life stage that allows imprinting.

However, liturgy of any kind has more power than that. We sit, stand, and kneel in my church to remind us of how our words connect to our actions, but also of how they connect to our souls/psyches/spirits. I’d forgotten this until my friend Bindu Wiles announced her Twitter community practice of #215800: 21 days, 5 days a week, of writing 800 words and doing some kind of yoga each day along with that writing. Each participant has the option of taking a yoga class, using a yoga DVD, or spending 15-30 minutes each day in savasana or “corpse” pose.

Since I’m a yoga newbie, I decided to try the latter. I’ve been doing savasana for 20-30 minutes each day while listening to Taize chants. “Taize chants” are the quiet, repetitive hymns of an ecumenical Christian community founded in France after World War II by a monk named Brother Roger. Many Protestant churches have regular Taize services, and that’s how I was introduced to this music. A few years ago while vacationing in Burgundy with some dear friends my husband and I visited the town of Taize and the community grounds. We attended a simple noonday service in the town church and listened to the Taize brothers sing their chants. My friend, a preacher’s kid and a lifelong active Christian, turned to me and said “I got more out of that hour than I ever have out of weeklong women’s retreats.”

I tell you all that because I believe — no, feel — that Taize, like yoga, is all about mindfulness. “Mindfulness” is the part I’d been leaving out of my writing practice all of these years. I knew I couldn’t and shouldn’t wait for inspiration. I knew I had to apply “bum glue” and just stay in my chair and before the blank or partially scribbled on page. I knew I should just write — morning pages, freewriting, journal entries, whatever. I knew all of these things, yet yea, verily, still I did not write.

I’ve been working on a novel for several years, now. The last time I wrote a single word on that novel was in 2007. Yet after just one session of savasana, I wrote 800 words. As of today, I’ve written 4,000 words. 

That might now be remarkable in and of itself. I know that there are writers out there who have spates of productivity and churn out thousands of words in a single day. What is remarkable about this is how contented I’ve been while doing it. The writing isn’t necessarily easy, or seamless, or perfect. This practice is not effortless. It is, however, beautiful and gratifying. 

All those days, weeks, months, years, decades, I left out the one thing I needed: Mindfulness. For you, the thing “left out” in your writing might be different. Yet I urge you to consider intention and ritual. No, not the kind of ritual that involves making tea the way you like it or making sure you have the right kind of Uniball pens. A ritual that connects you with something more than yourself and your own process, a ritual that connects you to the divine.

Namaste. And in the words of my own church: Peace be with you.

A New Writing Challenge: #215800

Tuesday, June 8th, 2010

Greetings, readers. Today I’m starting something new and different — and while I don’t plan to blog about it every day, I do want to share it with you because I think it’s such a great combination of real-life action and online interaction.

My friend Bindu Wiles is offering a yoga/writing practice called “21 5 800,” which means 21 days, 5 days a week, of writing 800 words combined with at least 15 minutes of yoga (we all have the choice of taking a class, using a DVD, or spending time in savasana/corpse pose). 

I’m a yoga newbie, so I’ve chosen the savasana option, and I’ll be listening to Taize chants each day to encourage mindfulness. I haven’t set a daily time for writing, although one may naturally emerge.

I’ll be writing a new passage of my novel-in-progress…”in progress” now for something like five years! I can’t wait to see where this focused challenge will lead my characters and plot.

What’s On Your Nightstand? The Semi-Regular Feature Continues…

Thursday, June 3rd, 2010

If you’re reading this, there’s a chance you’ve been reading my various blog iterations for a while — loyal readers are the only kind I have. All two of them! I should call my blog readers “The Few, The Proud, The Patient.” Sometimes I go months without blogging. So far, since 2004, I haven’t gone years without blogging, but never say never…

One of the first blog “features” I “invented” was a regular post called “What’s On Your Nightstand?” I had just become the Books Editor at AOL, and we were trying to gently pull AOL users out of the message board chat rooms and into the light of blogginess. (Upshot: What a mess! There was a reason those chat rooms were popular; they were the true precursor of Facebook and Twitter. But that’s another story for another day.) While I wasn’t then and remain sadly less community-minded than I should be, I did want a blog spot in which I could hear about what other people were reading, wanted to read, looked forward to reading, recommended to others…

Yeah. I totally napped while others invented Goodreads etc. That brings back painful memories of an AOL interview in which one of the company’s enfants terribles repeatedly snapped the fingers of both hands in succession in front of my face while barking “What’s the killer app for books? What. is. the. killer. app. for. books?” They hired me anyway. AOL no longer has a Books Channel. Res ipsa loquitur.

So OK, so all right, I’m not an Internet visionary. I accept that. What I am is a woman with great taste in books and a certain amount of writing talent, which is why after AOL gave me the boot I blogged for two years for Publishers Weekly (when they stopped paying bloggers, I stopped blogging; that’s also another post for another time, and in no way reflects on the current Publishers Weekly as they are now independent and heading towards a bright future), and then was given a wonderful opportunity at WETA-PBS here in the DC area which is my current gig, The WETA Book Studio.

I love posting things on The Book Studio, but it’s a different animal altogether than this sad, neglected Still Life with Book Maven blog. No longer! I’m filled with new purpose and energy and would like to channel it into something more productive than scrubbing the crevices in my kitchen with Simple Green and a putty knife. Whoops, TMI…

So: What IS on your nightstand? Share one title, share twelve. This is different from my Tweetmeme #fridayreads. Friday Reads is all about what you’re actually reading. WOYN is all about your TBR stack. The more titles, the merrier. 

As for my own TBR pile, it includes the following titles, all of which are in different stages of Being Read: 

Matterhorn by Karl Marlantes

The Invisible Bridge by Julie Orringer

A Curable Romantic by Joseph Skibell

The Imperfectionists by Tom Rachman

The Marrowbone Marble Company by Glenn Taylor

Serena by Ron Rash

Bloodroot by Amy Greene

Amandine by Marlena di Blasi

Oh the shame…but really, that’s what this feature is all about: Confession. Which books are you neglecting? Which books are you struggling with? Which books are the ones you can’t put down? Tell me, lads and lassies. I’m listening.

Character Flaws: Inspector Lynley’s Class-y Behavior

Tuesday, June 1st, 2010

SPOILER ALERT: Far down in this post I discuss a couple of plot points in Elizabeth George’s latest Inspector Lynley novel, “This Body of Death.” Feel free to skip if you don’t want to know a thing…

I told you I was going to start blogging again…and I’m going to bring back several of my old “features,” including “What’s On Your Nightstand?” One of those old features was “Character Flaws,” in which I reconsider famous or archetypal characters from literature. Since I’m unbelievably lazy and careless about adding tags and categories to my blog post, you may not be able to find all of the former entries. However, since there were only two or three, you’re not missing much.

Ha! Ha! Well, that will change. I’m back and with a renewed sense of bloggy purpose, which brings me to today’s subject: Inspector Thomas Lynley, the blonde, blue-blooded, and bloody complicated chief detective of Elizabeth George’s mystery novels.

I’ve been a huge fan (yes! I said “fan,” not “reader” — sorry, but that describes it best in the case of books in series) of George’s books since the first in the Lynley/Havers/St. James series came out in 1988, “A Great Deliverance.” I was hooked early and hard by the quartet of genteel English people at the series’ center — Thomas Lynley, Simon St. James, Deborah Cotter, and Lady Helen Clyde. I blame the aunt who introduced me to Agatha Christie; from there it was a slippery slope to Margery Allingham, Dorothy Sayers, Ngaio Marsh, Minette Walters, and so many more authors who penned (and pen) mystery novels that use the British class system (to a greater or lesser extent) as one aspect of their work.

Thomas Lynley, AKA Lord Asherton (he’s the 8th Earl thereof), has always struggled with his noble lineage and status. I know that  many of my fellow readers may disagree with me, but I’ve never bought into Lynley’s figurative forelock-tugging about his rank and privilege. He moans about it and tries to get all of his fellow police officers to treat him like one of the chavs when he’s on duty — but he has little compunction all through the series about using his family’s inherited lucre to indulge his propensity for Saville Row togs and very, very, very expensive vintage automobiles.

Also, let’s face it: He couldn’t marry Deborah, the daughter of his valet Joseph Cotter. He went for Lady Helen Clyde, she of the silly shoes and thinly developed personality (notice I did not say “thinly developed character;” I think Elizabeth George is very deliberate, canny, and smart about what she chooses to emphasize in her books).

In “This Body of Death,” the newest Elizabeth George Lynley novel, “Tommy” Lynley has another choice to make between the lower- and upper-class women in his life. This time, it’s not just personal and/or romantic, either; it’s personal and professional. (See? I told you George is deliberate about these things. Even if you don’t care for this novel — and my colleague Maureen Corrigan certainly didn’t — it’s wonderful to see George’s wheels turning as her career progresses). Will Lynley give his loyalty (and his kisses) to new Chief Inspector Isabel Ardery, or remain connected in solidarity and friendship to his former partner Detective Sergeant Barbara Havers?

For me, “This Body of Death” will stand as the series title in which Elizabeth George tears the shrink wrap off of her Ken doll of a character, Lynley, exposing him to light, air, and his own limitations. There’s a particularly poignant scene in which Lynley meets Havers at a motorway Little Chef (sort of the British equivalent of a Denny’s). His distaste at her eager consumption of a fry-up lunch, his obvious discomfort at having his superb auto in the parking lot, and his growing disaffection for his old team make the reader as uneasy as Barbara.

Lynley is a right toff, in other words. How fabulous! Instead of trying to make all of her characters politically correct, Elizabeth George is choosing to make all of her characters complex. I look forward to what happens next. The books, taken individually, may be uneven. The series, taken as a whole, is a triumph.