Wordwork|play

Reading Satire

The ONION features a neat satire on reading entitled "Area Eccentric Reads Entire Book." It's quite funny on the surface, but points to a disturbing move away from books, especially among the younger generations. Many young people no longer have the requisite attention span to read books. They seem to need a continuous stream of stimuli, of sound bytes and visual flickers. In our always-on, plugged-in, virtually networked and technologically connected culture, there is no shortage thereof. There's lots of money to be made from a generation trained to be in constant 'need' of fresh stimuli and new, or newly packaged, products.

On the topic of books, here's another sad commentary. And here yet another. We laugh at all of them for the same reason that we laugh when poked in the ribs (I'll leave that analogy for you to think about for now).

On Old Books, Fungus, and Inspiration

What's not to love about books? I have always loved books. I love the feel of books, the look of books, and yes, the smell of books. Particularly old books. The older the better--old books look, feel and smell better than modern ones.

Oh how I love hanging out in and walking through library stacks (read about the long history of libraries here), inhaling deeply the musty smell of old books. For that, and the intellectually stimulating atmosphere of course, I miss university life. I used to think I liked the smell of books for psychological reasons--I love the idea of books, therefore I like the smell of books. But an article I came across recently suggests something more physical.

Ellen Warren writes, in the Chicago Tribune, that there may well be more to getting high on great literature than the love of literature or learning itself. In "Book Fungus Can Get You High," Warren writes that "[e]xperts on the various fungi that feed on the pages and on the covers of books are increasingly convinced that you can get high - or at least a little wacky-by sniffing old books. Fungus on books, they say, is a likely source of hallucinogenic spores." Hmm. So that could explain some of the great works of literature--the authors, spending hours upon hours in dank libraries full of old books, especially in the days before high-tech humidity control, got high off fungus spores. Their inspiration may have come from what they were inspiring (breathing in).

I really need to surround myself with more old books. Take a good whiff of old book, then get back to the computer to write. That may be another downside of digital literature--no hallucinogenic fungus to inspire.

The Life of a Creative Offering: Independent and yet Dependent

I was doing some research on Ecotecture (word-blend of ecology and architecture) and came across the following quote from Picasso that can be equally well applied to literature--to poetry, short stories, and novels.

A picture is not thought out and settled before hand. While it is being done, it changes as one's thoughts change. And when it is finished, it still goes on changing, according to the state of mind of whoever is looking at it. A picture lives a life like a living creature, undergoing the changes imposed on us by our life from day to day. This is natural enough, as the picture lives only through the man who is looking at it.

Picasso from a 1935 interview with Christian Zervos. (found at Ecotecture Canada)

A work of fiction is the same way. No matter how much thought and effort a writer may have put into a story-- perhaps growing it out of, and around, an overarching concept or leitmotif, forming and refining characters, laying out plot elements, and then revising, refining, focusing, clarifying, culling, and polishing--to bring it to life, as soon as it is published and out of the author's hands, out of the author's control, it begins a life of its own. It is an independent, living creature. As long as it has a reader, it is alive. But it grows and changes.

People change from childhood into adulthood, and continue to change and grow and be modified by the impact of life experience. People change when they cross national, cultural, religious, linguistic and political borders, even if certain core elements remain relatively fixed. And so it is also with the work of fiction. Even if unchanged in a literal sense, an ancient Arabic, Greek, Indian, Persian, or Roman story, an Old English or Norse poem, or for that matter a Victorian, or even modernist novel, is a different creature now. It no longer means what it did in its own time and place. It has a life of its own, but is utterly dependent upon the reader. The author gives it birth, but it is the reader alone who keeps it alive, the reader alone who nurtures it, changes it, and sometimes revives it.

Ipsos Reid Study on Readers in Canada: 31% Read Not a Single Book in Past Year

I was alerted by the Literary Saloon to an Ipsos Reid survey commissioned by CanWest News Service and Global Television. According to the study which surveyed 1001 people across Canada, 31% of adults across Canada had not read a single book in the past year. A similar poll conducted in the U.S. found 27% of adults there had not picked up a book in the past year. I don't like to get too much into Canada/U.S. rivalries, but I am a bit surprised that Canada was behind the U.S. in this regard. I suppose I thought of Canadians, on the whole, as a bit more educated, literate and, well, reading, than this study reveals.

Interestingly, as Misty Harris reports in Canadian book readers fall behind the U.S.: poll at canada.com, the 69% of Canadians who said they did read in 2007, did so voraciously, reading an average of 20 books a year. And what I find even more interesting is the regional variations across Canada: B.C. residents read about 33 books a year, Atlantic Canada 22, Ontario 19, Alberta 18, Quebec 16, and Manitoba/Saskatchewan 15 books. What I find disturbing is that, at least as reported in Harris' article, the Eastern provinces are lumped all together, instead of being listed separately (Newfoundland and Labrador, Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, and Prince Edward Island), and the Territories (Yukon, Northwest Territories, and Nunavut) are not included at all.

We seem to be surprised, and perhaps embarrassed, every time such a report comes out. There is much talk of declining literacy, especially among members of a generation increasingly caught up in the pop culture world of the internet (facebook, MySpace, YouTube, etc.), and gadgets like iPods and cell phones, a world often shallow, consumer-driven, and wetterwendisch.

Educators certainly notice (I was one, briefly, and have also had many conversations with professors on the matter), from elementary school through university, a deterioration of language, critical thinking, and research skills. Information has become easily accessible, but is spread out wide and shallow like manure, and many young people no longer learn how to separate the wheat from the chaff. Some of the available and frequently accessed and referenced information is packaged as democratized knowledge (see Wikipedia), a dangerous concept that sounds good on the surface but can easily slide down the slippery slope towards truthiness (1 : "truth that comes from the gut, not books" (Stephen Colbert, Comedy Central's "The Colbert Report," October 2005); 2 : "the quality of preferring concepts or facts one wishes to be true, rather than concepts or facts known to be true" (American Dialect Society, January 2006).

But according to Janet Eger, a spokeswoman for Indigo Books, "readership in the Canadian market is remaining steady." A much more interesting and revealing question, I think, is what it is people are reading, and the quality of what is being read. According to the Ipsos Reid survey, fiction was the most popular genre among Canadians last year, at 56% of those who had read at least one book. Mysteries and thrillers were also at 56%, while non-fiction books were at 46%. (Is there something odd about these percentages?) How much, I wonder, of the fiction being read is formulaic fluff. That is certainly the bulk of what I see people reading on buses, trains and waiting rooms. Literacy may well be on the decline, even if readership isn't. Maybe people are reading just as much as they have for generations, but are reading less of quality and substance, reaching instead for the easy, escapist, entertaining fluff that kills time and tickles the mind but doesn't require much independent thought and engagement with the text. There is, of course, a place for genre fiction, and some of it does tackle more substantive issues that demand engagement and stimulate deeper thought.

Holiday Productivity

I haven't posted or published anything in a few days, aside from NODs. My day job has kept me rather busy the past week in preparation for the holidays, leaving little time or energy for reading or writing. Though I will spend some time with family over the holidays, I hope to get at least one review written and published, that of Mobs, Messiahs, and Markets, and get some reading done as well.

I don't celebrate Christmas. And I don't accept the oft-advanced argument that Christmas -- a holiday imposed on all of us through the audiovisual pollution of flashing lights and tinseled trees, Christmas carols, product pushing and the cheery-fake 'Merry Christmas' -- is merely a cultural affair. It is not. It is a Christian affair and should not, in a society that claims to have secular government and continues to welcome new immigrants from all parts of the world with the promise of religious freedom, equality and multiculturalism, be State-sanctioned. A secular government in a multicultural society should hold no religious event above any other. Either institute official holidays for the significant events and celebrations of all religions or stay out of it altogether!

Since the State is involved in pushing Christianity by making Christmas an official holiday, I choose to take advantage of the extra time to withdraw, as much as possible, from all things Christmas-y to get some reading and writing done. Of course I take advantage of any holiday to relax a little with good food, drink and company. However, the list of upcoming books for review is getting longer than I like to see it and there is some exciting reading (and listening) ahead. After Mobs, Messiahs, and Markets I get to immerse myself in Al Young's Something About the Blues.

Time, Money & Medieval Literature: A New Translation of Sir Gawain and the Green Knight: A New Verse Translation

As mentioned in the lead-in to a recent post, "Texts in Translation: Kalima and Translation into Arabic," I have more than a passing interest in, and fascination with, medieval literature, as also with translation. But because I am overburdened with student debt, still, I have neither the time nor money to pursue this interest in earnest. Certainly not by way of another university degree--my three have nearly buried me in debt. But on to the matter of this post.

I came across a review of a new translation of Sir Gawain and the Green Knight in the "Sunday Book Review" of the New York Times a few days ago--"A Stranger in Camelot." Though I prefer to read such texts in the original, in this case Middle English, I do understand the need for modern English translations that render the text intelligible to readers who struggle overmuch with older forms of English. Many, perhaps most, high school and university students today struggle even with Shakespearean English, so one cannot really expect them to tackle even earlier stuff.

I haven't read this translation yet, though I hope to do so in the near future. Apparently Armitage presents the Middle English original in a parallel text, much like Seamus Heaney did in Beowulf: A New Verse Translation, a copy of which I have and treasure in my personal library. When a new translation reproduces, as nearly as possible, the spirit and cadence of the original text, it is a joy to read and gives the modern reader a feel for the original. Especially important, as pointed out by Edward Hirsch, is an adequate reproduction of alliteration, the poetic device of choice in early English writing. I, personally, much prefer alliteration and assonance to rhyme as a poetic constraint.

The linguistically adventurous can read the new translation, then work their way through the original. Fun, fun, fun!

Slow Reading, the Book, and New Media

I came across an interesting article, again at Inside Higher Ed, entitled "Blind, Deaf and Dumb." I read the beginning with great interest. I also feel that too much of our lives is sped up too much, and that this also applies to higher education, something I've touched on before (see Research: taking the time to read thoroughly). Students often have little time to truly engage with their reading materials, to read deliberately, thoroughly, and widely. They often feel compelled, when doing research for a research paper, for example, to use tables of contents and indices to find only what they feel is immediately relevant to their argument. This obviously leaves them open to taking things out of context. It also makes for an impoverished reading and learning experience.

I think I understand what Musgrove was getting at when discussing certain students' inability to relate to the text--to see, hear and speak about the text meaningfully. But that is, I think, little different from the blank stare and incoherent stammer exhibited by some (generally older) people when confronted with a computer, cellphone, or iPod. It has to do with familiarity and literacy. His choice of words were, however, rather unfortunate.

Though I also have a certain attachment to the physical book, I think we must be open to new media. The book was, just a few hundred years ago, a new medium. What we need to do is to continue tinkering with the medium to make it as useful as we can (the use of electronic paper helps), and make enough use of it to forget the medium and engage the text. Who gives any thought to the physical book when truly engrossed in the text?

Covering Academic Books in Newspaper Books Sections?

I came across an interesting post yesterday on Inside Higher Ed about a new approach to book coverage in a newspaper. Apparently The Austin American-Statesman is trying a new niche to get people into reading--covering books from academic presses.

I was really surprised that a mainstream paper would try this when books sections are disappearing or shrinking in newspapers across North America. And their niche is academic books, not the newest genre fiction, which I could see as a more popular sort of thing--genre fiction is mostly what I see people on buses and subways and offices reading. I hope this catches on though, at least in university towns across North America.

Texts in Translation: Kalima and Translation into Arabic

I find translation fascinating. I once considered, but, for reasons I will not delve into here, did not pursue a graduate degree at the Centre for Medieval Studies in the University of Toronto that would likely have led me to translation work. My intended foci were Latin, Old English, and Old Norse, possibly in collaboration with Editing Medieval Texts or Book History & Print Culture. Will I revisit these interests at some point? Maybe. But I'm digressing.

There is, of course, nothing essentially modern about translation. As long as written languages have existed and peoples using distinct languages have interacted and/or ruled one another, there has quite likely been translation. There are some very old examples of bi- or multilingual writings (see the bilingual edict of Ashoka--Greek & Aramaic--located in present-day Afghanistan, erected circa 230 B.C.E., for one example). The spread of religion--esp. Buddhism, Christianity, & Islam--and the rise and fall and shifting boundaries of empires--Greek, Roman, Persian, Arab, and later Spanish, Ottoman and British--also resulted in a flurry of translation. Vast empires are invariably multilingual, at least at first, though some end up imposing one language on all.

Baghdad, during the Abbasid Caliphate (750-1258), is said to have had a healthy literary culture and was a vibrant book trade and translation hub. Islam, students of religion and philosophy certainly know, contributed tremendously to the development and flowering of modern Western civilization with philosophical, mathematical, scientific and literary contributions. Today, it would seem, there is little except suspicion, misunderstanding and animosity exchanged between the Arab world and the West. A little of that is hopefully about to change.

I first heard about Kalima and its efforts to translate world literature into Arabic through the Literary Saloon at the complete review. My initial reaction was one of suspicion, ironically. What, I wondered, was the motivation for the translation of literature into Arabic? Why not from Arabic into English and other Western languages? I have since gone to Kalima's web site and read up a bit--about who they are, their objectives, raison d'etre, who supports them and what they have done thus far and plan to do in the coming year--and am impressed.

While I don't see in their list of books already translated and awaiting translation any distinct bias, I do agree with the Literary Saloon's assessment that it's a bit English-heavy. And while translation into Arabic of world literature is a great thing, I really do hope we'll also see more translation of Arabic texts into other languages, especially English, given how dominant it is in world affairs at the moment. There is an obvious need to balance things--there is enough of Western ideas, especially the most frivolous and evanescent ones, making their way around the world via television and, increasingly, internet-driven new media.

Following Developments of E-Ink Technology

For a few years now, I've been watching developments of electronic paper display, or electronic ink technology. I checked the E Ink Corporation web site from time to time, hoping to see products on the market useful to readers and writers. Suddenly now, there seems to be an explosion of devices on the market making use of this technology.

The resolution is not yet very high, and they don't have video or even colour. But being able to carry with you one device about the size of a paperback novel (maybe a little smaller) that can hold hundreds of books, and that, unlike previous generations of e-book readers, despite being digital, is as easy on the eyes as paper, is exciting. Before e-ink, digital books simply were not appealing to me because of the strain on the eyes of looking at a screen. PDAs, though fun, were not viable as readers either, for the same reason.

A recent e-mail from Amazon.com introducing Kindle, their own reader with electronic paper technology, got me going again. Since I cannot afford to go out and purchase it now, especially since I need to research different options first, rather than jumping on the bandwagon with the first product placed under my nose, I will hold off a bit.

What I did do instead of running to the store to purchase Kindle, was a little research. I found the following companies offering readers with electronic ink displays (listed in no particular order):
- Amazon--Kindle
- eREAD--STAReBook
- 3GC, llc (dba. MyAirplane.com)--eFlyBook
- Emano Tec, inc.--MedTab
- iRex Technologies--iLiad
- Polymer Vision--READiUS
- Sony--Sony Reader
- Tianjin Jinke Electronics Co., LTD--Hanlin eReader

If I can arrange it, given my limited income, I shall be reviewing these items here as I can get a hold of them. I normally wouldn't review electronic gadgets on this site, as it is firmly a litblog, but these are alternative book technologies (for reading and writing) and thus directly relevant to this site.

Things to Love About Being a Critic

I was recently asked to submit my book recommendation(s) for the NBCC's new Best Recommended List. When I saw the list posted on Critical Mass, the NBCC's blog, I had to go and see which books had made it into the top 5 for each category and, less importantly, whether my recommendation had made it into the list.

Interestingly, though I'd glanced at or leafed through a couple of the books on the list, I haven't read a single book listed in it's entirety. Some sound very interesting. And my recommendation under non-fiction, David Livingstone Smith's The Most Dangerous Animal: Human Nature and the Origins of War, was not on the list. Oh well, not a big deal.

While on the NBCC site, I got to reading Steve Kellman's acceptance speech for the 2006 Nona Balakian Citation for Excellence in Reviewing. He mentioned a number of things in his speech about being a critic, especially a book reviewer, that really struck a chord. Though I am still rather new to the profession and a part-timer with an unrelated day job, I found myself nodding in agreement throughout. His words made me feel good about what I do with my time after work and on weekends.

Kellman says--I'm paraphrasing here--that shunning bullshit (or horseshit) rhetoric is the first responsibility of the critic, and "[b]eing accurate, honest, informative, and provocative are others." Those are the things I strive for in my reviews. Like Kellman, I don't see much use in simply providing a brief plot summary and thumbs-up or thumbs-down. That does not enrich our culture, nor meaningfully engage the reader.

He quotes Pauline Kael's advice to reviewers (in her case of movies): "You must use everything you are and everything you know that is relevant." The beauty in talking and writing about literature is that, in doing so, the whole universe of thought and experience and subject matter is opened up. "The more we know," says Kellman, "the more we are." And here's my favourite part:

...since the critic is someone who is always learning on the job, whose very job is to learn, using everything you are produces a kind of fractal computation--the self taking the measure of an ever-enlarging self.

Beautiful!

The above is equally true for the theatre and movie critic as for the book critic. But unlike theatre and movie criticism, which requires that the critic goes out into the world, "book criticism is a solitary occupation conducted by an individual reader confronting a volume page by page and conjuring up a commentary word by reluctant word." It is an interesting mixture of private and public, solitary and social. And it is a wonderful combination of pleasure and pain.

I love it!

Talking About Bayard's How to Talk About Books You Haven't Read Without Having Read It

A few days ago I came across Pierre Bayard's How to Talk About Books You Haven't Read via my feed subscription to the complete review's Literary Saloon. This book just begs to be talked/written about without having read it. So, suspending my usual practice, here I go.

My gut reaction, when I first saw the title, was rather negative. But as usual, the negative first impression was followed by curiosity. When something disturbs me, I like to dig in and find out for myself what argument is being made and what lies behind it. As readers of Wordwork|play would quickly find out, it is a matter of principle for me to read a book, particularly a book about which I am going to speak or write, with the exception of some reference materials (dictionaries, thesauri, etc.), from front to back, including the preface, introduction, postscript, appendices and addenda. Behind this principle is the idea that a cursory or incomplete reading can easily result in things being taken out of context, leading to incorrect assumptions, reactions, and conclusions.

The complete review provides not only its own review of the book, but also a good overview of other reviewers' reactions. Most seem to think the book has some valid points and is presented well. Some seem to agree with his general argument, some disagree, though they find it entertaining, while others feel the argument makes more or less sense depending on the culture (esp. its relationship to reading and literature) to which it is applied.

Not having read the book, my reaction is probably closest to that of Anthony Daniels of the New Criterion:

His book is a vindication of ignorance. It is, however, extremely amusing and clever -- though I must add that I use the word "clever" at least partially in its English sense, that is to say meretriciously and ostentatiously intelligent rather than deeply so; it is more a search for applause than truth. (...) It is not easy to guess how far the author is being tongue-in-cheek. Nevertheless, there is a serious point behind the book, and it is wrong.

But then I'm basing my reaction on an incomplete context.

Now if someone would like to send me a free copy of the book--I don't feel like actually spending money on it at this time--I'll read it for myself and form a more sound and studied opinion. Who knows, I may read something that will modify my reaction. I do agree on one point he is said to make in the book--just because we haven't read a book does not mean we can't begin discussion of the ideas contained therein. But judgment of the book and its arguments have to be suspended until it has been read in its entirety.

Advertising in Library Books?

I've read this in several sources now and it really bothers me (see here and here, and a number of litblogs who have picked up on it). It obviously bothers others as well. Advertising is coming not just into public libraries, but indeed into their books. This is beginning in certain libraries in the UK where they will place ad inserts at the first page next to the panel with the review date, thus forcing the borrower to see the ad at least once. Since public funding of libraries seems to be on the decline across North America as well, I would not be surprised to
see library book ads here soon.

I feel a little hypocritical ranting about this as my own litblog has advertising on it, though I have mentioned before how conflicted I feel about it. It is a funding issue here as well. I'm hoping to ultimately restrict advertising here to writing and reading-related content--that would make me feel better. I doesn't sound like library advertising will be restricted that much, though libraries get to approve content. Apparently it will be "fairly respectable, branded offer," according to Mr Jackson, who heads the marketing agency entering/spearheading this new market, and as "fairly generic." Not very comforting.

What really disturbs me about this development is that libraries were/are supposed to be about "free access and impartiality." They were supposed to be a public service, making it possible for anyone, regardless of
socio-economic status, to have free access to literature (used in a very broad sense). This intrusion is simply too much. We already can't walk down the street, take an elevator ride, or even a leak, without being
confronted with advertisements. Now borrowers will have to pay, by looking at advertising, for library books. The question now is, putting the general issue of the intrusion of consumerism into every aspect of our
lives somewhat to the side, whether advertising moneys will end up determining or to some extent influencing material acquisition and offerings.

Book Review: Consider the Source; A Critical Guide to the 100 Most Prominent News and Information Sites on the Web, by James F. Broderick & Darren W. Miller

(Published Oct. 31, 2007 in BC Magazine)

Whether you are a newshound, student, journalist, or writer, this handy guide to news websites should save you a great deal of time.

Whether you are a student, writer, journalist, or newshound, you are often in need of sources. For most of us, the days of spending hours in a library accessing card catalogues, microfiche, and microfilm are over. Not only do most of us no longer need to use such time-consuming and inefficient technologies in search of information, many of us rarely feel the need to physically step into a library. We now have the power of the internet to access, from the comfort of our homes, an almost endless stream of information. Though we may still need to buy or borrow books, magazines, journals or newspapers for our research, the internet once again gives us ready access to information about them, their publishers and authors, and a means to buy or reserve them.

With such ready access to information, and such a dizzying number of sources, how can we know which sources to trust? How do we know the information we access is not only accurate and thorough, but also fair and balanced? How do we know whether a given source has a political, social, ideological or demographic agenda or bias? The long answer is to take the time to read our sources thoroughly and critically, and to research the authors, institutions, publishers, and sponsors behind them. Increasingly, people either lack the critical thinking and analytical skills necessary to judge their sources, and/or lack the time to do so.

This is where Consider the Source; A Critical Guide to the 100 Most Prominent News and Information Sites on the Web by James F. Broderick and Darren W. Miller comes in. They have done much of the work for us. At least for a hundred sites. As the title quite unambiguously suggests, this book examines and guides us through 100 prominent online news and information sites. It purports to give us "a glimpse behind the screens of the most important news and information Web sites--from those connected to global news services to those connected only to the modems of independent journalists and idiosyncratic culture watchers."

Jim Broderick, Ph.D., is an assistant professor of journalism at New Jersey City University in Jersey City, New Jersey. He started his career writing for Indiana State University's newspaper, The Indiana Statesman, and has written for newspapers and wire services in New York City and in the Midwest. Broderick is the author of two books--Paging New Jersey: A Literary Guide to the Garden State (2003, Rutgers University Press) and The Literary Galaxy of Star Trek (2006, McFarland Publishing)--and lectures frequently on New Jersey literature and pop culture.

Darren Miller has worked as a reporter and editor for newspapers in New Jersey and North Carolina. He spent two and a half years covering the people and politics for The Mountaineer. Miller has also been editor-in-chief of The Gothic Times in Jersey City, New Jersey, writing about such topics as the death penalty, murder trials, municipal corruption, and natural disasters. He has appeared in schools and elsewhere to talk about journalism, and writes about the media on his blog, Taking Notes.

Broderick and Miller, having recently written Consider the Source together, are now working on Web of Conspiracy: A Critical Guide to the Conspiratorial World on the Internet, a book about conspiracy theories and the Web. Much more information, as well as links to the 100 sites profiled in Consider the Source can be found on their website, The Reporters' Well.

Consider the Source obviously does not, nor could it, discuss or even list every important sources of news and information on the internet. How then did they decide which sites to cover and which to leave out? The authors do state that the sites chosen have a certain prominence, reputation and importance and, significantly, that they offer content that is largely free. How exactly prominence, importance, or reputation were defined is not entirely clear. These are, after all, subjective terms. Was prominence based on a certain circulation or number of hits, or were polls conducted? How was importance defined? Important in what way and to whom? And what exactly constitutes a certain reputation? However these terms were ultimately defined, having extensively perused the guide, it seems the sources--some of them well-known, others less so--cover a wide spectrum and are treated critically and fairly.

Consider the Source examines the strengths and weaknesses of each site, listed in alphabetical order, and provides links to them. The criteria used to critique the sources are fairly straight-forward: balance, thoroughness, compelling writing, and sensible use of available technology. Each source is covered under the following useful, and fairly brief, sections: "Overview," "What You'll Find There," "Why You Should Visit," "Keep This in Mind," and "Off the Record." These provide the reader with not only a general overview of the source as a whole, but also the site's main features, reasons to visit (or not to visit, in some cases), lesser known aspects, such as it's history or ideological roots or leanings, and other interesting facts. For every source, also, a URL and small visual snapshot are provided. And at the end of each there is a rating displayed as 1 to 5 newspapers.

As important as content in a site's critique is its accessibility and user-friendliness. Some sites, while scoring high in terms of content and historical importance (see AFP--Agence France-Press, "considered to be the oldest news agency in the world"), received a low final rating because their sites were poor (1 newspaper out of 5 for AFP).

At the end, Consider the Source has an appendix listing all sites covered by their ranking, from five newspapers down to one. This is a very handy feature, allowing the reader--perhaps I should say user--quick access to rankings for specific sites. Though handy, I sincerely hope users will read, at least once, the complete critique of each source used. And this leads me to one concern. So many people already don't take the time, or have the critical skills, to adequately determine the value of a given source. This guide, though very useful as a reference for the busy researcher, does not provide, except perhaps by example, access to the tools themselves, to the critical skills needed to analyze sources. There are, after all, many more sites on the internet than the hundred discussed here.

Consider the Source should fit comfortably on the busy researcher's reference shelf. Whether you are a newshound, student, journalist, or writer, this guide should save you a great deal of time in getting a sense of the reliability and usefulness of at least one hundred prominent, important, and reputable news and information sites. Put it next to your writer's guides.

Is Literary Fiction on the Decline?

I came across an interesting article today from the Toronto Star--"Why novelists are nervous." The article, by the Star's books columnist Philip Marchand, made me grunt, swear, beat my fist upon the unsuspecting and innocent dining-room table and, since she was within earshot, share especially frustrating points with my partner. You, incidentally, are also within proverbial earshot.

We have often discussed and lamented the very things brought up in the article. Marchand notes changes in practice, if not policy, at this year's International Festival of Authors in Toronto, to which I won't have the time to go. "It used to be," he writes, "that non-fiction writers need not apply to appear at the International Festival of Authors--unless they were literary biographers." This year, the IFOA, starting at Harbourfront today, has expanded its non-fiction entries available and will highlight the Charles Taylor Prize for literary non-fiction. And a number of prominent writers--Charlotte Gray, Larry Gaudet, David Gilmour, and Rudy Wiebe--will be there specifically because of their non-fiction work.

What's so bad about opening the festival up a bit? Nothing, really. I'm all for inclusion--there is a great deal of very good non-fiction work being produced. The question is whether literary fiction coverage will be reduced, or pushed aside, to accommodate the inclusion. Does it mean, as 'some nervous novelists' feel, that literary fiction is slowly losing its footing in our culture? Marchand says that particular complaint is being raised more often from various quarters--"'literary fiction is losing market share to memoirs and genre fiction'" (from Australian Book Review, April 2005), and '"literary fiction has lost its authority in the culture'" (from Publishers Weekly, Sept. 10). John Updike, quoted by Marchand, also thinks people are becoming less comfortable with the novel, in part because readers no longer have the "backward frame of reference that would enable them to appreciate things like irony and allusions. It's sad."

It is sad. I've certainly noticed less allusion in modern fiction (with notable exceptions), certainly allusion to older forms--literary, as well as cultural, linguistic, and religious. More often now, allusions are to popular culture, or music, or other contemporary forms. Again, I don't decry these. But I worry that there is an erosion of culture where much of the former depth is lost, that deep, nutrient-rich vertical accumulation out of which successive generations have grown, and that we'll be left with only a thin layer of often artificially enhanced and fertilized topsoil. Without that depth, we lose perspective, and without perspective we lose strength, especially to weather storms. Pardon the extended agricultural metaphor.

Philip Roth is also quoted, responding to a question about the conditions for literary fiction, in which he states that there's no doubt that the conditions have deteriorated. He says the status of literature has gone down since he began writing, and that there are also fewer serious critics, fewer serious readers, and many more distractions. He points to 'the screen' as a major distraction--the movie screen, the television screen, and the computer screen. We may as well throw in souped-up cell phones, iPods, and gaming machines that provide both auditory and visual distractions. And then, of course, there are the distractions, brought to young people in large part by ubiquitous advertisements, of mass consumerism.

Marchand, perhaps to balance the article's perspective, approaches both the festival's artistic director, Geoffrey Taylor, and independent booksellers. Taylor, not surprisingly, assures readers that the change does not portend a decline in literary fiction. They have added to, not subtracted from, the program. "But we're trying to be more reflective of what people read," he adds, and "[r]eal readers will read all kinds of things."

Independent booksellers in Toronto, Marchand finds, don't think there is a decline in literary fiction. But I think they, like the festival organizer, are the wrong people to ask. It is in their best interests to sound upbeat about it all. How else can they continue to sell? It might be more instructive to ask the owners/managers of large bookstore chains. First, they carry enough of everything to not care so much about the decline of any one area, and second, because they are so much larger, they are better able to recognize and predict overall trends.

What I would have liked more of a focus on is the decline of literacy, something to which he refers, almost as an afterthought, in a paragraph mentioning the impact of the events of 9/11 on the New York publishing industry. And "the situation is different in Canada and the United States," he adds. Yes, perhaps, but mainly in degree. In many areas we are fast catching up. And not in a good way, either.