The Puget News

While reading the April 2007 issue of Harper’s I came across an excerpt of an interview [subscription required] between Tom LeClair, professor of English at University of Cincinnati, and William Gaddis, the famous author.

LECLAIR: How do the novels get to be so long, if they don’t start out with mass in mind?
GADDIS: If one is involved with a complicated idea, and spends every day with it, takes notes, and reads selectively with it in mind, ramifications proliferate. If one has what could be called an obsessional wish to exhaust an idea, understand it on six, seven, or eight levels, the book gets longer and longer.

While this extract might seem obvious, I just love the idea of focused time around the exploration of complex ideas and the expressed dedication to following them through to their natural conclusions. It always helps to remember that great authors wrestle with these ideas day in and day out while the rest of us are out grabbing our coffees. This gives me hope.

Note: The excerpt in the magazine is called “They call me Mr. Difficult” by Tom LeClair. This is part of a newly released collection of essays called Paper Empire: William Gaddis and the World System.

Other Interesting Links:

• Harper’s makes all past content available for free to subscribers

Uh oh. Oh no you didn’t! Harper’s has gone and “done it”, granting access to 157 years of Harper’s Magazine content as part of their normal subscription price. Take that New Yorker! Infowhores unite!

(click the image for a larger look at what it looks like when you sign up and have access to 157 years of material)

Read the rest of this entry »

Spotting a new magazine called “GOOD” on the newsstand, with the ever-dapper John Hodgman on the cover, I was intrigued enough to pick up a copy and read it during a flight over the holidays. I mean, really, how can you turn down a cover quote from Hodgman quipping, “I’m not going to humiliate you with my incredibly large brain.”

I thought it was quite decent for a fledgling publication, not quite all that its lofty aspirations promised but certainly on its way there. The new issue has a detailed list of the top 51 magazines of all time, in enough detail to cover particular periods with certain editors. It’s quite a fun read.

The only real oddity I could find was the lack of inclusion for “The Economist.” Perhaps they consider that a weekly newspaper rather than a magazine?