1. New poem up at Translations of Dead German Poets.
2. NO MORE BOOK REVIEWS! I swear this time. They take up too much of my free brain space. No more (well, at least not in the foreseeable future). A published book review really takes a lot of time. You have an initial draft, edits/back and forth with an editor, and also the time it took to read the book. My desire for my own writing and book choices certainly outranks that of publishing a measly review. Only books I have chosen for myself so be prepared for more write-ups for fiction coming soon. 
3. Playing catch up on my favorite blogs. I’ve been a bit quiet lately. I’m not a big fan of the way that WordPress organizes the blogs I follow; plus I am sometimes negligent in pressing the ‘Follow’ button. I’ve always used Google Reader but now with its demise, I must find something new to organize everything. Suggestions greatly appreciated.
4. Things I’m happy with: Writing! Yes, I’ve finally gotten some more words down on the page for a book I’m writing. This plot is a bit twisty, so may I share my new favorite virtual corkboard that helps me stay organized and it’s free? Definitely recommended. www.stixy.com/
5. Even with all of this mind-stretching-in-different-directions, I still try to put up a few interesting writerly, bookish things on the ole Twitter feed even if I can’t get to the blog. www.twitter.com/AcidFreePulp

While on my beach vacation, I started with David Sedaris’ newest book. I’ve been a big fan for a long time and have even listened to all of his audiobooks. With the exception of Squirrel Meets Chipmunk, I’ve loved them all. I was so excited to get my hands on his newest, Let’s Explore Diabetes with Owls.

Unlike his past essay collections, this one is uneven. There were moments that I absolutely loved it. I noticed that he excelled–like he always does–when writing about his family. I was less enthralled with his time visiting dentists in France. I couldn’t help but feel let down when I read a passage that had that absolute gut-busting Sedaris humor and observation because unfortunately the collection has some lackluster essays as well.

This collection is marked “Essays, Etc.” That et cetera is sometimes satirical “short stories” or a long poem closing the collection. They, of course, had humor but they served as a way for the writer to vent his frustrations with certain aspects or individuals in the United States. Although, sometimes very funny, I found myself hoping for their end so I could move on to parts about his father or what other strange mischief Sedaris got into as a child.

Although somewhat missing the usual Sedaris pizzazz, there were still essays that were a pleasure to read. When the audiobook comes out, I will still listen to it. David Sedaris, no matter what, is an exquisite story teller.

Below, is a short video about the title of the book.

Even while running around all week trying to tie up loose ends in anticipation of my super sunny vacation, I paused to go through the Flavorwire 25 Vintage Photos of Librarians Being Awesome.

Favorite? #2 for obvious reasons. Enjoy!

But anyhoo, I was one of the lucky souls that was able to grab a seat at the incredibly packed Center for Fiction last night. Adler was there to read a few excerpts from Speedboat and Pitch Dark, followed by an interesting Q&A where she discussed writing the two novels, her time as a staff writer at the New Yorker, amongst other topics. Adler was quick and witty and the entire audience loved her. I even brought a couple of lovely friends who were visiting from Germany who had heard all of my fellow New York writerly friends and me kvell about Renata Adler and Speedboat. Beforehand, we all bought books. I have never read Pitch Dark and I can’t wait to get started. My German friends are so excited to begin Speedboat.

After the talk, Renata Adler signed everyone’s books. I told her about the class I taught a few years ago to undergrads and how much they enjoyed her book. She wanted to know what other books were taught in the class, too. When I told her Philip K. Dick, she replied back saying she really needed to read him.

If you were unable to attend yesterday evening’s event, the Center for Fiction posted a recent interview they conducted with her. A favorite snippet is when she talks about the process of writing her novels (which are not in any traditional structure),

Oh, I always shuffle. And there, the computer is just a disaster because the only thing I’ve ever been compulsively neat about is typing. I type with two fingers, and so I would always make a mistake near the end of the page, and since White Out is no use, I would throw the thing out and start again at the beginning. Then along came the computer and I thought it was going to help because you can move everything around all the time and you can change every sentence 50 different ways in seconds. But that’s exactly what I don’t want, because then what was I doing? If the computer can shift everything in a split-second, then what am I doing here? That’s what I used to do so carefully. One of the things that’s almost comically a problem is AutoCorrect, and what AutoCorrect thinks I’m saying.

I have just discovered this week that a personal favorite, Project Gutenberg, has many editions of Punch, or the London Charivari available for FREE! In addition to issues of the magazine, Project Gut also offers some of their books. In Mr. Punch’s Book of Love (subtitle: Being the Humours of Courtship and Matrimony),

Only recently we heard a gentleman telling a group of people in a hotel smoking-room that Mark Twain got a hundred pounds from Punch for writing that famous line, “I used your soap two years ago; since then I have used no other.”

Punch was a humor and satire magazine founded in 1841. According to Wikipedia, “Reflecting their satiric and humorous intent, the two editors took for their name and masthead the anarchic glove puppet, Mr. Punch, of Punch and Judy; the name also referred to a joke made early on about one of the magazine’s first editors, Lemon, that ‘punch is nothing without lemon.’”

The original illustrations are a nice treat to accompany the texts that Project Gut has collected. I love to scroll through old political cartoons (don’t get me going on a collection of Boss Tweed & Tammany Hall cartoons; the hours will pass by).

Yet again, I have stumbled upon something new which will ultimately distract me from being productive in one way or another!

Some people squish stress balls in their hands, others clean their whole home. I choose to translate poems by dead and forgotten (at least, forgotten in the US) German-language poets to refocus and forget about everyday stresses. So without further ado…

TRANSLATIONS OF DEAD GERMAN POETS

Let me sidetrack for a moment and say: I am skeptical of journal editors who engage in far too much editing. By that I mean, in regards to literary magazines and journals there should only be light editing when necessary. Editors should be supportive and want to work with you and publish your work in its finest form. Everyone should shine. 

Now, back to our story. My helpful and attentive contact was trying to hear back from the final editor but he was having trouble contacting her. As a reminder, I was asked in December and now it is March. I had not concerned myself too much because I knew it would get done. The editors seemed placated. The other day, I finally received the hold-out’s edits. I started to look through them. She immediately wanted to re-title it with far worse titles (this is always a red flag!!).  Her line edits were terrible and then I realized she clearly had never read the revised addition and was commenting on an old draft. I stopped reading.

With the exception of my contact, this gaggle of editors was a complete horror show! They were completely unprofessional and their comments, quite frankly, were rubbish (which is unfortunate because this is a well-regarded journal). I suppose my point is, it doesn’t matter how far you are along with your writing and/or publishing career, you should not have to compromise what you think is right or you are comfortable with. You should not have to change your story or poem or essay to accommodate a group of unprofessional knuckleheads. Send your writing some place else where they aren’t running a dog and pony show. I have had plenty of wonderful experiences with editors who offer constructive feedback and edits. Remember, it’s never a good sign if they are hard to reach, unprofessional, trying to chop up your story, etc. YOU CAN ALWAYS TAKE A SUBMISSION BACK!

I have grappled with the idea of posting my email to them. I will not name names out of decorum even though I would never again recommend this publication to a single friend of mine. I hope by including this email, it can remind others in similar predicaments that they don’t have to stand for crummy editors but do remember that you should not burn bridges. Don’t roll over but do let them know what is problematic. Take back your story immediately and send it some place else.

Okay, look, I’m annoyed but please keep in mind that my annoyance is not with you at all. I already sent back edits which this person clearly did not read. I am disregarding all of her edits including wanting to change the title. The title shall not be changed. She can refer to the draft I last sent you if she would like to notate that. I don’t mind doing a little bit of house cleaning (some of which I definitely agreed with in that previous round; they made good points which I had already been thinking of). I have never worked with a journal/magazine/publisher that demanded so many edits from a short story (and an extremely short story to boot). So with that said, they can take it as is with what I sent the other time or pass. I haven’t had this much rigmarole with editors before…I don’t have time for unprofessionalism.

p.s. and they should know better than to ask a writer to change a title unless it’s a story about getting my period and I’ve titled it “Crimson Tide.” 

 

**Just as a disclaimer, I personally know my contact, so the post script–meant in all seriousness to this particular gaggle of editors–might only be appropriate because of my aforementioned friendship with the contact.**

I recently decided to conduct a little experiment. I submitted a story of mine to an anthology that required a fee. You paid it separately via PayPal so you are able to email them first and pay later. I did only the former and purposefully neglected the latter. I was informed twice about my lack of payment. I received the final email today: “Just a reminder: We’ve received your story but not your fee. If we don’t get it in the next week or so (before the deadline), we won’t be able to accept your submission.”

Which leads me to my subconscious dismissal of publications that only publish work by writers that have paid to have their writing appear there. It wasn’t until recently that what used to be subconscious had surfaced to the front of my mind. As a reader, I avoid such publications. Why do I want to read writing that someone paid to have placed? It could be entirely well-deserved of publication but the nasty business of reader’s fee has blemished it all for me. When a journal, magazine, or anthology puts out a call for submissions, it should be just that. “Hey! We’re looking for some great writing. Send it our way.” It should not be a palm greasing monetary transaction that excludes those who cannot afford to send cash-in-hand to every lame publication out there.

It is a real disappointment that writers in general are always being asked to work for free (although, there are moments when it could be acceptable–for example, certain non-profits). I think, in a way, it is even more of a travesty to make them pay for their own work as well as narrowing the pool of submitted work to choose from. Just remember, there are plenty of wonderful publishers who are looking for exciting, new writing and don’t charge you to submit. Now, paying writers for their work–that’s a whole other story.

This doc is definitely worth a watch. Regardless of your opinion about Roth or his writing, it really is hard to deny that he is a very prominent and successful 20th century American writer. His novels are always exhaling a breath of zeitgeist. The film mostly concerns itself with interviewing Roth with some peripheral chatting with friends and the very strangely airy and otherworldy, Claudia Roth Pierpont (no relation) who was the only element that took me out of the whole fascinating film.

Roth was witty and open in the interviews and it was intriguing to see that he still stay friends with people from high school and college who remain his readers while he has a novel in progress. The more humorous bits were when he talked about his very loving and normal parents (the antithesis to the Portnoy mother & father). A funny anecdote he told was before Portnoy’s Complaint was to be released, he brought his parents in from New Jersey to New York City and prepared them for the book by telling them that they might be hounded by journalists and, of course, be compared to the fictitious parents within the novel. He parents left and got into a cab. When Roth asked his father later what happened, he said that his mother started to cry and say that her son had “delusions of grandeur” and that nothing big would come of Portnoy’s Complaint.

In the wake of Roth’s announcement that he is retiring from writing, The Guardian put out an article of Roth’s picks for his best novels. The article concludes with,

Referring to fellow writers including John Updike, Joyce Carol Oates, EL Doctorow and William Styron, Roth said he “ran with some very fast horses … Now, the Nobel prize committee doesn’t agree with me. They think we’re provincial. But I suspect they’re a little bit provincial.”

Carson is one of those people who has slashes included in their profession: poet/translator/writer/professor. I really have a soft spot for The Beauty of the Husband, which can fall into the slashie category (is it a poem? a novel? what is it?). Carson, herself, subtitles this book “a fictional essay in 29 tangos.” Is it a dance routine? This book also begs to be reread (which I must do one of these days).

I am happy to see that Anne Carson has been popping up in national publications. With VIDA’s annual report out recently and the big hoopla about the recent NYmag spread on Philip Roth¹, I’ve been on hyper alert about the gender bias in publishing. So, on a normal day, I would probably just think. Anne Carson on the front of the Times website? Fantastic! A whole review (if flawed) of Anne Carson’s newest book in New York? Perfect! I’m just happy that a talented and not quite mainstream writer is getting some spotlight attention.
 
 
 
¹I’m totally on board anytime Alexander Portnoy feels the need to make love to his family’s liver dinner but this spread was a bit blah for my taste. A literary caucus…with James Franco! Come on. If you don’t have the time to read the whole spread, let me sum it up with one featured quote by Keith Gessen when asked if Roth is a misogynist, “Did Roth hate women? What does that mean? If you hated women, why would you spend all your time thinking about fucking them.”  [end scene]