Actor! Actor! « Niall Anderson on actors writing novels

A lovely piece by Niall Anderson, which somebody with a chequebook and the remnants of a media business should republish and pay him for. This on Dirk Bogarde’s novels, for instance:

Read enough of them, though, and you begin to notice a certain recurring theme: that rich people can have it hard, too. You also begin to notice a recurring character. He is male and eternally middle-aged. He is English, sexually ambiguous, and in self-chosen exile. He may or may not write an annual bestseller. (He might also, at this stage, start to remind you of someone.) Shortly before the novel begins, something will have happened to him that has allowed him to figure out the complete meaning of life. He never overplays this, or expects other people to understand such dearly-bought and dreadful knowledge; nevertheless, everybody who comes to him – that is to say, everybody else in the entire novel – leaves with a sad sense of having met a man who just knows.

via Actor! Actor! « MostlyFilm.

Laura Morgan on ITV’s Poirot

A quite lovely and very perceptive ramble around ITV’s adaptations of Poirot, in honour of the final series, which is coming this year:

At her best Agatha Christie is very funny, and this is often evident in the pairing of Poirot and his hapless sidekick. The early ITV series, in which both characters invariably appeared, were – violent deaths notwithstanding – feelgood TV. They were light-hearted and witty and they spoke of an age of elegance, and painted an affectionate and studiedly beautiful portrait of an England that we would have liked to know, even if it never really quite existed. The attention to detail, both in the scripts and the production, was impeccable; the 1930s costumes and interiors almost – almost – as pleasing as the plots.

via Curtain Call « MostlyFilm.

The Harold Bloom of Missouri Jail

I embed a lot of delightful web stuff over on my Tumblr, I’ve Said Too Much. It’s a handy place to save the ephemeral, the funny, the sad, the inriguing – the flotsam and jetsam of everyday websurfing. Normally, I’d embed something like This American Life’s 2002 show Act V over there. But when it came up on my run this morning, it was just so extraordinarily moving, human and interesting that I wanted to put it here.

I’m only halfway through, but already Big Hutch’s reading of Hamlet – or, more accurately, his rewriting of Hamlet in a prison setting – has got me thinking about story and character and challenges and conflict. His description of how a prison setting could give new resonance to Hamlet’s dilemma is chilling. He describes a society where a self-imposed personal honour becomes more and more potent while the normal self-respect that comes from being a contributing member of that society becomes ever harder to attain. It’s the rigid Catch-22 which every poorly educated male in the West now faces. Hutch is Hamlet is Us.

Some writers on reading

Jennifer Egan, photo by Pieter M. Van Hattem/Vistalux

Some thoughts from clever people on reading and where it fits in our lives.

First, Jennifer Egan, in a wonderful, wonderful, wonderful piece on becoming a writer:

My advice is so basic. Number one: Read. I feel like it’s amazing how many people I know who want to be writers who don’t really read. I’m not convinced someone wants to be a writer if they don’t read. I don’t think the problem is that they need to read more; I think they might need to readjust their life goals. Reading is the nourishment that lets you do interesting work. To be reading good things. I feel that you should be reading what you want to write. Nothing less.

Beautifully said, I think. And it makes me want to read Jennifer Egan in particular (I haven’t, yet).

But on the other hand, this from Geoff Dyer:

Back home there are plenty of books that I’ve not read and yet, gazing blankly at my shelves, all I can think is, There’s nothing left to read. Hoping to lance the boil, to get to the heart of the matter in the course of a transatlantic flight, I bought—but couldn’t face reading—Bernhard Schlink’s The Reader and Alberto Manguel’s A History of Reading. Having resigned myself to not reading them (or any of the other books I’d bought for the flight), I scavenged around for anything to read: the in-flight magazine, the duty-free catalog, the emergency evacuation procedure. And yet, at the same time that I am ready to read scraps like this, I am an overdiscriminating reader. I am always not reading something in the name of something else. The opportunity cost of reading a given book is always too great. Some books, obviously, are a waste of one’s eyes. To feel this about airport blockbusters is perfectly normal, but I feel it is beneath me to read Jeanette Winterson, for example, or Hanif Kureishi. In fact, most so-called quality fiction that is story-driven seems a waste of time (time that, by the way, I have in abundance). This would be fine if I could transpose a reluctance to read James Hawes into a willingness to read Henry James, but I am unable to get beyond the first five paragraphs (i.e., four sentences) of The Golden Bowl.

I should say that comment is very much taken out of context. It’s funny, cynical, bleak and interesting all at the same time. I’m glad I read it. So, there, some irony too.

And finally, this little exchange on Twitter with the one-and-only Norman Geras, on the subject of when it’s right to abandon a book:

 

Vonnegut on story shapes, with added video

A while back I linked to a story about Kurt Vonnegut’s playful story shapes, which plot traditional stories onto an x/y axis, with happiness on the y and time on the x. Turns out there’s a video of Vonnegut’s talk, which Open Culture pointed me too.

It’s a lovely and charming thing, this video. I never saw Vonnegut speak, but the voice I hear in his stories and his other writing is right there on stage: funny, clever, wanting to be enjoyed but with an edge as well. There’s a bunch of other YouTube videos about Vonnegut, and they all evince the same qualities.

Here’s the story shapes video:

Here’s a little video treatment of Vonnegut’s eight rules of short story writing:

Here’s Vonnegut talking about censorship, and “not making a damn difference”:

And I was going to embed Fox News’ laughable Vonnegut obituary, but why spoil a perfectly nice day?