Movable Snipe: What 3 Quarks Giveth, The Scanner Taketh Away

Hi, Michael. By now, it should be evident that I don’t read blogs much. I have certainly never read as many or as much as I have this week. It’s been sort of fascinating. One tends to forget how much is going on out there. I have been chastened by the experience. I also realized that I do, indeed, know who Philip Rieff is, but that out of context, all this stuff just comes at me like unorganized data I cannot process.

I just noticed on Elegant Variation mention of Dzanc Books and their first two titles. I’d never heard of them—which says nothing—but I was excited about what they are publishing. For one, the indie presses are keeping literature alive. They are publishing the stuff that’s too risky for most of the big houses—and by too risky I mean too weird and thus unpalatable to the majority of readers out there. I’m not trying to be a snob, it’s just that most people don’t know what to do with novelty. Because if you can’t turn it into a movie, what have you? I like that Dzanc quotes Gary Lutz and Brian Evenson because when you get endorsements from writers like these, and when you publicize them, you are pretty much saying: We are the real deal. And it’s true, they are.

Apropos the business of the good childhood, here comes the Netherlands. Crooked Timber reports UNICEF’s findings that the Dutch excel when it comes to the well-being of kids. Who doesn’t excel? We don’t, of course. The United Kingdom, too. There follows a paean to the Netherlands that has me wanting to immigrate and then an anti-paean that’s making me feel better about where I am, should I ever manage to have kid of my own.

This is what I like about Crooked Timber—they aren’t so bad at flipping the coin, despite the overall lefty bias of the thing. What I don’t like is how self-referential some of the posts are. Like that bit about Jodi Dean and formal modeling; not only is Dean’s post unintelligible, but so is the discussion that follows, if only because this guy assumes we know something about formal modeling beyond the obvious. I suppose most people who regularly read this blog do know about such matters. Me? I’m done. Can’t say the same of Drezner who, apparently, reads Crooked Timber with regularity.

I wanted to watch his bloggingheads tv thing, but I guess I need some intel-based mac plugin. Worth the trouble? No. Maybe I should just read his new book, which looks hot.

Richard Feynman on 3 Quarks: most satisfying. Likewise the snippets from the Orr/Dennett smackdown. It’s getting personal. By time it’s over, they will have long departed from debate over The God Delusion. Did you read The God Delusion? It’s on my pile, just below Anna Karenina, but above Catch-22. Props to 3 Quarks: I learned more from reading the site this week than I have in months.

Unfortunately, I also learned one great way not to get any work done is to read the aforementioned. I have been so unproductive! It’s a little depressing. And when depressed, instead of taking a walk or reading a book, I’ve gone to the Nerve Scanner. Today’s array? A clip from the startlingly unfunny “The Half-hour News Hour,” evidence that John Mayer looks like Edward Scissorhands, and a posing of the age-old question: is Vladimir Putin looker or loser? In short, what 3 Quarks inspires—brain activity, I guess—the Scanner destroys.

I’m signing off, Michael. It’s been fun corresponding with you. Maybe when we meet in the flesh, we can talk cupcakes.

Cheers,

fiona