The National Book Awards–Debating How to Move Forward

/0 Comments/in , , /by

Here’s an excellent literary commentary from Publishers Weekly, by indie book publishers Chris Fischbach and Fiona McCrae, on how the National Book Awards could be reformed–and equally important, the direction they believe the reforms should not take. The 2012 Awards were given last week, so this is very timely, with Fischbach and McCrae noting a recent NY Times article which reported that “the National Book Foundation is reviewing changes to its procedures in order to ‘create more splash’ and in particular to address criticisms that ‘in recent years judges had preferred little-known authors, which diminished the award’s stature.’”

They urge the Foundation not to make the annual awards into a contest that merely rewards “big books’ by “big authors” from “big publishers,” which most of the year “get the lion’s share of attention.” By contrast, they say, “the annual national awards provide an opportunity to audit the year’s books and to come up with lists that either echo the year’s noise and/or illuminate books that for whatever reason have remained under the mainstream radar. The element of surprise and discovery, we would argue, is absolutely part of the value of these awards.” I also found that the Times article mentioned some good ideas that are being contemplated, such as involving younger book industry people at award-related events during NBA week. For my part, I think the Foundation should continue doing more to reach out beyond the book industry to involve avid readers.

I recommend you read the excellent column by Fischbach and McCrae which affirms the vibrancy of the independent publishing spirit.
—
Nov. 28 Graywolf Press Update: Speaking of Graywolf, PW‘s Claire Kirch has also published this profile of them, Graywolf Press in a New Era. Last, I made one of Graywolf’s current titles, Mary Jo Bang’s new translation of Dante’s Inferno, my #FridayReads last April 27.  

Read more

Welcoming Burma to a Better World

/0 Comments/in , /by

Update: Late Monday this photo by the Washington Post’s David Nakamura of an embrace between Aun Sang Suu Kyi and Hillary Clinton, with President Obama looking on, hit the newswires. Happy to add it to this post.

—
Some human rights activists are criticizing President Obama for making Burma a stop on his current visit to Southeast Asia. They say the country still holds captive many political prisoners, and that it’s too soon to favor them with a presidential visit. I share their concern that the gains made over the past year aren’t sufficient, and that reversals in the process may still occur. And yet, I believe that the visit, which brings with it not just the president but Hillary Clinton and the whole force of the State Department is the best way to ensure progress and forestall a return to the repression of the past decades.

The NY Times reports that while sharing a dais with Aung San Suu Kyi President Obama said of Burma today:

“‘You must reach for the future you deserve, a future where a single prisoner of conscience is one too many. You need to reach for a future where the law is stronger than any single leader.’”

The Times adds that “Although human rights activists criticized him for visiting while hundreds of political prisoners remain locked up and violence rages through parts of the country, Mr. Obama used the occasion to nudge Myanmar to move further.” The president was greeted on arrival “by further promises of reform by the government, which announced a series of specific commitments regarding the release of political prisoners and the end of ethnic violence. Although Mr. Obama stayed just six hours, his visit was seen here as a validation of a new era. . . . John Sifton of Human Rights Watch said that if the promises [Prime Minister] Mr. Thein Sein announced Monday were kept, it would ‘be a huge step in the right direction for the people’ and future of Myanmar, although he maintained it could have been achieved without rewarding the government with a presidential visit so soon.”

Readers of this blog may recall that last winter I attended the opening of an exhibit put on by The Mantle: a forum of progressive critique at Gallery 35 of Burmese artists whose work spanned the period before the loosening and after it had begun. The latter pieces reflected an early, wary response to the government’s new openness, and blogged about it at the time.  The art was really compelling too, not just as political messages. I’ve posted some of the images here–there are lots more at the original post.

In September, when Aung San Suu Kyi visited Washington, I shared two great pictures from her visit, like the one below taken with Hillary. I’m glad America is engaged this way, not just with Burma, but also reaching out to Thailand and Cambodia on this presidential trip, and look forward to seeing more diplomacy like over the next four years. Though China’s dominance in the region is undeniable, American influence with these smaller countries with growing economic dynamism, is going to be very important, for American trade and public approval.

Read more

Would a Lawyer Today Dare Send Such a Funny & Profane Letter?

/1 Comment/in , , , , /by

If it’s Sunday, it must be football, right? In keeping with the day, Shaun Usher, the British proprietor of the always-splendid website Letters of Note has reposted on his site’s Facebook page a funny exchange of correspondence that I chuckled over when he first shared it last February. It gave me another good laugh today. Shaun’s placed the 1974 letters under the heading Regarding Your Stupid Complaint. They were between Dale O. Cox, Esquire, a persnickety Cleveland Browns season ticket holder, and the Browns’ team office.

As readers of this blog may recall, from pieces such as How to Enjoy Sports Even When Your Teams Have a History of Failure, and a Personal History essay, I grew up following the ups and (often the) downs of Cleveland sports teams. With my late father and brother, I had the great good fortune to attend the last professional sports championship of a Cleveland team–when in the 1964 NFL title game the Browns upset the Baltimore Colts, 27-0. As the scanned copy of a grade school composition of mine will attest, the season ticket holders we sat near in the upper deck in Section 42 were a colorful bunch, like “Bert, a lover of wine” who “often fixe[d] himself a Diet-Rite and wine cocktail,” and Eddie, who “As soon as the first half ends, breaks out [a] thermos of chili . . . he shares with John, while John splits one of his many bottles of wine with him.” (See bottom of post for the whole piece.)

In the summer of 1977, after I was graduated from Franconia College, I worked as a beer vendor at Cleveland Indians’ baseball games. I enjoyed walking the wide open grandstands of cavernous Municipal Stadium, calling out such pitches as “Beer Here!” and “Get Your Cold Ones!”. My happy run as a vendor ended though when I worked a Cleveland Browns pre-season game, and was appalled to discover that the placid beer-drinking Indians fans I’d come to enjoy serving had morphed into, as I wrote in that personal history essay, “an unruly, inebriated mass. . . I was lucky I didn’t have my rack of beers stolen along with all my earnings.”

With these recollection of public drinking and intoxication at Municipal Stadium, you can see why I derive such a good laugh from the correspondence between Mr. Cox and the Browns (headings and signatures abridged):

November 18, 1974

The Cleveland Browns
Cleveland Stadium
Cleveland, OH

Gentlemen:

I am one of your season ticket holders who attends or tries to attend every game. It appears that one of the pastimes of several fans has become the sailing of paper airplanes generally made out of the game program. As you know, there is the risk of serious eye injury and perhaps an ear injury as a result of such airplanes. I am sure that this has been called to your attention and that several of your ushers and policemen witnessed the same.

Please be advised that since you are in a position to control or terminate such action on the part of fans, I will hold you responsible for any injury sustained by any person in my party attending one of your sporting events. It is hoped that this disrespectful and possibly dangerous activity will be terminated.

Very truly yours,

Dale O. Cox

The Browns’ reply, from their General Counsel and cc:d to team owner Art Modell, was written only three days later:

Dear Mr. Cox:

Attached is a letter that we received on November 19, 1974. I feel that you should be aware that some asshole is signing your name to stupid letters. 

Very truly yours, 

CLEVELAND STADIUM CORP. 

James N. Bailey,
General Counsel

cc: Arthur B. Modell

Cleveland Browns letters
—
In the years following the exchange with Mr. Cox, Art Modell–who died this past September at age 87–would later be tagged with infamy among many Cleveland sports fans for relocating the Browns to Baltimore in 1996. Yet it’s plain to me that at least in 1974 he was still a stand-up guy, or he wouldn’t have condoned his team attorney sending such a funny, profane letter to a customer who was himself a lawyer, and one who included in his letter an implied threat of litigation–“I will hold you responsible for any injury sustained by any person in my party attending one of your sporting events.” Would any caution-ridden lawyer today dare to send such a letter in response? If you have thoughts on this and would like to continue the conversation, please let me know what you think in the comments field below. A final point on Mr. Usher’s Letters of Note presentation for this exchange. He uses a photo in it of a Cleveland stadium, but it is the new Browns stadium, built and opened in 1999, on the site of the old Municipal Stadium, where I attended games as a boy and worked in 1977.

A grade school essay of mine on the fans I sat near at Cleveland Browns’ games.

Read more

Shields & Brooks, Decent to President Obama this Friday

/0 Comments/in , /by

Wow, for the first time in months I found the Friday night commentary of Shields & Brooks on the PBS NewsHour fair and reasonable toward President Obama. They weren’t so carping and snarky as usual.

One remarkable piece of information: Mark Shields reported that an Obama campaign staffer told him that following President Obama’s emotional remarks at Chicago campaign HQs, video of which I featured here last night, the president shook hands with and greeted all 700 staffers.

Read more

About That 2016 Romney Reelection Bid

/0 Comments/in /by

According to this Washington Post story by Peter Wallsten, Republican poobahs are so out of touch that on Election Night,

“Party leaders said they already had planned to poll voters in battleground states starting Tuesday night in anticipation of a Mitt Romney victory—to immediately begin laying the groundwork for midterm congressional elections and a Romney 2016 reelection bid.”

I actually had to read that twice to make sure I got it right. After my double-take, it sank in that Repubs had already been planning for Mitt’s reelection! Wow–they were planning to review why they’d won, and had anticipated no other result. Even if they believed so adamantly in their certain victory–despite the objective absurdity of it–wasn’t this extremely imprudent? Isn’t it wise to hope for the best, while planning for an outcome that falls short? This is as clear an instance of epistemic closure as I’ve yet seen, even from this political party that has made hermetically-sealed stupidity their singular trademark. In the wake of what was to them an unexpected drubbing,

“Top Republican officials, stunned by the extent of their election losses Tuesday night, have [instead] begun an exhaustive review to figure out what went so wrong and how to fix it.”

But in signs of a stunningly uninsightful self-assessment to come,

Party officials said the review is aimed at studying their tactics and message, not at changing the philosophical underpinnings of the party. ‘This is no different than a patient going to see a doctor,’ said Sean Spicer, the Republican National Committee’s spokesman. ‘Your number one thing is to say, I’m not feeling well. Tell me what the problem is. Run some tests on me.’”

Well, a majority of the American people have already delivered their diagnosis, and it ain’t a pretty picture. Republicans need to revitalize their sclerotic circulatory system by allowing their organism to be transfused with new blood that will prompt new ideas and a new way of viewing the evolving American electorate.

Read more

Election Night on FOX, Rove Ranted & the Network Pimped Megyn Kelly

/0 Comments/in /by

As if more proof were needed, this Gabriel Sherman report in NY magazine, tipped to me by TPM, shows how intertwined FOX News continues to be with the Repub establishment. On Tuesday night, after FOX, following the same decision by other networks, called Ohio for President Obama, there was a meltdown on the right, culminating in Karl Rove’s rant on camera, when he sounded like a spoiled child who wanted his toys back:

“Instantly, FOX phones lit up with angry phone calls and e-mails from the Romney campaign, who believed that the call was premature, since tallies in several Republican-leaning Southern counties hadn’t been been fully tabulated. ‘The Romney people were totally screaming that we’re totally wrong,’ one FOX source said. ‘To various people, they were saying, ‘your decision team is wrong.’ According to a FOX insider, Rove had been in contact with the Romney people all night. After the Ohio call, Rove—whose super-PAC had spent as much as $300 million on the election, to little avail—took their complaints public, conducting an on-air primer on Ohio’s electoral math in disputing the call.

I guess phone numbers of FOX senior producers is something Repub operatives are given when they get hired.

Sherman’s story also makes clear how willing FOX is to dangle and pimp their on-air female talent before male viewers.  In an impromptu episode that followed Rove’s refusal to accept the Ohio call for Obama, FOX producers sent host Megyn Kelly on a bizarre expedition down the hall to conduct an interview with the experts staffing the network’s election decision desk. Sherman reports that,

“One idea was for two members of the decision team, Mishkin and Fox’s digital politics editor Chris Stirewalt, to go on camera with Megyn Kelly and Bret Baier to squelch the doubts over the call. But then it was decided that Kelly would walk through the office and interview the decision team in the conference room. ‘This is Fox News,’ an insider said, ‘so anytime there’s a chance to show off Megyn Kelly’s legs they’ll go for it.’ The decision desk were given a three-minute warning that Kelly would be showing up.”

This isn’t a network, it’s a burlesque show.

Read more