The Solomon Scandals A Washington newspaper novel by David Rothman

10Sep/100

Don’t just worry about ‘books,’ Jack—worry about libraries, indie stores, e-formats and DRM

image Jack Shafer, the Slate “Press Box” colum­nist, is mourn­ing the “fallen sta­tus” of the tra­di­tional paper book, which he thinks tech­nol­ogy has devalued.

As a con­trib­u­tor to the trou­bled medium—Scan­dals is avail­able as a trade paper­back, not just as an e-book—I have an obvi­ous stake in this. Shafer may be think­ing espe­cially of hard­cov­ers, but at least we’re talk­ing about some­thing more tan­gi­ble than electrons.

Scan­dals is about the news­pa­per world of sev­eral decades ago, and some of its gray-haired read­ers might pre­fer to read it the old-fashioned way. Then again, maybe not; as one librar­ian put it, Kin­dles could be the new large print. I just want to make cer­tain those paper­backs are around, too.

At least, unlike many other wor­ry­warts, Shafer dis­tin­guishes between books and read­ing. I sim­ply wish he’d think of e-books as books, too. If any­thing the tech­nol­ogy has made my read­ing more old-fashioned, through the pub­lic domain col­lec­tions of Project Guten­berg, Feed­books, the Inter­net Archive and else­where. How many neigh­bor­hood pub­lic libraries carry all the major nov­els of George Giss­ing, for example?

Rather than sim­ply wor­ry­ing about paper books, here’s what I’d rec­om­mend some good, healthy fret­ting over—following up on Shafer’s wise dis­tinc­tion between books and reading.

You might also enjoy:
20Aug/100

Book promotion wisdom for the Twitter era? Victorian novelist George Gissing on social standing and literary success

image “Men won’t suc­ceed in lit­er­a­ture that they may get into soci­ety, but will get into soci­ety that they may suc­ceed in lit­er­a­ture.” — Jasper Mil­vain, the social-climbing jour­nal­ist in George Giss­ing’s New Grub Street, his clas­sic about the Lon­don lit­er­ary world more than a cen­tury ago.

Ques­tion: Sub­sti­tute “Web,” “Face­book” or “Twit­ter” for “soci­ety,” and would be the above apply to the Inter­net era? Maybe. But I sus­pect that the tra­di­tional social com­po­nent would still count as well, at least when it comes to men­tion in the main­stream media. As a suc­cess story, Giss­ing cites a “clever, pro­lific” writer named Ralph War­bury who “began with money and friends; he came from Oxford into the thick of adver­tised peo­ple; his name was men­tioned in print six times a week before he had writ­ten a dozen arti­cles.” Then Giss­ing goes on to the quote at the top of this post. War­bury seems to be imag­i­nary, but I cer­tainly can think of his real-life equiv­a­lents today here in the States, espe­cially with such a fix­a­tion that many Wash­ing­to­ni­ans have on Ivy League degrees. If noth­ing else, remem­ber the five Ws and the H—who, what, why, when, where and how—taught to Amer­i­can jour­nal­ists. Guess which one comes first. I hardly doubt that the same is true in the Gissing’s country.

You might also enjoy:
19Aug/100

‘6 great novels that were hated in their time’: Hope for overlooked novelists and brave readers

image What do The Lord of the Rings Tril­ogy (one book shown), Moby-Dick, The Catcher in the Rye, Lord of the Flies, The Grapes of Wrath and Brave New World have in common?

Lit­er­ary crit­ics hated them.

So, at least, says Jacopo della Querci’s Cracked piece—must read­ing for brave read­ers and over­looked nov­el­ists alike. Here’s the low­down on the recep­tion befalling The Lord of the Rings Tril­ogy:

“The rea­sons for Tolkien’s neg­a­tive feed­back were numer­ous, not the least of them being that he was a career lin­guist, not a pro­fes­sional writer. The New York Times described Tolkien’s writ­ing as ‘high-minded’ and ‘death to lit­er­a­ture itself.’

“The New Repub­lic described the book and its char­ac­ters as ‘ane­mic, and lack­ing in fiber’ which was appar­ently a real burn back then in the pre-Cheerios days. Even heavy­weights like Isaac Asi­mov weren’t sold by the book’s whole indus­try ver­sus the envi­ron­ment mes­sage, retort­ing that moder­nity ‘or per­haps the mod­ern world… wasn’t all bad.’

“Hell, not even Tolkien’s friends were all that big on it. Tolkien had to stop read­ing sam­ples of the book to them on account of neg­a­tive feedback/hurt feel­ings. One mem­ber of Tolkien’s cir­cle, Hugo Dyson (H.V.D. Dyson in geek) once famously moaned from a sofa dur­ing one read­ing: ‘Oh, fuck! Not another elf!’

How about Brave New World? “Even fel­low futur­ists like H.G. Wells were shocked by the book’s dystopian land­scape. Despite being the same man who wrote War of the Worlds, Wells describe Brave New World’s bleak future as ‘a betrayal.’ As for the book’s more for­get­table crit­ics, i.e. every­one else, responses ranged from dis­missal to child­ish name-calling.”

Now here’s a ques­tion. If even crit­ics can’t get these things right, just what are the impli­ca­tions of the above in an era when Ama­zon and many other book-related Web sites rely so heav­ily on the opin­ions of civil­ians? Per­haps it doesn’t mat­ter, since the read­ers are rat­ing books for each other, not pos­ter­ity. Or does it? Mean­while I think it’s tragic that Kil­gore Trout is only imag­i­nary and Kurt Von­negut is dead. I’d love their opin­ions on these matters.

Detail: “Jacopo della Querci” is appar­ently a pseu­do­nym? Note the sim­i­lar name of an Ital­ian Renais­sance sculp­tor.

You might also enjoy:
26May/100

‘David Rothman’ namesakes: Egosurfers, here’s what the rest of us are up to

Kitty Kelley on the home page of The Georgetowner site I’ve remarked before on weird coin­ci­dences related to my name.

Two let­ters, for exam­ple, dis­tin­guish me from David Roffman, at least if you don’t include mid­dle names. He’s the vet­eran jour­nal­ist asso­ci­ated with the George­towner news­pa­per, shown with a Kitty Kel­ley fea­ture (tem­po­rary link).

Much of The Solomon Scan­dals hap­pens in George­town, which, by the way, is home to a net.friend of mine named Beth Solomon, founder of The George­town Dish web­site and most def­i­nitely not the real estate mag­nate in Scan­dals. You can read the Dish’s own Kel­ley fea­ture here.

But back Topic R or DR. For the ben­e­fit of any stray David Roth­mans who ego­surfed their way to this post, here are a few more stray facts about peo­ple shar­ing The Name or close to it:

–David the Almost Roth­man and I are now friends on Face­book, which will make it all the eas­ier to catch up with him when once again peo­ple con­fuse us and I need to redi­rect them.

image–I  enjoyed The Girl on the Train, an excel­lent French film about an attention-grabber who falsely claims to have been the vic­tim of anti-Semitism. Authen­tic anti-Semitism hap­pens against a fic­tion­al­ized char­ac­ter in the movie (French title shown). His name? “David Roth­man.” Hey, for the pur­pose of this list, we’ll con­sider him an hon­orary real person.

–Yes, other book-writers exist named David Roth­man, even though the sur­name isn’t exactly “Smith.” David B., is the author of Mr. Death: The Life of a CIA Assas­si­na­tion Expert, by His Son. David J. writes poetry. Per­haps the most promi­nent David Roth­man, at least in the United States, is the pro­fes­sor at Colum­bia Uni­ver­sity, an expert on med­ical ethics and a pro­lific author. He’s a sec­ond David J. Finally there’s the med­ical librar­ian David L. Roth­man, a library blog­ger and author, whose life became per­haps a lit­tle less dif­fi­cult when I sold off the Tel­eRead site devoted to e-books and libraries. That’s him to the right, doing a funny rant against a LibraryJour­nal blog.

In Florida a David Roth­man works for Dis­ney World, or at least was when our paths crossed vir­tu­ally due to con­fu­sion on Hot­mail. Flor­dia is also home to David B. Roth­man the lawyer.

I don’t know of any crooks, child-molesters, etc., with The Name but will do an adden­dum if I find any. Minus the “David” in the title, there is a Roth­man Scan­dal novel.

You might also enjoy:
19May/100

The essential copy editor

image image See update at the end. – D.R.

I’m zeal­ously pro-copy edi­tor. While I don’t always agree with CEs, I’d hate for them not to be around to argue with. I can remem­ber one book project where I replaced a dozen likes in favor of as ifs and as thoughs, my orig­i­nal choices. And yet I’m grate­ful for all the typo catches and other hard work from the same editor.

In the per­fect cos­mos, even the tini­est Web site would ben­e­fit from for­mal copy edit­ing (includ­ing Solomonscandals.com). No writer would be with­out his or her own pro­tec­tor. Just look at the atroc­i­ties that inevitably slip through here. I’d rather be able to focus more on writ­ing as opposed to proof­ing, which, alas, isn’t my forte.

Now let’s parse a sen­tence from another Web site: “It’s hard to know, and hard to measure—but with­out the effort, it’s my sense that we’re headed quickly into a world only one set of eye­balls deter­mines publication.”

imageWhere’s the “where,” and just who gave us this gem? A sleepy inde­pen­dent blog­ger, typ­ing away in his PJs? Not exactly. The sin showed up in The New­so­nom­ics of copy­edit­ing value, some com­men­tary from Ken Doc­tor, the author of New­so­nom­ics: Twelve New Trends That Will Shape the News You Get. It didn’t appear just any­where. No, it was at the end of the blog post, where Doc­tor should have been reward­ing his most con­sci­en­tious and enthu­si­as­tic readers—the detail lovers most likely to agree with him. And the site was none other than the one for the pres­ti­gious Nie­man Jour­nal­ism Lab at Harvard.

Accord­ing to the Nie­man time stamp, the Doc­tor item popped up at around 10 a.m. (East­ern Day­light, pre­sum­ably) on the unlucky date of May 13. It’s now about 3:30  p.m. on May 19, and I still don’t see a fix even though an eagle-eyed reader named Sara caught the mis­take at 1:08 a.m. on May 16 after some well-placed edi­tors at var­i­ous news­pa­pers failed to com­ment on the irony.

image Sur­prise of sur­prise, Sara says she is an unem­ployed copy edi­tor. I hope some­one hires this woman in a hurry. Per­haps I even know her. Sara, by any chance do you live in an East­ern state bor­der­ing Canada? What­ever the case, I pro­pose that news orga­ni­za­tions set­tle for slim­mer prof­its and saner exec­u­tive salaries to be able to use more copy edi­tors like Sara, and I’d hope that Ken Doc­tor would agree. In his piece men­tion­ing “copy­edit­ing value,” he called for the pub­li­ca­tion of “news prin­ci­ple boxes” to tout the effort that went into MSM sites, includ­ing “impor­tant practices—like editing.

You might also enjoy:
Page 1 of 512345