« J. Lethem Wants to Be Slashed | Main | * »

April 19, 2007




My admittedly subjective impression is that they're more parochial than the status quo they're "questioning." You think *Lethem* is calculating and using controversy to distract from a mediocre piece of fiction? I think we've got a trough you can feed from here.

We're learning these days that sometimes indy films are indy for a reason. I think the same can be applied to writing.

You going to review one of those books? I'll agree ground-breaking work will probably get rejected but assuming work is ground-breaking *because* it got rejected is backward. If the ULA can make its point by letting the *books* speak for themselves in the future, I'll take back my "meh."

But I feel manipulated just posting this.


I never said I agreed that Lethem was doing that but I can see where folks might think that he is, especially considering that the book is below average (to put it nicely). However, I do agree with you that the ULA is and has been very calculating; it's how they thrive. I haven't always agreed with their practices but I often find myself in agreement with their theory. Then again, I frequently side with the malcontents.

I wouldn't not review one of these books. I'd certainly read it, though it would have to sit on the TBR pile for a while. Hell, I've read some tripe coming from the big houses that couldn't be any worse.

Finally, couldn't agree more with the backwardness of the rejection/groundbreaking supposition. That's the immature stance of the ULA that I find most egregious. And I won't be fully on board until they're able to back their rhetoric with solid action, and not just of the potato-salad throwing variety, and perhaps, as you say, works that stand on their own.


Just for the record, Allen Ginsberg didn't throw potato salad at anybody. That was Carl Solomon, and Ginsberg wrote about it in "Howl". Wenclas should be more careful with the facts ... good article otherwise, though!


Wenclas careful with the facts? That will happen the day that hot dog buns are packaged in ten!


The "you" is conditionally but not specifically you.

Put an "If" at the start of that sentence and replace the "?" with a "," and I think that will read better.

Jimmy Beck

I think most writers would gladly bend over and take it if only they could find more editors willing to stand up and give it...

Wred Fright

If any litblogger is interested in reviewing The Pornographic Flabbergasted Emus, then please email me at wredfright (whereit'sat) yahoo.com I'll mail a review copy to the first five litbloggers I hear from. Whether good or bad, more reviews for the novel would be great! You can find out more about the book at http://www.wredfright.com/pfe.html

Wred Fright

Sorry fellows, the above offer is now closed. Thanks to Jeff for taking me up on it--looking forward to the review!

The comments to this entry are closed.

Go Read Now