Hilary Zarabi-Aazam
Originally published in Wilder Voice, volume 3, issue 5.
I make it a habit not to do too many "just links" entries. Find links your damn self, I say. And it feels cheap, somehow, not to gloss. But, consider this a link day. I just closed a three-hour tour in the Writing Center. SIDE NOTE: For those who don't know what the Writing Center is, it is one of the many wonderful things Oberlin has to offer. Located in the first floor of Mudd, the Writing Center provides peer tutoring for any and all. I can tell you that I no longer hand in a paper without getting it looked at, often more than once, in just about every stage, at the Writing Center.
Anyway, I'm tired, and while I will be putting up a couple more posts before I go to bed, these are things that I might write more about if I had the time but probably won't, and, as such, I'll just give you the links before they fall through the cracks of this blog into the realm of things I want to do but probably won't.
(1) Over at Bubblegum Aesthetics, another Oberlin blog, there is an excellent post up about Gossip Girl and The O.C.. Of course, like most good criticism, it's about more than that. Here's a taster:
She is, in other words, a budding media critic, and the best representation of the complex relationship between trash and art, irony and sincerity, surface and depth, that Gossip Girl offers.
Intrigued? Go, read.
(2) There's an excellent--both funny and movin, actually--post up at The Kenyon Review by Brian Doyle (hat tip to Ezra Klein) on rejection letters. Of course, it's about much more than that. It's about editing and writing for magazines in the now. Here's a taster:
One of the very best: a rejection note sent by the writer Stefan Merken to an editor who had rejected one of his short stories. “Please forgive me for not accepting your rejection letter,” wrote Merken. “At this time I cannot accept a rejection of my short story. I accept more than 99 percent of the rejections I receive. Many I don’t agree with, but I realize that accepting a piece of fiction for publication is a very subjective judgment call. My acceptance of your rejection letter is also a subjective process and therefore I am returning your letter to you. I did read your letter. I read every letter I receive. Your letter was well-written, but due to time constraints from my own writing schedule, I am unable to make editorial comments. I do make mistakes. Don’t you, as an editor, be disheartened by this role reversal. The road of publishing is long and tedious. You need successful publications and I need for successful publications to print my stories. I will expect to see my story in your next publication. Good luck in the future.”
Intruiged? Go, read.
I'm done with the link section of this post, and onto some original thoughts. Well, one anyway. Ezra Klein, whom I hat tipped for highlighting the Doyle piece, hat tipped Andrew Sullivan (of The Atlantic), who hat tipped Helen Rittelmeyer of The Cigarette Smoking Blog. As far as I know, she was the one who started the whole thing off. I would give links to all of these people, but I recommend you do it yourself.
This chain of links is fascinating on many levels, The Cigarette Smoking Blog is one of those mid-level (in terms of readership) blogs, but, apparently Andrew Sullivan (whose blog is at a much higher level) reads her. Sullivan, in turn, is read by Klein (whose blog is at a level roughly equal to Sullivan). Along the way, I imagine that people like myself, who run small (or, in my case, very small) blogs link to it. I wish I could see the whole chain and all the spokes and hubs (to follow Naomi Klein).
This is one of the wonderful thing about--in particular--the lefty blogosphere. There is no shame in showing where your post came from; in fact, it's a sign of (1) good manners and (2) erudition. In many ways, the blogosphere--and this isn't a particularly new idea here--is one of the better breeding grounds for ideas because of the way that everyone directly responds to each other, and the networks of memes and thoughts is constantly developing. It's fascinating to think that this man, Doyle, wrote a piece that has branched out across the blogosphere in a matter of hours. What's the word for that? Zeitgeist? I think that's right (I'm not being sarcastic). Anyway, it's a good day for Doyle, and a good day for the blogosphere.
|