Tag Archives: Books Read in 2013

12: The Cottage Builder’s Letter

The Cottage Builder’s Letter by George Murray

From the Book Shop in Penticton.

Read in April 2013.

Since it was poetry month, I thought I’d read some poetry. This one’s been on my to-read shelf for a while (how long? not sure. I think it’s probably from my 2009 trip to the Book Shop). You may be familiar with George Murray as the proprietor of the (sadly no-longer-updated) book blog Bookninja.

Most of the poems in The Cottage Builder’s Letter are narrative poems (stories in poetry), many of them multi-part. A number of the poems are semi-formal in construction, e.g. poems consisting of all 3-line stanzas or all 2-line stanzas, poems where a phrase/word sequence is repeated in each line or stanza.

This was one of those books that I wanted to like more than I did. The writing was good; the poems skillfully composed, but for whatever reason, I didn’t really connect with them. Maybe it was that there were too many unfamiliar references. I’m not sure.

I did like this one, especially the last stanza:

LIBRARY

Maybe you know how
to live in a way
that isn’t just about breathing,
but I don’t —
so please: reserve this
space for me.

(Rest here a moment
without thinking)

In what manner you choose
to keep your books:
I know this little part of you,
hold it sacred —
it’s your other secrets,
if any, that are not safe with me.

—The Cottage Builder’s Letter, 55

11: Why is Always About You?

Why Is It Always About You? : The Seven Deadly Sins of Narcissism by Sandy Hotchkiss

My rating: 3 of 5 stars

This one was passed along to me.

Read in March/April 2013.

View all my reviews

Part I describes the 7 deadly sins of the title:

Shamelessness (shame = personal flaw)
Magical Thinking (fantasy world)
Arrogance (value = relative)
Envy (need to be superior)
Entitlement (expect to get what they want)
Exploitation (lack of empathy)
Bad Boundaries (violate others’ boundaries)

The boundaries one is worth thinking about—helps to understand why certain gifts can be so uncomfortable—these types of gifts are not about doing something nice, really thinking about the receiver, but about molding them in the shape of the giver (narcissist).

Part II discusses where narcissism comes from. Hotchkiss claims narcissism originates in toddlerhood—occurs when child doesn’t develop healthy sense of self. Adolescent narcissism is also a normal stage, but people can get stuck there. Children of narcissists often become narcissists themselves; those who don’t are shame-driven, drawn to people who resemble their narcissistic parent(s).

Part III discusses strategies for defending yourself from narcissists: know yourself, embrace reality, set boundaries, cultivate reciprocal (i.e. healthy) relationships. I thought this section wasn’t as helpful as it could have been. Sort of, “yes, and…?”

Unfortunately, there’s not a lot you can do to help/change narcissists because the first rule of being a narcissist is not admitting you’re a narcissist. It’s like Fight Club. So someone you know is a narcissist, you have two choices: a) flee! or b) tolerate them. (Here’s the moment where you wonder “I don’t think I’m a narcissist. Does that mean I am one?” Well, if you’re questioning whether you are, you’re probably not. Self-awareness!)

Part IV describes narcissism in different scenarios (e.g. love, work, family). Narcissists, of course, consider themselves “special” so if you know someone like that (and you probably do), they might be a narcissist. Read Part I and find out.

Part V was about preventing narcissism.

Decent overview, but I wasn’t thrilled with her conservative agenda. If y’all just believed in Almighty God, society wouldn’t be overrun with narcissists, don’t ya know? 🙄

10: Cockroach

Cockroach by Rawi Hage

My rating: 4 of 5 stars

From the fall 2012 VPL book sale.

Read in March 2013.

View all my reviews

The protagonist is an immigrant living in Quebec. He had a job at a restaurant as a dishwasher, then was promoted to busboy, but he quit when the maitre’d told him he was “too brown” to be a waiter. He’s now on welfare.

He tried to commit suicide by hanging himself from a tree, but the branch broke. He’s currently in court-ordered therapy with a psychiatrist, Genevieve. In his sessions with Genevieve, he talks about his past and his regrets, and these scenes foreshadow the book’s climax.

All of his friends/acquaintances are also immigrants, but they don’t share his background. Most of them, like his frenemy Reza and Shohreh, who he sort of has a relationship with, are Persian/Iranian, but he isn’t. His name and home country are never revealed. (‘Lira’ is mentioned, but this is a generic term, like ‘dollar.’) However, it’s possible he’s Lebanese, since Hage immigrated to Canada from Lebanon.

He imagines himself as a cockroach. This is partly a metaphor for how he sees himself (a low-life, a pest, but resilient), but also being a cockroach allows him to explore places he couldn’t as a human. One question for the reader to decide is how much of what he does as a cockroach is real and how much is imaginary.

He’s kind of an anti-hero. He’s not a ‘good’ person (yes, the dreaded unlikable character!), but I still empathized with him.

Cockroach is funny, in a dark humor / black comedy kind of way. In what comes as no surprise (at least to me!), there are drug-induced hallucinations. Note to self: if you have the urge to write an “I’m on drugs!” scene, just say no.

Also, it’s quite scatological. You’ve been warned!

9: The Lonely Voice

The Lonely Voice: A Study of the Short Story by Frank O’Connor

My rating: 2 of 5 stars

Borrowed from the VPL.

Read in March 2013.

View all my reviews

Some notes from the introduction:

“The novel is bound to be a process of identification between the reader and the character.” (16)
But this is not true of short stories: “There is no character here with whom the reader can identify himself, unless it is that nameless horrified figure who represents the author … the short story has never had a hero. What it has instead is a submerged population group,” (17) i.e. outlawed figures, fringes of society.
“there is in the short story at its most characteristic something we do not often find in the novel–an intense awareness of human loneliness” (18-19).
The differences between novel and short story are more ideological—with respect to national attitude toward society—than formal. The novel = civilized society, community. The short story = “remote from the community–romantic, individualistic, and intransigent” (20).
the short story “is organic form, something that springs from a single detail and embraces past, present, and future” (21)
the storyteller “must be much more of a writer, much more of an artist” (22) than the novelist—great novelists can be inferior writers; great storytellers are generally not inferior writers.
“the form of the novel is given by the length; in the short story the length is given by the form” (26)
“the difference between the short story and the novel is not one of length. It is a difference between pure and applied storytelling” (26)
short story = static, single episode, life telescoped. novel = episodic.

We have been told that the novel is dead, and I am sure that someone has said as much for the short story. I suspect that the announcement may prove a little premature … the novel and the short story are drastic adaptations of a primitive art form to modern conditions—to printing, to science, and individual religion–and I see no possibility of or reason for their supersession except in a general supersession of all culture by mass civilization. (43) [dated June 21, 1962]

The rest of the book is an analysis of work by various short story writers. There are some insights here and there, but also so many racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic stereotypes. I found it hard to take. The Katherine Mansfield chapter was especially terrible. So yeah. If you pick this up, you’ve been warned. The introduction was interesting, though.

8: Heave

Heave by Christy Ann Conlin

My rating: 3 of 5 stars

From the Fall 2012 VPL book sale.

Read in February/March 2013.

View all my reviews

Heave opens with Seraphina “Serrie” Sullivan running away from her wedding. This scene frames the story; the rest is told in flashback, starting from Serrie’s childhood.

I found the voice kind of hard to get into at the beginning. More drug-addled musings. Yep, it’s a theme.

At age 20, Serrie is in 3rd year university. She’s homesick (even though she’s only in Halifax, a short distance from home). Her bffs are Dearie and Elizabeth. Serrie is an alcoholic, like her dad, and has been since she was 14. She has a professor who’s kind to her, who notices she’s missing class, and tells her she should be thinking about grad school. Her brother Percy is doing an MA in Toronto (i.e. he’s perfect).

Serrie overdoses and ends up in the psychiatric hospital. She isn’t depressed; she’s young for her age. She doesn’t want to be an adult because it seems life gets worse the older you get.

Martha, Serrie’s mom, is depressed. She’s lamenting giving up her dreams and makes Serrie feel bad for being young / still having dreams. Cyril, Serrie’s dad, is oblivious. He’s too busy collecting outhouses. Yes, you read that right.

Anyway, when she gets out of the psych hospital, she gets a job in a pie factory (really!), where she meets Hans, this rich German dude.

You know how terrible things are always befalling certain people? And at first you’re like, “omg! that’s so awful!” but after the eleventy-billionth dramatic thing in a week/month/year, you’re like, “wtf dude, what’s with the constant drama? I haven’t had this much drama in my entire life!” Except you don’t actually say that because everyone would give you the side-eye and call you out for being mean and ostracize you even though they’re thinking the exact same thing. Well, that’s kind of what this book felt like. There was some good stuff here, but omg. Drama overload.

Well into the book there’s a big reveal, but it’s foreshadowed throughout. Watch for it!

I will say, with the framing device, most of the book in flashback, girl going crazy because she doesn’t want to grow up, this reminded me of The Language of the Goldfish. The difference being TLotG is a skinny novella, and Heave is a 300+ page epic.

7: On Writing Well

On Writing Well: An Informal Guide to Writing Nonfiction by William Knowlton Zinsser

My rating: 4 of 5 stars

Borrowed from the VPL.

Read in February 2013.

View all my reviews

Here are some notes I took. I feel like I’m quoting myself; so many of these points are things I say all the time.

“Our national tendency is to inflate and thereby sound important.” (7) We think if a sentence is too simple, there must be something wrong with it. ha!
Simplify! Clear the clutter.
“My reason for bracketing superfluous words instead of crossing them out was to avoid violating the students’ sacred prose.” (17) ha!
carpentry analogy: simple and solid first, learn to embellish later—comes with practice
deliberately embellishing is like wearing a toupee. be yourself. (I need to remember that one.)
first paragraphs and pages can be discarded!
use “I”—take responsibility for your ideas!
write for yourself, in the sense that you shouldn’t worry “whether the reader likes you, or likes what you are saying or how you are saying it, or agrees with it, or feels an affinity for your sense of humor or your vision of life” (27)
think about how you writing sounds—read aloud
usage changes, but…
- avoid jargon. be precise.
- be liberal with new words and phrases.
- be conservative with grammar.
think small—try to leave the reader with one provocative thought
nonfiction can be literature; it’s not inferior to fiction
interviews:
- take notes; record only as backup. “Be a writer. Write things down.” (70)
- quotes will need to be moved around, spliced together—but do not fabricate!
places are second only to people
memoir—narrowness of focus, like a window or photograph into a life
science writing
- “describe how a process works”—exercise that helps people learn to write more clearly
- think of science writing as an upside-down pyramid—start with one fact the reader needs to know, then build from there
jargon = people wanting to sound important. hahaha. yes.
“I consider it a privilege to be able to shape my writing until it’s as clean and strong as I can make it. … Students, I realize, don’t share my love of rewriting. They regard it as some kind of punishment, or extra homework. Please—if you’re such a student—think of it as a gift. You’ll never write well unless you understand that writing is an evolving process, not a one-shot product.” (187-188)
distinction between a critic and a reviewer: “As a reviewer your job is more to report than to make an aesthetic judgment.” (215)

This was an older edition of the book, so some of the examples and advice (try a word processor! you’ll like it!) were dated. There’s a newer, 20th anniversary edition that I’m sure resolves those issues.

I think this should be required reading for 1st year university/college students. So much of it is stuff I find myself explaining to 3rd, 4th, 5th years—but I never know how much takes. Especially with certain students who seem to interpret tips like “simple is better” to mean “I’m too dumb to understand your deep thoughts,” having a “textbook” that backs me up might make them more likely to take my advice seriously.

6: Mean Boy

Mean Boy by Lynn Coady

My rating: 4 of 5 stars

From the fall 2010 VPL book sale.

Read in January/February 2013.

View all my reviews

The protagonist of Mean Boy is Lawrence (formerly Larry) Campbell, age 19. He’s from Prince Edward Island and is attending Westcock University in New Brunswick. It’s 1975.

The title is ironic. On page 35, he says, “I am trying to be meaner these days…” The highlight of Lawrence’s university experience is the poetry class he’s taking with his hero, poet Jim Arsenault.

Lawrence uptalks, which distresses him. Jim calls him “Larry” which annoys him.

Jim has been denied tenure, much to Lawrence’s consternation (he would have gone to the University of Toronto if Jim hadn’t been at Westcock). He and some of the other students (Todd and Sherrie) in the poetry class decide to write a letter to the admin and get all the students to sign it. The petition feels like a transgressive act to Lawrence and Sherrie.

Meanwhile, there are student/prof drinking-parties at Jim’s house and a poetry reading by Dermot Schofield, Jim’s frenemy + fellow poet, which turns into a comedy of errors. Oh, an awesome subplot featuring Lawrence’s cousin Janet that turns out to be not what you think. Instead, Lawrence learns a lesson about distancing yourself from your family in order to be able to write about them.

In the end, everyone’s flaws are revealed.

I guessed that “Westcock” was actually Mount Allison and a quick search confirmed that supposition to be correct. And it turns out that the character of Jim Arsenault is based on real-life poet/Mount Allison prof John Thompson, which apparently cheesed off some people who knew him. Interesting.

I’ve read all of Lynn Coady’s books prior to this one (Strange Heaven, Play the Monster Blind, Saints of Big Harbour; her latest, The Antagonist, is on my shelf). I read Strange Heaven because it was lauded at the time, and while I thought it was good, I didn’t really get the upop. I had the same feeling with PtMB and SoBH. Good, but missing… something. imo. Obviously others thought they were perfect. But Mean Boy, Mean Boy I loved. The ending gets a little crazy (I can’t seem to escape drug-induced hazes in fiction of late) but I will forgive this because endings are hard.

Finish Your Dissertation Once and for All!

Finish Your Dissertation Once and for All!: How to Overcome Psychological Barriers, Get Results, and Move on with Your Life by Alison B. Miller

My rating: 3 of 5 stars

One-sentence synopsis: “I’m good enough, I’m smart enough, and doggone it, I’m going to finish this dissertation!” Yes, all I kept thinking about whilst skimming this were Stuart Smalley‘s daily affirmations. From the title I was hoping for something directed at people who are already in the midst of working on their dissertations—more concrete ideas about speeding up the process. Essentially I’m already doing everything suggested in this book. So while it was an affirmation (ha) that I’m on the right track, sadly it offered no magic bullets. Will continue to plod. (Have started to think Evelyn Hunt Ogden‘s suggestion to hire someone to help with monotonous tasks wasn’t such a crazy idea after all.) Recommended for anyone floundering at the “I don’t know where to start” stage.

View all my reviews

5: Refuse to Choose

Refuse to Choose! : A Revolutionary Program for Doing All That You Love by Barbara Sher

My rating: 3 of 5 stars

Borrowed from the VPL.

Read in January 2013.

View all my reviews

I saw this mentioned The Clutter Museum:

One of my favorite career-finding books, and one I recommend regularly to my students, is Barbara Sher’s Refuse to Choose. In it, she describes ‘scanners,’ bright people who are simultaneously and/or serially interested in diverse and sometimes divergent subjects and careers.

and for obvious reasons was intrigued.

Sher’s opening anecdote is about reading university course descriptions, wanting to take everything—and her sadness on realizing she couldn’t:

The conventional wisdom was overwhelming and seemed indisputable: If you’re a jack-of-all-trades, you’ll always be a master of none. You’ll become a dilettante, a dabbler, a superficial person—and you’ll never have a decent career. Suddenly, a scanner who all through school might have been seen as an enthusiastic learner had now become a failure. (6)

She describes different types of scanners. I was skimming along, identifying with a characteristic here and there, when I reached the ‘jack-of-all-trades’ type, which is so me, it’s ridiculous (right down to the detail that jacks don’t have the clutter problem that other scanners do). Some highlights:

do you have more certificates and degrees that most people—all in different disciplines? *cough*
are you good at just about everything you try? / have you ever thought your problem would be solved if you were good at only one thing?
many things come easily to you so you sometimes underestimate their value
you “have often complained that being good at almost everything isn’t the same as being great at one thing.” (202) !! I say this all the time.

Jacks have so much talent, but that’s not all they have—they are the ones who show up and deliver. They do the job. With all these qualities, they should be hugely successful in business or the arts or some profession. But they rarely are. (203)

Truth.

Almost without exception, this type of scanner is gifted at something you don’t find on career lists: Catching the ball in a team situation. Bailing out the other players. Saving the day. (205)

She describes jacks as ‘rescuers.’

If you don’t have the needed skills, you’ll learn them fast, because you know how to learn. (206)

Yep. It’s always driven me nuts how job descriptions say stuff like ‘must be familiar with X’ or ‘must know how to use Y program’ b/c even if I’ve never done X or used Y, I can figure it out in like, a day. So no big deal.

She suggests scanners are best suited for an ‘umbrella career,’ i.e. one that allows you to do many of the things you enjoy—like freelance writer or researcher. heh 🙂 Indeed.

Throughout the book there are strategies for dealing with being a scanner. A lot of these are things I already do in my own way. The central one is keeping a ‘scanner daybook’—essentially a writer’s notebook—where you write all your random brilliant ideas 😉 down so you’re not overwhelmed/distracted by them.

While much of the book was a confirmation of stuff I already know, it’s always nice to get validation that you are not the only one, that you are a recognized type! Being a unique snowflake is overrated. Plus, now I have this post I can refer people to when they want to know what’s up with all those degrees. I can’t help it! I’m a jack-of-all-trades!

Immediately after finishing Refuse to Choose, I read this essay by Michael Dirda. Scanner alert!

When I talk to friends and editors about possible projects, especially about projects that might come with a significant cash advance, they usually suggest a biography. Sometimes I’m tempted, but the prospect of spending years researching and writing about someone else’s life offends my vanity. I don’t want to submerge myself in another man or woman’s existence, I want to write about me, about the books and writers that I like. And I want to be able to finish any commitment within a year at best, so that I can get on to something else. I have, it would seem, the temperament of a reporter—always intensely interested in a subject for a short while, but soon ready to move on to the next assignment.

4: Mourning Diary

Mourning Diary by Roland Barthes

My rating: 3 of 5 stars

Consists of the notes Roland Barthes took after the death of his mother, Henriette. She was widowed (via WWI, that recurring theme) when he was a baby and they lived together most of his life. The notes are transcribed as they were written, one note to a page. There’s a center insert with family photographs and scans of a few of the diary notecards.

(Sidenote: I didn’t realize Barthes had a brother. Specifically, a younger half-brother (Michel) born out-of-wedlock to his mother when Barthes was 12ish. This info seems to be elided from his standard bio; it isn’t on his Wikipedia page. Kinda weird, because reading MD, it seems like they were pretty close. Makes Mme. Barthes seem more human, less martyr, too!)

It’s likely the notes would have become the basis for a book but Barthes died (he was hit by a truck and succumbed to his injuries) only months after the diary stops. So what’s here are basically personal/private notes not written for a public audience. Except it’s Barthes, so…

At the same time, I think calling the diary whiny/self-indulgent (as I saw in some reader reviews) is silly because it’s a diary. If you can’t whine in your diary, please. 🙄

Some quotes:

In taking these notes, I’m trusting myself to the banality that is in me. (17)

Solitude = having no one at home to whom you can say: I’ll be back at a specific time or who you can call to say (or to whom you can just say): voilà, I’m home now. (44)

Depression comes when, in the depths of despair, I cannot manage to save myself by my attachment to writing. (62)

I have not a desire but a need for solitude. (91)

if these ‘changes’ … make for silence, inwardness, the wound of mourning shifts toward a higher realm of thought. Triviality (of hysteria) ≠ Nobility (of Solitude). (95)

M. and I feel that paradoxically (since people usually say: work, amuse yourself, see friends) it’s when we’re busy, distracted, sought out, exteriorized, that we suffer most. Inwardness, calm, solitude make us less miserable. (100)

Only I know what my road has been for the last year and a half: the economy of this motionless and anything but spectacular mourning that has kept me unceasingly separate by its demands; a separation that I have ultimately always projected to bring to a close by a book — Stubbornness, secrecy. (231)

Reading this got me thinking again about the difference between loss by death vs. loss by leaving again. When someone dies, those left behind still have their (good) memories. This, I think, makes it hard(er) to move on, because it’s possible to dwell in the past, in happy memories of the person who is gone. Whereas, when someone leaves, those left behind can’t dwell in the past—at least how they’d always remembered it—that’s gone. If it’s to be remembered, it needs to be reconstituted/reconstructed in a completely different way. So while death-loss drags you backward, leaving-loss pushes you forward. It almost forces you to move on, because there are no happy memories to return to.

View all my reviews