The post-literate 1980s - Thriller to the rescue

I've been engaged in an ongoing exchange with my friend Eric Caplan, a McGill University Prof. (I don't hold that against him). We like to talk about the state of the arts, he from the standpoint of pop music (he's a fine musician, plays with an occasional cover band of university associates calling themselves The Diminished Faculties), me from the point of view of literature. Lately, I've started calling the 1980s "the post-literate 80s" since I can't think of a writer who emerged during that period who has influenced in any meaningful way the writers of the current generation. On the contrary, it seems to me that younger writers are looking farther and farther back for their influences. In American literature for instance, Jonathan Safran Foer seems to have more in common with Isaac Bashevis-Singer than Philip Roth or Saul Bellow. In a recent e-mail Eric said that Madonna and Michael Jackson were the last two artists to really make a pop music splash. My point about the post-literate 80s made. Perhaps this also explains the resurgence of groups like the Beatles and new interest in Bob Dylan. I think it's more than just nostalgia. These are the musicians that remain genuinely artistically relevant and influential. Reminder: In February Epic/Legacy is planning to release a special 25th anniversary edition of Thriller to honour the watershed cultural moment of its original release. Industry execs are sitting on shpilkes, hoping against hope that this will mean at least a temporary stay of execution for the recording industry as we know it.

Hmmm

If veterinarians have the means to harmlessly subdue a 1500 pound charging rhinoceros, or 1000 pound polar bear, or Siberian tiger, why can't the police find a completely safe, non-lethal method of dealing with an agitated man?

If you're keeping score 2

Karlheinz Schrieber 3
Brian Mulroney 1 (at least until next week)
Members of Parliament 1
Canadian People 0

Best 100 Books Season

Does Anyone find these things at all helpful?

Over at "Thirsty" the Biblioasis http://biblioasis.blogspot.com/2007/12/globe-100-plus.html Dan Wells complains About the Globe 100 list of "best" books of the year. He is disappointed that the so-called "small" publishers, in spite of receiving excellent reviews for their books, tend to get shafted in these year-end assessments. It's hard to disagree.

The lists certainly afford ("afford" being the optimal word here) certain publishers one last chance (after awards season failure) to plaster a gold star on their book covers, and not uncoincidentally, another opportunity to advertise their books in the newspaper in time for the Christmas rush ie. "chosen one of the 100 best books etc."

What does making the list mean from a reviewer's standpoint? Not much according to Bookninja's George Murray who has contributed book reviews to the Globe & Mail but has never been consulted for a top 100 list. He writes, "The thing I find funny about the 100 is that the reviewers themselves aren’t consulted. Reviews I’ve written in the past have led to 100 listings, but I only found out by opening the paper in December."

I've never found these lists particularly useful as either gift-purchasing guides or as a guides for my own future reading. The tongue in cheek approach employed by TyeeBooks.ca seems more appropriate. Their list is less self-important, more adventuresome and definitely more fun, with lots of "small" press recommendations too. Here's the link to last year's Christmas list: http://thetyee.ca/Books/2006/12/19/Booked/ I look forward to this year's installment from them.

If you're keeping score

Karlheinz Schreiber 2
Brian Mulroney 1
Members of Parliament 0
Canadian People 0

Montreal this morning, 30 cms and counting

SNOW

This offering of
heaven grounded
abundance,
the mind is
for a moment
indiscriminate
to roam an expanse of land,
envision a span of lake
like a lush carpet of light
uninterrupted;
and then thoughts
get folded
neatly as bed linen
into the mundane,
bus schedules,
school closings,
the streets shimmering
linoleum white
and in every quarter
amid the perk-perk-drip
of coffee pots
and swish-hum
of dishwashers
there is kitchen-talk,
some time needed
some extra time
for another phone call
from neighbours
searching for new
and amusing ways
to describe deluge,
a fresh outpouring
unlike any
in recent memory,
a double dose of milk
in the morning coffee.

The uneasy fit between poetry and awards

I've been a regular reader of Alex Good's website for interesting links and thoughtful book reviews for some time now (www.goodreports.net). He recently held his fourth annual Runaway Jury (with Carmine Starnino and Paul Vermeersch) to reassess the GG poetry selections. The most interesting comment I think came from Carmine who said "This country is bursting at the seams with word-happy, form-shifting poets hungry for change and constantly on the look-out for what Auden called "new rhetoric." But rather than tracking this large-scale shift, this leap into "new rhetoric," this year’s jury produced a shortlist that feels like a standing hop." Zach Wells, another one my favourites, also commented on this (http://www.zachariahwells.blogspot.com/). Carmine may be right, but my thought was that the most interesting moves artistically have always taken place away from the centre, at the margins. Why should the Canada Council (or any other cultural institution) be expected to "track" changes in artistic innovation. They are by definition certifiers of a cultural norm, a standard that is acceptable and typically already widely accepted ("bluechip," Carmine calls it.) The Domanski choice is eminently understandable in this regard (as is the tendency to award authors for their careers instead of their books.) In the arts there is no more uncomfortable fit then awards for poetry. This also begs the question of the role of public funding for poetry production and publication and whether it is relevant and even needed any longer. It seems to me that poetry is flourishing in print and online because the means are available to inexpensively produce, re-produce and widely distribute it. The same can not be said of any other artform which requires huge resources and benefits from public funding (visual arts, dance, theatre, film). The public subsidizing of poetry publications and poetry-related events seems to have achieved very little with respect to generating new audiences, more book buyers or more proficient and relevant practioners. I don't think we should expect otherwise.