Just call it e-rotica

WELL, I’ll be darned. While I thought Kindles and other e-readers were all about convenience, space and portability, others are not so high-minded. In fact, I’ve just discovered the devices could well be the reason for the sudden upsurge in what’s been called “mommy porn” – with one book in particular leading the charge.

Fifty Shades of Grey, a gasping tale of badly written S&M “erotic romance” by one EL James, is apparently such a runaway success with middle-aged moms that it’s about to be made into a film, according to America’s National Public Radio. And, apparently, it’s mostly thanks to the advent of devices like the Kindle, which mean no one can see what you’re reading ….

Having taken a peek on amazon.com to see what all the fuss is about, I can tell you the writing’s truly dire – “the real heart-fail is that I don’t know if he is truly capable of love”, etc – the names are corny, with a “heroine” called Anastasia Steele whose lover is named Christian Grey (get it?), but the tale is apparently really rude.

I decided to see if this secret side of e-reading really was a trend or just a marketing ploy for the book, only to discover that, according to the Guardian’s Antonia Senior, phenomenal e-book sales are definitely being driven by “downmarket” fiction.

“Kindle-owning bibliophiles are furtive beasts,” avers Antonia. “Their shelves still boast classics and Booker winners. But inside that plastic case, other things lurk. Sci-fi and self-help. Even paranormal romance, where vampires seduce virgins and elves bonk trolls …. There is a literary snobbishness at play here, clearly. Reading has always been a competitive  sport. Why else would anyone have read Ulysses?”

Good grief! It could make for a whole new way of vetting potential friends or lovers, couldn’t it? No longer is a furtive scan of their bookshelves enough to check out whether they’re right for you. You’ll have to demand to see what’s on their e-readers.

My own Kindle collection must make for very dull reading by these new standards. Typical of the 76 titles stowed on my favourite toy are The Man Who Planted Trees; Hit Lit: Cracking the Code of the 20th Century’s Biggest Bestsellers; and Madame Bovary.

The “raciest” — only in the sense that one of the characters races around in a Cadillac — is probably Elvis and the Dearly Departed, a silly but strangely absorbing murder mystery which I bought because of its quirky title and first line: “Elvis has just peed on my shoes, which is my life in a nutshell.”

Elvis, in case you’re wondering, is a dog.

Of course, now that I think about it, there are other unexpected consequences of the advent of the e-reader, too.

As website cracked.com points out, you can’t hide a gun in a Kindle, you can’t doodle on it while you’re reading, and you can’t perform other important tasks with it, like stabilising a table, killing a spider or breaking up a cat fight. – Stevie Godson

 (A version of this column first appeared in the Daily Dispatch)

 

Comments »

What the #@$%*!

I’VE been feeling full of profanities lately. So full that if my thoughts were photographed – heaven forbid – I guarantee they’d look like this: #@$%*!

It’s not nice, I know, but if you had to put up with the haphazardness of my internet connection – up and running beautifully one minute and dead as a dodo the next – and had lots of research to do to boot, you probably wouldn’t be in a good mood, either.

Still, at least it set me to thinking about #@$%*! There’s even a name for it. It’s called a grawlix.

If you were lucky enough to have comics as a kid (they were totally banned in my house so I had to read smuggled copies by torchlight in a sneaky under-the-covers kind of way), you’ll probably remember seeing it quite often.

It was invented especially for comics to depict cursing, and named by a comic book artist – Mort Walker (whose most famous creations were Beetle Bailey, and Hi and Lois) – for a 1964 article called Let’s Get Down to Grawlixes.

Swearing of any kind poses problems in print. While some readers don’t mind, others are outraged. Newspapers – generally all-age publications – tread a fine line.

The Dispatch’s style guide – the newspaper for which I write this column – says we should use the first letter followed by asterisks rather than spelling the naughty word out in full. If grawlixes were the rule, though, readers wouldn’t have to work out the difference between, for example, b**** and b*******, would they? They could just use their own imaginations ….

In England, it seems the more liberal the newspaper, the more liberal the language, leading one blog to ask: “Are there too many f****s in the Guardian?” (And since the blog was one of its own, that newspaper spelt the swear word out in full!)

Grawlixes weren’t the only thing old Mort came up with for the comics – he created words for all the graphic symbols splattered generously across their pages. In his 1980 Lexicon of Comicana, he coined  “briffits” for the clouds of dust indicating a character left in a rush; “solrads” for lines that radiate from the sun or from light bulbs to indicate luminosity; “agitrons”, the wiggly lines around a character that indicate shaking, and a whole slew more.

“It started out as a joke for the National Cartoonists Society magazine,” he says, in Mort Walker’s Private Scrapbook. “I spoofed the tricks cartoonists use, like dust clouds when characters are running or lightbulbs over their heads when they get an idea.”

When his son suggested he expand on it, “I created pseudo-scientific names for each cartoon cliché, like the sweat marks cartoon characters radiate. I called them ‘plewds’ after the god of rain, ‘Joe Pluvius’.”

Mort was later shocked to see the book displayed not in the humour section of his local bookstore, as he expected, but on a shelf labelled “Art Instruction”.

“I gave up,” he explained, with a shrug – or should that be an “agitron”? – and that’s just how he sold it. – Stevie Godson

(A version of this column first appeared in the Daily Dispatch)

 

 

6 Comments »

Hit Lit: Cracking the Code of the Twentieth Century’s Biggest Bestsellers

… by James W Hall

Reviewed for New York Journal of Books by Stevie Godson

It’s a simple premise: take a dozen bestsellers from across the 20th century, turn them inside out and upside down to see what makes them tick, analyse all their similarities and, voila!, you have the recipe for writing a bestseller.

Or do you?

Author and literature professor James W. Hall decided to find out and with some smart forethought—not least the title’s clever play on the hugely popular “chick lit” genre—he may just nudge this albeit nonfiction book into selling quite a few copies itself.

The book’s other clever hook, of course, is its inevitable appeal to the hundreds of thousands of would-be authors out there frantically seeking that holy grail of fiction—the secret to bestseller success.

That the author should have ended up writing about popular fiction is somewhat surprising given that, as a youngster growing up in a southern US town in the 1950s, it was touch and go whether he would read any book, especially for fun.

It was, he says, as unlikely as if he’d decided to knit a sweater for the football coach.

So when his mother one day dropped him off at the local library to kill time while she ran some errands, he was mortified—until he spotted the word “nude”.

Like many a 10-year-old before and after, it was his entrée into the world of books. And like most of them—luckily—his taste in books eventually expanded to matters beyond preteen titillation.
“. . . later I fell in love with Virginia Woolf, Lawrence Durrell, and John Fowles, Faulkner and Steinbeck and the poets Sylvia Plath and Anne Sexton and Robert Frost. It came as a shock to learn that sports and reading were not mutually exclusive.”

So in love did Hall fall that books became not only his passion but his profession, although for some time he was quite the literary snob.

As a teacher, the avant-garde and experimental became his specialty. It was probably a bonus that “they required someone like me to help the uninitiated student fully comprehend and appreciate their esoteric beauty”.

“I held up these challenging novels as the gold standard of literary achievement, and I touted them as superior in every regard to novels that still employed such old-fashioned techniques as plot and character development.”

Happening on a collection of year-by-year bestseller lists one day in the university library, “starbursts of nostalgia” were evoked by the names of novel after novel that he’d read years ago and, before long, he’d chosen 10 of them and put together a course in popular fiction.

What started out as little more than a whim proved, he says, to be a watershed moment in his life and set him off on an odyssey to find out what the “larger wisdom” is that makes a book sell by the bucketload.

For Hit Lit, Hall has offered up his own wisdom—gained over more than 20 years of study and lectures—to examine a dozen of what he calls spectacular megahits.

They are—and it’s almost impossible that you won’t have read at least one of this stellar group—Gone with the Wind by Margaret Mitchell (1936); Peyton Place by Grace Metalious (1956); To Kill a Mockingbird by Harper Lee (1960); Valley of the Dolls by Jacqueline Susann (1966); The Godfather by Mario Puzo (1969); The Exorcist by William Peter Blatty (1971); Jaws by Peter Benchley (1974); The Dead Zone by Stephen King (1979); The Hunt for Red October by Tom Clancy (1984); The Firm by John Grisham (1991); The Bridges of Madison County by Robert James Waller (1992); and The Da Vinci Code by Dan Brown (2003).

As different as the stories seem, reading Hill’s postmortem we discover that in many ways, they are all alike, too. True to his word, the author manages to spell it all out for us in down-to-earth detail with nary a hint of academia clogging up the process.

Sometimes fascinating, often predictable, Hit Lit is unfortunately tediously drawn out. What may hold the attention broken up into lecture-size chunks is simply too much for a full-length book.

But if you take the trouble to plough through it, will you find, hidden in one of its pages, the secret formula that will make you an overnight bestselling author? Does he crack the code?

To answer, unfortunately, would give the game away.

 

 

Comments »

R.I.P. Jim Marshall

 

 My interview with Jim Marshall – the man who changed the music. — Stevie Godson

 

Comments »

Clover Adams: A Gilded & Heartbreaking Life

… By Natalie Dykstra

Reviewed for the New York Journal of Books by Stevie Godson

“Gilded Clover Adams’ life undoubtedly was. It was undeniably tinged with sadness, too—the death of her mother when Clover was only six; the suicide of a beloved aunt; her own childlessness. Clover nonetheless rose above these personal tragedies to live a life filled with creativity, art, travel, and intelligent debate. Until a series of dark moods overwhelmed her completely, her life had been full and rich. The heartbreak was not in her life. It was in her desperate demise.”

Whenever—if ever—Marion “Clover” Adams’ role in 19th century American history is mentioned, it is usually as the adjunct to a brilliant man of letters or as a tragic suicide. At the start of the 21st century, does this narrow view of the wife of Henry Adams, grandson and great-grandson of presidents, matter?

To first-time biographer Natalie Dykstra it does indeed. And thanks to her evident passion for her subject, tempered with enough restraint to intrigue rather than bludgeon the reader into the author’s way of thinking, Clover Adams at last comes vividly into her own.

Through meticulous research and a lively writing style, Dykstra succeeds in presenting a fully rounded picture of her subject, bringing Clover to vibrant life. The biography plays out like the mystery it ultimately is: Why, at age 42, did Clover take her own life, a life full of privilege and position—not only as a member of the wealthy Boston Hooper family, but also as the wife of respected historian Henry Adams?

It was Clover’s photographs—the socialite took up the relatively new art of photography less than three years before she killed herself—that first led Dykstra to try to find the truth behind what drove her to her death. And although there was a raft of Clover’s own letters, as well as the discovery of family papers still in private hands that allowed the author to understand more about the world into which Clover had been born, “What I saw in her photographs was exactly what she’d seen herself,” writes Dykstra, “giving me a kind of visual evidence that letters don’t provide, opening up hidden reservoirs of feeling about family and marriage, loss and madness.”

Clover’s life, says the author, was previously “half-illumined”, reflected in the views of others: “Occasionally, Clover can be glimpsed in other people’s diaries and letters—a quick flash of her skirt as it rounds a corner.”

But she left behind clues, not only in her many letters but also—most eloquently—in her revelatory photographs, “which invite the viewer to stand not on this side of her suicide, but on the other, the one she lived on.”

On the surface, Clover led a completely charmed life. Born into a lively, intelligent and privileged family, she had “all she wanted, all this world could give.”

She enjoyed a close bond with her older brother, Ned, and her widowed father but, as she drifted toward her 30s, life as an unmarried woman had, in her own words, “become tiresome.” Marriage prospects had dimmed after the Civil War, severely skewing the male:female ratio, and Clover was 28 by the time she married. Her groom was 33.

According to Dykstra’s research, Clover and Henry truly loved one another, although, from the start, a strange ambivalence seemed to underscore Henry’s feelings. He found Clover, he wrote to his brother Brooks during his engagement, “so far away superior to any woman I have ever met, that I did not think it worthwhile to resist . . . I am absurdly in love.”

But to his friend, English lawyer Charles Milnes Gaskell, Henry wrote: “She is certainly not handsome; nor would she be quite called plain, I think . . . She talks garrulously but on the whole pretty sensibly . . . We shall improve her . . .”

Notes Dykstra: “The way his genuine love for her was marbled with a persistent turning away, a covert withdrawal hidden within overt approval, would persist throughout their marriage.”

Fiercely intelligent, Clover thrived in the “gilded age” of Washington, DC. A wide array of writers and artists, contemporary presidents and other politicians, dignitaries, doctors, and academics made their way to the Adams’ salon—as much for Clover’s company as for Henry’s—drawn by her wit and warmth (as well as her often entertainingly acerbic take on society). She was, said famed author and close confidant Henry James, “a perfect Voltaire in petticoats”.

Honest, quick thinking, and with a streak of independence and rebellion, Clover read widely, tackling Plato and the Greek playwrights in their original language.

Though dismissive of her own writing skills, Clover was nonetheless a talented wordsmith in her own right, describing a Titian painting as looking as though it had been painted “with powdered jewels soaked in sunshine,” and a row of golden poplars as “enormous lighted candles.”

She was practical, too, ordering the legs of their furniture to be shortened to better fit her 5’ 2” and Henry’s only slightly taller proportions.

In 1883, Clover began taking and developing photographs with her portable five-by-eight-inch mahogany camera. It was a complicated procedure, but “Clover started making art, and the process was changing her life”.

In less than three years she had a collection of 113 photographs, their subjects uniquely and artistically interpreted. But just when she had discovered this powerful way to express herself, her life started to unravel. “What had been a recurrent undertow of dark moods gathered force until she was engulfed by despair.”

Henry’s clichéd, somewhat overenthusiastic, attention to a younger, prettier woman couldn’t have helped matters.

In December 1885, two and a half years after she had first picked up her camera, Clover committed suicide by drinking from a vial of potassium cyanide that she had used to develop her photographs. “The means of her art had become the means of her death.”

Henry was heartbroken, commissioning sculptor Augustus Saint-Gaudens to create a brooding bronze statue to memorialize her. The six-foot-high “compelling and mysterious figure, draped and seated” was his only public tribute to her.

“He almost never spoke of her and did not even mention her in his Pulitzer Prize-winning autobiography, The Education of Henry Adams.

If there is any small criticism to be levelled at this haunting book, it is in the subtitle: A Gilded and Heartbreaking Life. Gilded Clover Adams’ life undoubtedly was. It was undeniably tinged with sadness, too—the death of her mother when Clover was only six; the suicide of a beloved aunt; her own childlessness.

Clover nonetheless rose above these personal tragedies to live a life filled with creativity, art, travel, and intelligent debate. Until a series of dark moods overwhelmed her completely, her life had been full and rich.

The heartbreak was not in her life. It was in her desperate demise.

2 Comments »

We are so very ‘umble

Today is a very special day for word nerds worldwide – it’s the 200th anniversary of the birth of Charles Dickens.

In commemoration of  his life and works, not only has Google created one of its wonderful “doodles” in his honour, but Great Britain’s Royal Mail today revealed a sneak preview of two stamps – officially launching in June – to celebrate his bicentenary.

The two stamps feature illustrations from his first novel, The Pickwick Papers (originally serialised and entitled The Posthumous Papers of Pickwick) and his 1838 novel, Nicholas Nickleby.

The character of Mr Pickwick forms a set of six stamps featuring original illustrations adapted from Character Sketches from Charles Dickens, by Joseph Clayton Clarke (otherwise known as Kyd) and originally published around 1890.

The Nicholas Nickleby stamp will be part of a special miniature sheet of four stamps of illustrations by Hablot Knight Brown, (known as Phiz), who illustrated 10 books by the author.

Royal Mail Stamps spokesman Philip Parker said: “Charles Dickens was one of the truly great British novelists, a man born into poor circumstances who went on to change the world in which he lived thanks not just to his novels, but his campaigning journalism and philanthropy.”

Today’s celebrations include a wreath-laying ceremony in Portsmouth, England – the author’s birthplace – and at Westminster Abbey, where he was laid to rest some 58 years later.

The full set of 10 new stamps will be issued on June 19 and will feature iconic characters from some of his most famous novels, including Oliver Twist, David Copperfield and A Tale of Two Cities.

What the Dickens? Some facts about the author

  • Charles Dickens was born in Portsmouth on February 7, 1812. In 1836 he married Catherine Hogarth. They subsequently had 10 children.
  • When he was nine, his family were imprisoned in Marshalsea Debtors’ Prison in Southwark for his father’s debts, while Dickens went to work in a blacking factory. He later used the prison as one of the settings for Little Dorrit.
  • His first novel, The Pickwick Papers, was published in 1836.
  • In 1837 Catherine’s 17-year-old sister Mary died in Dickens’s arms, becoming the inspiration for the death of Little Nell in The Old Curiosity Shop.
  • On June 9, 1865 Dickens survived the Staplehurst rail crash. The first class carriage in which he was travelling was the only one of seven not to plunge off the bridge. Dickens helped to tend the wounded and used his experience later in the ghost story The Signalman.
  • His final, unfinished, novel, The Mystery of Edwin Drood, was published after his death. The identity of the murderer was never revealed.
  • Dickens was interred at Poets’ Corner in Westminster Abbey, despite his wish to be buried at Rochester Cathedral.
  • His novel A Tale of Two Cities has sold over 200 million copies.
  • Between 1992 and 2003, Dickens was featured on the reverse of the Bank of England £10 note together with a scene from The Pickwick Papers. 
  • Dickens’ most autobiographical work – David Copperfield – was also his favourite.
  • Such was the interest generated by the serialisation of his work, a huge crowd gathered at the dock in Boston to await the ship that carried Chapter 71 of  The Old Curiosity Shop.
  • The only person said to be able to predict the conclusion of Dickens’ complex plots was the American author and poet Edgar Allan Poe.
  • Dickens is regarded as the most ‘adapted’ author of all time; all of his novels have been adapted for the cinema or television and, in addition to modern versions, around 100 silent films were made – a third of which still exist.

 

Comments »

A winning word

WANT to know what real bliss is to a dedicated word nerd?

It’s a brand new dictionary, to be pored over, and even pawed over, for the linguistic treasures within. Trouble is, dictionaries – even those frustratingly abridged editions – are horribly expensive.

There are several on the shelves chez Godson (the beloved is as big a word nerd as I am). There’s his battered Oxford, which has accompanied him across continents and through numerous newsrooms, my Oxford Illustrated and – a more recent acquisition – my abridged Collins.

I’ve always thought of Collins as a bit of a bland upstart. Getting one didn’t alter my opinion.

I’d always been an Oxford girl but that had to change when I joined the Daily Dispatch, whose rules dictate that Collins is the “house” guide to English. What I didn’t know – until I took ownership this week of a brand, spanking new edition – is that I’m really a Chambers girl at heart.

The beautiful book – all 1,904 pages of it – is a quirky delight. First published in 1872, Chambers’ original aim was to appeal to everyone. As the UK Independent says in its review of this one:  “Its 12th edition still has no truck with word snobbery, and boasts more entries and definitions than any other single volume English dictionary.”

And indeed it does – 620,000 words, as opposed to the Concise Oxford’s 240,000.

No starchiness here, either. The academically correct definitions and derivations are often accompanied by a wry description, as in the case of (chocolate) éclair, which it describes as “long in shape but short in duration”.

A special “red section” singles out such delights as “words that never were”, “extinct words”, “words that merit rescue”, and “insults”, as well as crossword code-breakers, indispensable two-letter word solutions, top-scoring Q and Z words for Scrabble lovers, etc.

Weighing in at around 2.5kg and costing some R500, I’d have really had to think twice about buying it, but – lucky me – I didn’t have to. It cost me just one word – mellifluous.

Well, one word and a tweet.

You see, among the “Twitterers” I follow is @FoxedQuarterly – tweeted by the dedicated bibliophiles who run independent London bookstore Slightly Foxed, started several decades ago by novelist Graham Greene’s nephew.

Send us your favourite word and its meaning, they tweeted in early December, and you could win a Chambers Dictionary.

So I did. The first one that popped into my head, in fact: “Mellifluous – flowing with sweetness and honey.”

The Foxed Quarterly folk answered immediately: “Very nice,” they said. “Here’s another: “goluptious” (delicious, voluptuous).

“That’s mellifluously goluptious, I’d say, wouldn’t you,” I tweeted back.

The flurry of competing tweets that followed put me in the doldrums. They were so odd that mellifluous – always a favourite of mine for its feeling on the tongue and its delicious descriptiveness – began to feel decidedly ordinary.

There was, for example, “tuftaffety” – taffeta with tufted pile, apparently. And “hornswoggle” – to trick and deceive.

When “callipygous” was tweeted, I knew all was lost. Who, after all, could resist a word that means “having beautiful buttocks”?

As I’d guessed, the Foxed Quarterly folk couldn’t. Happily, though, there were two copies of Chambers to be won, and the other one was mine.

Happily, too, my London-based daughter stoically lugged the weighty beast along with her when she came to visit me in South Africa this week.

What a mellifluous start to my new year! – Stevie Godson

(A version of this column first appeared in the Daily Dispatch 

6 Comments »

The dodgy roots of English …

Picture by Thomas Shahan 3

“English doesn’t borrow from other languages. English follows other languages down dark alleys, knocks them over and goes through their pockets for loose grammar.”
(Anonymous)

Comments »

Pardon my kummerspeck

Evolution, American-Style by Mike Licht

IT’S almost the end of another year, and the beginning of a stream of best-of lists – songs, books, websites, gadgets – in fact, almost anything you can think of.

As a complete and utter word nerd, my own favourites are the dictionary top 10 word lists. Oxford Dictionaries were first out of the starting gate this year – and what a disappointment theirs is.

Their word of the year – chosen, incidentally, by both the US and UK versions – is “squeezed middle”!

Quite apart from the fact it’s a phrase and not a word, I’ve never heard of it. Have you?

The obscure – to me, anyway – phrase “took it by a whisker”, says the OD blog, as there were so many that could have qualified.

My favourite Language Log linguist, Geoffrey K Pullum, is also pretty miffed that for the past couple of years, Oxford Dictionary’s “word” of the year has been a phrase.

“I want to argue that this is a mistake, not just because they have chosen an utterly undistinguished item, but because what they have chosen is a straightforwardly compositional phrase, one that couldn’t be argued to be a lexical item at all … squeezed just means ‘squeezed’, and middle just means ‘middle’, and if you put the two together you have the literal meaning. It is ridiculous to think of putting this in a dictionary.”

Quite.

The phrase is, he says, “a UK Labour Party politician’s feeble phrase for denoting an allegedly squeezed and put-upon class trapped in between the welfare riff-raff below … and the fat-cat billionaires above.”

It’s a phrase used by politicians to make everyone think they’re part of the suffering masses … and “oil them up for voting”.

Overall, the Oxford’s top 10 is not a jolly set, they admit, (well, apart from the Berlusconi-inspired “bunga bunga”, which is jolly graphic if you’re into orgies, I reckon) adding: “In a year like this, it is hardly surprising that the tone is a sombre one. Financial hardship and protest on an unprecedented scale have scored our language deeply (and no doubt many others, too).”

Those others include “Arab Spring”, “occupy”,  and “fracking”.

Following hot on the Oxford’s heels, as it were, The Hot Word online dictionary’s readers have also been influenced by this year’s worldwide political turmoil. Their altogether more mundane top 5 contenders are “winning”, “occupy”, “spring”, “jobs”, and “austerity”.

Global Language Monitor reckons “occupy” is 2011’s word of the year, with “Arab Spring” the top phrase.

“Deficit”, “fracking”, “drone”, and “non-veg” (huh?), make up their top 5, but number 6 has to be my own favourite – now I’ve discovered it, that is.

It’s kummerspeck, taken from the German but “seeing wider acceptance in English”, says the monitor’s website.

Quite apart from the fact that the word rolls off the tongue so roundly, its meaning is particularly appropriate for me right now – “excess weight gained from emotional over-eating”- a squeezed middle, you might even say, which is why I’m adopting it immediately. – Stevie Godson
(A version of this column first appeared in the Daily Dispatch)

Comments »

Black Tuesday

Comments »
Join the Club
The Soggies
Photobucket Announcing the annual Stamp out Gobbledegook Awards*, (or Soggies, as we like to call them). Send us your Soggies
Creative Commons
Follow me
Follow StevieGodson on Twitter
Look It Up
Enchantment by Guy Kawasaki
I Heart Madiba
Books & Reading Blogs - BlogCatalog Blog Directory