The part about his six-day coke marathon with William Ayers was unexpected.
Oh dear. Obama's love letters will have to stay over there, I'm afraid.
(a) "I'm afraid"?
(b) Come on, his letter about Eliot is awesome.
I mean, really, do you want people reading your post-collegiate letters 25 years hence?
Come on, his letter about Eliot is awesome.
Yes.
Christ have mercy I hope I never get famous enough that someone looks up any of my old girlfriends and asks for my letters/e-mails/margin drawings of stick figures dueling to the death.*
* Hey, tell Aristotle to be more interesting if he doesn't want cartoons in his books.
4.b, 8: Yes, that's the problem.
I mean, really, do you want people reading your post-collegiate letters 25 years hence?
I have every confidence that the women to whom I addressed my post-collegiate letters will be reading and re-reading them 25 and more years hence.
I feel uncomfortably voyeuristic reading that. Because it's the sort of self-conscious, overly mannered thing I know I must have written in letters and emails a decade ago. Thank god there's no online archive of my opinions for anyone to stumble across.
9.1: Indeed.
Aristotle, eh? I apparently had a great deal of trouble with him; it's mostly a blur of notes everywhere. It looks like I was having a hard time, and that was in graduate school. Leibniz was pretty bad too, though.
Anyway. Those Obama post-collegiate letters should be left private.
Yeah, the writing style of the first letter quoted is very, very familiar to me. I will now make two comments relating to the source of that familiarity.
The following sentences in the present paragraph form the first comment. The other day I was looking through the papers I have retained since graduate school and beyond (i.e. beyond in the direction of the past), for notes I might have taken when TAing a class a version of which I am currently teaching, because I thought I might have written down something about Chaucer which I wouldn't be able to recover through an act of memory but only, rather, through the aid of some external source. Since I have a folder labelled "my notes and commented-on papers", I naturally looked in it. I did not find the notes I was looking for, but I did flip through the papers I wrote for the Dostoevsky class I took when I was a third year. The paper was about the roles Svidrigailov and Smerdyakov play in Crime and Punishment bzw. The Brothers Karamazov, and I closed by saying that "In the Brothers Karamazov, it is less clear that he has succeeded with Smerdyakov. However, this very ambiguity also prevents a patness to the end of the novel that might otherwise be present.". Ah, me! Ah, my!
The remainder of this blog comment forms the second comment I noted I would make. I decided to look through the gmail-archived exchanges of emails between me and the friend from Chicago with whom I was most likely to have pretentious email exchanges with. In fact I think nothing in them approaches the level of certainty characteristic of the essay above or Barry O's letters, but I did once get an email that began like this: "I was listening to the stylings of the Dutch goth-rock band Within Temptation (has your head exploded yet, trying to contemplate the sheer impossibility of such a thing?) and thinking about authenticity."
That's a pretty long search string. Maybe you should check the spelling again.
Oh. This is a physical folder, with physical papers.
There was a point when I thought it was tragic that the voluminous archive of emails I sent to my high-school girlfriend got lost. Now I see how foolish that was.
14.2: However, this very ambiguity also prevents a patness to the end of the novel that might otherwise be present.
Whoa.
Actually I am somewhat enjoying reading these emails, though it has to be admitted that they are not to a girlfriend. (They also are somewhat depressing. God, it's like I haven't really changed at all since I was 22.)
(except FOR THE WORSE. "So viele Jahre lebte ich, und alles ist versunken", to quote the subject line of an email I apparently wrote many years ago.)
You're depressing me, neb. It's all well and good to reread old correspondence, but it mustn't be done with an eye toward whether one has changed for the better or for the worse. It's not a competition.
What on earth makes you think that one has to read with an eye toward such things, in order to have such thoughts?
This is so embarrassing and juvenile. Real men who have accomplished something in life write things like "will and skill always win, and that be us!!!!"
At the end of March, Genevieve moved from Second Street to another apartment, on Warren Street, in Brooklyn.
OMG, I lived on Warren St.! Maybe I lived in the very same house!
I supposed this is the sort of thing everybody but me already knows, but I found it a bit unsettling to learn that Obama had blended together different girlfriends in order to create his memoir's composite "New York girlfriend" character. I can see why it makes sense, especially when you're dealing with past relationships, but at the same time there's definitely something creepy about it. It seems like a more complete expropriation of the other person's story than is usually the case in such memoiry writings. Hmm.
Remember BOHSGF? I was totally going to marry her, but then she dumped me after I totaled my car and then she dragged out our dysfunctional relationship for 6 years, never revealing that she wanted to have my babies until it was too late and she'd moved to Maine.
And then I'll never forget my college fling with the large-breasted Swiss girl from upstate New York whom I met when she was a freshman and we were interns together the summer after she graduated from college. Boy, could he suck dick.
Last sentence in 29 shows the confusion that comes from combining characters.
I'd say all of 29 does that, actually.
Composite characters in memoirs seem wrong in a way that composite characters in adaptations do not.
(a.)
and thinking about authenticity.
You're joking right?
(b.) I'm sympathetic to feeling sympathetic with Eliot's conservatism and preferring some of it to bourgeois liberalism.
28: There's a memoir by Kay Redfield Jamison where she talks about herself as one of three siblings with one brother and a sister. In the back it mentions at least two sisters. She talks about how hard it was to maintain a reationship with her sister who was telling her that she was lithiumizing away her feelings etc. I think it was kinder toward her sister not to name which one or be overly specific.
31 -- Oh! Little slow on the uptake here.
Given the time in his career that it was published and the nature of the memoir, the concerns in 28 and 32 strike me as rather trivial. The use of a composite might even be seen as admirable in the actual circumstances. Looks a little dodgy in retrospect after the writer quite unexpectedly became President of the United States? Possibly. Or maybe you're Republican/Politico plants.
And of course there will be a Halford/x.trapnel composite in the Unfogged memoir that someone here writes.
I, for many, have no problem with the way we are used in memoirs.
36
Given the time in his career that it was published and the nature of the memoir, the concerns in 28 and 32 strike me as rather trivial. ...
Especially since the introduction apparently said some of the characters were composites.
And you'd hardly expect Bill Ayers to be able to keep all the details straight.
The use of a composite character helps to mitigate the violation of other people's privacy that is always part of writing a memoir. I'm at an extreme when it comes to respect for privacy, but I think even someone closer to the center of the bell curve would prefer some degree of plausible deniability when intimate details of their life are being discussed in public without their consent.
14:I still remember the paper I wrote about The Brothers Karamazov in college. I ended by quoting the Who, "The kids are alright" (this was in relation to the last scene of the novel).
39: Especially with the coke and all.
40: Especially given the relatively short time between the relationships in question and the writing of the book.
John "George Bush is an unappreciated genius" Hinderaker: The letters "are hilarious, and tend to confirm the perception that Obama is a hopeless bullshitter [and] may provide a hint as to why Obama's college and law school grades remain a well-kept secret."
And of course there will be a Halford/x.trapnel composite in the Unfogged memoir that someone here writes.
A constant thorn in the respective sides of all participants was one Haltrap: a Hollywood lawyer passionate about his workouts and his daughter, he valiantly protected the interests of his chosen clients by sleeping endlessly with them, averring that Jesus never meant for anything other than polyamory and hatred of Boston. Not one for half-measures, Haltrap's libertarianism was indistinguishable from his anarchism, which found expression in an insistence on half a pound of bacon for all, every morning. Sigh. Haltrap could be a trial, but fellow commenters could only commiserate with the strain of neurosis running through his discerning commentary on institutional legitimacy and whatnot.
---
Wow. I suck at writing.
I don't know what Obama's grades were at Columbia, by the way, but they were good enough to get him admitted to HLS, from he graduated magna cum laude. Hinderaker missed the magna.
Hinderaker missed the magna.
Because the black man was keeping him down, man.
Given the time in his career that it was published and the nature of the memoir, the concerns in 28 and 32 strike me as rather trivial.
Certainly, if you're going to write a memoir, this is probably the best way to handle the situation. And indicating that that's what you're doing is good. But it doesn't make that part of the memoir any more "true." And yes, I know that the memoir genre isn't necessarily about factual truth.
(And my criticism was blanket. It just happened to come up in a thread about Obama's memoir. For whatever amount of small change that's worth.)
I hate to get all serious here for a moment, but if the Vanity Fair piece is going to lead to people considering, yet again, whether Obama's a smart guy, whether he was or is a bullshitter or pathetic, whether he's hiding terrible secrets in his past, and so on, I'm annoyed. There's an election going on, and the outcome is going to make a real and significant difference. Fuck Vanity Fair.
It's an excerpt from a new biography of the president, that non-stupid people are saying good things about, written by a Pulitzer Prize winning journalist.
Personally, between folders nested deep on my computer and physical boxes or drawers, I have a number of mementoes of exes lying around. There's some that probably would get me in trouble if it came to light, but a lot more that I frankly don't feel bad about. Everyone was young and whiny once, right? I probably should organize it all and cull the bad stuff from the merely embarrassing stuff someday, though.
Skimming the Vanity Fair article and similar stuff elsewhere, I'm actually wondering if I skipped or repressed or have yet to hit some stage in writing development, because it seems to me like everyone goes through a florid, Romantic-with-a-capital-R phase, and I didn't. Not that I'm all that direct, but I circumlocute in different ways, I don't think or write about literature much (or at least I didn't until recently), I rarely use metaphors, etc. Of course, maybe when I dig into those old mementoes I'll find I actually did write like your typical whiny teen and I'll wish I'd deleted it all. Who knows.
28
I supposed this is the sort of thing everybody but me already knows, but I found it a bit unsettling to learn that Obama had blended together different girlfriends in order to create his memoir's composite "New York girlfriend" character.
I'd agree that it seemed weird (I wouldn't even say I felt "unsettled", but, whatever, nitpicking), but I don't read enough memoirs to have a strong opinion about it. If that is the norm, I can see why in hindsight. Maybe this is me just being too forgiving of Obama because he's a Democrat, though, so who knows.
51: Right, since the Hinderaker's of this world have mastered the trick of spontaneous generation of bullshit, trying overly hard to deny them fodder is a loser's game.
Apologies to Vanity Fair, then, I suppose.
I'm not a fan of celebrity chasing bios at opportunistic times, whether they're written by Pulitzer Prize winning journalists or not. The Pulitzer status doesn't constitute an argument from credentials.
Well, no shit. But you seemed to be confused about the endeavor from top to bottom. This is the work of a serious journalist, and, you know, an actual biography getting good reviews, not simply a couple decades-old love letters. Don't read it -- I'm certainly not going to. But suggesting that it not be written, or written about, is silly.
But suggesting that it not be written, or written about, is silly.
I'll have to think about that (I myself don't see a hell of a lot of value in that sort of book). I do think that the timing of publication should be taken into serious consideration when the subject is participating in high-stakes endeavors.
56: I'd agree that it's sometimes unfortunate, just because voters are irrational and who knows what they'll base their votes on. But writers might not want to wait (years, decades) until the subject has finished an entire lifetime of high-stakes endeavors. You could argue that all else being equal it's better journalism that way - I'm not even sure of that, but it's conceivable - but writers have their own lives and careers going on. And as for publishers and the media, well, it sucks that they're profit-driven, but...
Sometimes waiting is the only way to do the research in enough depth.
I'm actually wondering if I skipped or repressed or have yet to hit some stage in writing development, because it seems to me like everyone goes through a florid, Romantic-with-a-capital-R phase
Holy shit did I write some embarrassing stuff in HS. Par for the course, naturally, but I pray it's all pulp. By the time I hit college, I think I was mostly just overly earnest and lovey dovey, but not humiliatingly so.
Mostly OT, Iris revealed to AB last night that she "loves" a boy. Very sweet.
Finish the sentence, Cyrus. I'm making -- or would make, if I'd spelled it out -- a moral case for holding off on publication.
A writer like Maraniss took on this project precisely because it was going to be hot stuff right now. Sure, he has a career to pursue, and we could all run around chasing celebrity in order to advance a career that consists of chasing celebrity, which career then justifies our chasing of celebrity.
What I mean to say is that the upcoming election is not a game. Sorry I'm so irritable about this.
And as for publishers and the media, well, it sucks that they're profit-driven, but...
Finish the sentence, Cyrus. I'm making -- or would make, if I'd spelled it out -- a moral case for holding off on publication.
... but this is hardly the only and probably not even one of the biggest bad effects of the profit motive in media, certainly falling far behind the media's marginalization of anyone to the left of the mainstream Democratic Party for example, nor are apparently laudable books by an apparently serious writers (and not "Very Serious (TM)" but genuinely serious, at least as far as I can tell after admittedly cursory
research) anywhere near the top 10 list of causes of superficiality in politics, on which America's unique system of government and basic human psychology would figure more prominently than books like this, and putting aside enumerating exact lists I'm pretty sure that this isn't a deliberate hackjob which would be a more common source of misleading or destructive soundbites and narratives than from books like this, and the idea that the writer is "chasing celebrity" seems unlikely as well considering that Maraniss considered and rejected writing such a book back in 2008 which I think would have been an even better time if this really was opportunistic, so to the extent that there's a moral failing here it's roughly on the scale of, say, smoking while living in a household with small children, to pick a public presidential peccadillo.
I mean, I'm sure this isn't making you less irritable, sorry about that, but I'm in need of procrastination this afternoon, and you did ask...
Haltrap could be a trial, but fellow commenters could only commiserate with the strain of neurosis running through his discerning commentary on institutional legitimacy and whatnot.
Delightful!
Especially since the introduction apparently said some of the characters were composites.
Ah, I'd forgotten that. That being the case, and it being apparently common practice, my unease is largely dispelled. (And I think Nick Smith's "Polly Perkins" story was also defensible, in Metropolitan.)
and it being apparently common practice, my unease is largely dispelled
Noooo! You're supposed to now be uneasy about all memoirs. But then not do anything about it.
Well, I am uneasy about all memoirs, but for a different reason--I'm suspicious of the desire to present one's own life to others as embodying a coherent narrative. Attempting to make sense of our life through narrative is inevitable, I think, but I think memoirists are sort of like Cosmo-photoshoppers in that they present a misleading sense of perfection to the rest of us.
56
I'll have to think about that (I myself don't see a hell of a lot of value in that sort of book). I do think that the timing of publication should be taken into serious consideration when the subject is participating in high-stakes endeavors.
This is wrong. The fact that Obama is running for President makes the book more important. You think the news media should be prohibited from writing anything about the people running for President?
Definitely not, James. I'm looking forward to the long-anticipated book by a serious person on Mitt Romney's toilet-training habits. I hope it explores his early relationship with his mother.
It's not my bag, but I can imagine how a highly partisan writer uncovers a fact that he guesses might be damning to his favored candidate if revealed at the eleventh hour and wrestles with his conscience whether to post it. But "amusingly pretentious love letters" in May of an election year does not meet those criteria.
This is also a case in which reductio is helpful. Substitute any number of things for "the Vanity Fair piece" in 50, up to and including "the news." Parsi, prepare to be very annoyed.
68: I know, babe. My high-level privacy meter kicked in, as I said early on in this thread. Amusingly pretentious love letters are interesting to people who are into gossip.
Whatever. People will write these things. I sometimes tend toward being very sober and serious, and it bothers me that, in a highly contested and rather important election, something is published with some fanfare that puts some weight on the scales.
Completely OT: I see from Radley Balko's blog that he's moving the whole kit and caboodle over to Huffington Post.
Is this just a thing? Everything is appropriated by HuffPo? I hate that site.
I mean, everyone links to it all the time, as though it's the source for news, which I doubt is the case. Do they still have the obnoxious ads showing sexified chicks all the time?
I thought it was wire stories and vanity pieces by the b-list celebrity sorts.
68.last didn't take long to become a prophecy fulfilled.
Eh, having scrolled through some stuff at Balko's blog, I have not said anything new regarding the HuffPo move. Sorry for having brought it up here, but I was momentarily disgusted.
Still, momentarily disgusted is pretty much the same thing as very annoyed. I'm waiting for k-sky to open his hotline.
I'd rather have a coffee shop/movie theater than a hotline, truth be told.
Amusingly pretentious love letters are interesting to people who are into gossip.
I would like to note for the record that I am into gossip, and I'm prepared to argue in favor of gossip. Huzzah, gossip, I say.
Unless you have rich relatives or win the lottery or don't have ethics or something.
I'd rather have a coffee shop/movie theater than a moveshop coffvieater.
Do the kids today want coffee with their movies? The multiplex by me has a coffee shop, but they have 20 screens. I assume they can cater to minority tastes. They also have a restaurant and beer, if you pay too much for food and beer after paying extra for a seat in the food and beer section.
This is the one I'm thinking of. I saw Kicking & Screaming there in 1996. Also one of Satyajit Ray's films. Love that place.
What I can't figure out is why movie theaters keep prices so high on everything. As it stands, I probably go out to the movies once or twice a year. If they dropped admission to $5 and charged normal prices for the concessions, I'd probably go once a month, which means I'd be giving the theaters much more money per year.
I'm sure Knecht will come along shortly to explain why the current pricing model is tailored exactly to maximize profits based on market research or somesuch whatever.
You know the theaters don't get any of the ticket money, right?
None at all? I did not know that. But does the broader argument hold up? I'd be forking over more money for movie tickets to someone if they dropped the price. And I'd be spending more, on a yearly basis, on concessions.
Well, I am uneasy about all memoirs
I liked at the end of An Arsonist's Guide to Writers' Homes in New England the main character writes two books from prison. A memoir, which is the false official narrative, and a novel, which is the true story. Both are narratives, though. We're all struggling to tell a story of ourselves, even if everything doesn't fit quite right.
Genevieve's meditations on Barack seem often to lean toward the condescending, such as:
I really like him more and more--he may worry about posturing and void inside but he is a brimming and integrated character.
Stuff like that (which seems a bit cringeworthy to me, along the lines of Biden's famous "mainstream, clean and articulate" quote) -- along with her culminating statement on their relationship affirming that his true "lithe... black lady" is probably waiting for him out there somewhere -- hint at undercurrents of racialized anxiety that she never really comes clean about, even to (what the article presents of) her diary.
In a speculative mode -- but in line with a common element in "interracial" relationships -- I'd guess that he sensed this in her (it's at any rate a very workaday experience for black men dating white women to sense this kind of conflictedness and undertone of condescension in their partners). I would even hazard the speculation that it was, or could plausibly have been, a major source of the reserve and wariness she was always complaining to her diary about. A case of expectations becoming self-fulfilling prophecies.
On the other hand, or on a different part of the same hand, she may have simply sensed that he was a born politician and would need a racially-acceptable wife to go where he was going. An embellishment on the above theme, but one that would make it more understandable, or at least less distasteful.
My favorite movie theater is a second-run theater with a full bar and restaurant in it. You can get a good selection of lunches or dinners and beers and cocktails while watching your movie, not just nachos or popcorn slathered in cheese-flavored or butter-flavored goop with sodas. The food isn't four-star-restaurant-caliber, of course, and it's probably a little more expensive than what you'd pay for the same dishes at the restaurant across the street, but it's still nowhere near the markup in regular theaters. And, as a second-run theater, its ticket prices range from $1 to $5.50.
I don't actually go there all that often, because it's a bit remote for where I live now and if I'm interested in a big blockbuster I don't want to wait for it to get to a second-run theater, but it's really nice now and then.