Category: Book Review

Book Review: Slouching Toward Bethlehem

Book Review, Grad School,

My procrastination has continued in full force – I really don’t want to write an essay now that I’ve gotten myself into article/journalist mode, but it must be done. But anyway, in addition to cleaning the apartment, running errands, taking a walk, I also read Joan Didion’s Slouching Toward Bethlehem for J669 next week as a means of putting off my essay for 620.  Which I’m going to start after this blog post, I promise.

slouching-towards-bethlehemI have been pretty critical of some of the books I’ve read for class so far this semester, but I actually really loved this collection of Didion’s essays and articles. I think she is great the way that she is so clearly a part of the text but in the news pieces she never uses first person. I guess you just really get a sense of how she views herself through her writing no matter what the subject matter.

She is also really great with one-liners that just completely stop you in your tracks as you are working through a page. I always admire writers who can set up a rhythm and then completely knock you off it without leaving a reader feeling disoriented. All of the work in this collection also use really great language, I think she is a good example of the idea that all words have a specific meaning, and that there are no synonyms. She seems to focus on choosing the perfect word for what she is trying to convey.

So overall, this one was a win. I think its also important to note that for how famous and well regarded Joan Didion is, I had never heard of her before. We’ve been talking in J669 about the new journalists – Tom Wolfe, Hunter S. Thompson, Truman Capote and I think its interesting that out of the whole bunch, Didion was the one that I hadn’t heard of.

I also have to say that the title of the book made me think of Lehigh, how I miss Bethlehem, PA.

Book Review: Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas

Book Review, Grad School,

For J669, my literary journalism class, we have to read Hunter S. Thompson’s Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas. I sat down last night and read it in one shot, it took me about three hours which really wasn’t that bad. Its hard to critique a work like Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas because it is so famous, but I do have a few thoughts about it.

fear-loathing-2I didn’t love it, but I didn’t hate it either. It was really hard to look at it as a piece of journalism, although I can actually see pretty clearly how the piece is almost like a stream of conscience list of what happened during Thompson’s drug binge in Vegas. I like that he uses a fake name, and that name (Raoul Duke) becomes like a fictional character. I think what made it so hard to take seriously when it was written is that he describes all of his acid trips and subsequent illusions with complete and total seriousness, not really acknowledging that they are just fantasies created by LSD. He also chronicles his paranoia with complete and total certainty, which also gives the piece more of a fiction feel.

Overall I think that Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas falls into the realm of journalism because it is a very accurate record of Thompson’s memory of his trip to Vegas. I think its true to his memories, and what isn’t in his memory is apparently on a tape recorder. I think it is what happened during the trip, I just think it rattled cages because it shows such an extreme case of drug use. Its also notable for the fact that he didn’t write either one of the articles he was assigned, the desert race or the drug enforcement meeting.

For anyone who wants to learn more about Hunter S. Thompson I whole heartedly recommend Oscar-Winner Alex Gibney’s documentary film Gonzo: The Life and Work of Dr. Hunter S. Thompson, and not just because the director is from my hometown. The film tells the story of Thompson’s life from birth, through the peak of his career, to his suicide in 2005. Gibney gets an insider view of Thompson’s funeral, rocket and all. It also has Johnny Depp, which pretty much makes it a win.

Book Review: Writing For Story

Book Review, Good Writing, Grad School, State of Journalism,

This morning I finished Jon Franklin’s Writing for Story, what I hope is the last “how to” book I’m going to have to read this semester. Textbooks aside, in the first three weeks of classes I’ve read three books focused on how to avoid complete and total blinding failure as a writer. I have found it incredibly depressing that there is even a need for such manuals. Combined with those that I accumulated during my time as an undergrad at Lehigh, I am now the not-so-proud owner of quite the collection of books on how to write.

2272958It isn’t that I don’t find value in these books, I think that there are definitely nuggets of good advice and even a little humor about style, format, the industry, and numerous other aspects of journalism as a profession. However, I find that I get pretty frustrated listening to someone who is considered a “success” brag about how they got there. Congratulations, by capturing the ever elusive combination of financial success, public success, and the praise of your peers you have been deemed worthy enough to hold the distinguished title of being a “good writer.” Good for you.

I think the reason I am annoyed right now largely has to do with the generalizations that Franklin makes in his book. He assumes that all young journalists are a bunch of immature children that need to have rejection beat the desire to write, right out of us before we can accept that we aren’t going to be great artists. Well Jon Franklin, I for one don’t want to be an artist, I’ve never thought of writing as my art, and I hold no misguided feelings of anguish when an editor tells me a piece doesn’t work.
Yes, I’ve struggled to find my way in terms of all the mechanics of writing, to figure out what works and what doesn’t, as my early copy from BioTechniques CLEARLY indicates. But, I just don’t consider myself some downtrodden journalist struggling to find their literary voice. I want to talk in facts, I want to write hard news, sweeping poetic literary statements just aren’t my style, and I don’t like being lumped in with every other young writer afflicted with wanting to write. I don’t like the fact that to be considered “good” I have to unlock some magical realm of literary style that will come only with experience.
Perhaps I just aspire to lesser things than my more ideological counterparts, because I see the value in literary journalism and I think its great, but I just don’t feel some terrible stinging sensation in my soul that I’m not there yet.  I know I’ll get there, every piece I write I see myself getting better. Reading all of these books on how to write and what mistakes to avoid hasn’t left me questioning whether or not I can be a great writer, I know that I can be a great writer, I guess I’m just wondering if I’m not tormented by words that go bump in the night, if my desire to be a writer is strong enough.
Its troubling to me that I’m upset that where I’m at in life isn’t upsetting me. If you follow all of the “expert” opinions contained in these books I should be pulling my hair out, and I’m not. I’m also not disillusioned to think its because I’m so wonderful that I just don’t fit the mould. That’s not it. So why, as a fledgling journalist am I not depressed? According to all these how to manuals I should be.
I feel like  the authors of these books could have really benefitted from a manual entitled: How to enjoy learning how to write. I am enjoying my ride and the twists and turns it takes me on, even the rejection. It might sting but it means I’m still chasing after something, and I find comfort in that. I’m in no rush to be perfect right out of the gate, and I always thought that was a good thing, but is it? Should I be more driven? Reading these books didn’t teach my how to write, all they did was make me question my personality.

Book Review: True Stories

Book Review, Good Writing, Grad School,
Well the good news is that I seem to be fully recovered from my bout of food-induced illness, the bad news is that means I’m back full swing into my grad school work load. Last night, I finished reading True Stories by Norman Sims for my literary journalism class. The book goes through the history of literary journalism, from the reporting of World War I, the Great Depression, World War II, the lull of the 40’s and 50’s, New Journalism in the 60’s and 70’s, Vietnam, and through to the status of literary journalism today.

9780810124691-crop-325x325 In addition to Sims’ take on the history of the literary journalism style, the book also includes: The Long Fall of One-Eleven Heavy by Michael Paterniti, Red Caucasus by John Dos Passos, The Jumping-Off Place by Edmund Wilson, The Old House at Home by Joseph Mitchell, and Family Journeys by Adrian Nicole LeBlanc.

Overall I liked True Stories, it gave me a lot of important background into literary journalism and how writers need to immerse themselves in a topic and strike out on their own a bit in order to get a story that hasn’t been told time and time again. Sims made me want to devour more examples of literary journalism, particularly Truman Capote’s In Cold Blood. I might have to add that one to my to-do list.

Of the samples of literary journalism included in the book, I found Paterniti’s The Long Fall of One-Eleven Heavy to be incredibly powerful. It was emotional for me reading about a plane crash so close to the anniversary of September 11. But despite that, I thought the way Paterniti told the story without naming names added a lot of drama to the way he told the story. It was gripping, and the pages flew by. Unlike Dos Passos’ Red Caucasus which I actually had trouble focusing on and staying involved in the story.

One useful thing (I think at least) that Sims did was to include a historical list of literary journalism pieces. If you had the time, you could go through the pieces and trace the history of literary journalism through the words themselves. Although sadly I know that I, and very few people I know, would actually have the time for so much reading for the sake of curiosity. It is still useful to have the list, so you could go back and pick out select pieces to follow up on.

Book Review: The Elements of Journalism

Book Review, Good Writing, Grad School

151522For my J800 class I was assigned to read Bill Kovach and Tom Rosenstiel’s The Elements of Journalism – What Newspeople Should Know and the Public Should Expect. I finished it in two days, it was a quick read, but an important one. Just in these first few days of classes, I’ve been reminded how important it is for the public to build a relationship with a journalist based on transparency and verification of information. If no one trusts what you say, you can’t be a journalist. Its that simple.

So what are the “Elements of Journalism?”
(Taken directly out of the book)

1. The primary purpose of journalism is to provide citizens with the information they need to be free and self-governing.
2. Journalism’s first obligation is to the truth.
3. Journalism’s first loyalty is to citizens.
4. The essence of journalism is a discipline of verification.
5. Journalists must maintain an independence from those they cover.
6. Journalists must serve as an independent monitor of power.
7. Journalism must provide a forum for public criticism and compromise.
8. Journalists must make the significant interesting and relevant.
9. Journalists should keep the news comprehensive and in proportion.
10. Journalists have an obligation to exercise their personal conscience.

Things to think about as I start to settle into my chosen profession…