Lethem Has Wood

[note: this is about James Wood, critic, not James WoodS, this guy. But hey, who couldn't use a nice Videodrome pic here and there?]

Just as a timestamp, today is November 7th, 2011.

Jonathan Lethem's Fortress of Solitude came out August 4th, 2004.

So, it's a little unclear why Lethem decided to write a super-long, super-dense criticism of a review his book received when it came out. You can read it here. If you can actually get through the damn thing, good for you. You must have a life that has time for horseshit.

To summarize:

Basically, James Wood wrote a criticism of the book that made it seem like he A) wanted a book other than the book he was presented with and B) didn't actually read the book.

I 100% agree that criticizing a book that you haven't read, or at least criticizing without admitting that you couldn't get through it because it was so godawful, is wrong. And Lethem's right to be pissed that Wood criticized him for making no references to literature because Solitude is really one long love letter to forms of literature in a lot of ways.

However, this criticism...the one by Lethem, the criticism of the criticism, I found unreadable. I'll admit that I skimmed, but it's because I was so tired of waiting for him to get to the point that I couldn't take it anymore. 2,220 words long? And the first 500+ words are quotes? The kind of quotes that lead off a book and that I skip 90% of the time because they're either irrelevant until you've read portions of the book or because they're by Lewis Carroll and I just don't care anymore?

I tried going to the source as well, the James Wood review. 4,200 words. Couldn't even begin to begin it. Besides, you could be 5% into the goddamn ACTUAL BOOK by then at which point you could make a pretty informed decision on whether or not to read it.

My best work is by no means critiquing writing or writers. It's not really my place. But in creating a dense, unreadable criticism, I feel like these things don't function.

The other day I was waiting for a sandwich and looking at one of those bulletin boards filled with tacked-up business cards. One of the cards was for a business involved in graphic design. Despite the fact that this designer has spent money and time tacking up business cards in sandwich establishments, a dynamite business plan if I ever heard one, I doubt the calls are flooding in. You know why? Because the business card itself was boring and not well done, and if a graphic designer can't graphic design his own business card, why would I trust him with designing mine?

If you want to make the point that you're a good writer, maybe the best way to do it is to write something good. Just saying.

The controversy is silly to me because I would NEVER read that insane, rambling review in the first place, nor would I read the response to it. It's just a bunch of words about a bunch of words about a bunch of words, and it feels like a couple guys angrily 69'ing all day.

Also, and this is one of those things that proves, as we all learned from the Malcom in the Middle theme song, that life is unfair: when a writer talks about a harsh review from a critic, it's almost impossible to not sound like a whiner. Yes, Wood clearly didn't read the book and yes, that's clearly wrong, and not just wrong like a mistake is wrong. Just plain wrong. A lie. But you know what? It's false to assume that a writer, who is suited to writing, is also good at accepting criticism. So if the book is done, be done with it already.

Just so you don't think this is all about me hating on J.L. (who is hit or miss for me), check out his Promiscuous Stories project. Very cool.