What do YOU read?

XX

XX

XX

The following posting was originally written as consecutive tweets on Twitter. I routinely see interesting observations and links to informative articles about the world of book publishing when I'm on there, but I also find plenty that troubles me. The latter is what inspired this series of mini soundbites bemoaning what publishers are opting to print, which of course is prompted first and foremost by what people are choosing to read. Once done with school and no longer in possession of a required reading list, we're on our own to decide what to fill our heads with. I like a little brain candy sometimes as much as the next person, but as we were warned as children, if you consume too much sugar while neglecting fruits and vegetables and other stuff critical for your development, inevitably important things will start to rot.

In recent days, understandably, I’ve seen various sarcastic shots taken over the fact that reality star Snooki has a Best Selling book out. I joined in too, remarking on my sobering suspicion that there’s likely more I can relate to in her book, regardless of what percentage of the writing she actually contributed to it, than the various vampire novels pubbed seemingly hourly.

Those following my tweet of thought probably think I have a major problem with vampire fiction. My sister, for example. But that’s not the case. I believe ALL topics are fair game for literary examination.

In the vampire milieu I’ve enjoyed 2-3 Anne Rice titles & The Historian. Fine reading indeed.

What I take issue with is formulaic writing, cookie cutter books churned out like so many near identical widgets on an assembly line.

The appeal of such books to anyone over the age of 10 continues to elude me. At some point a mature person should demand more bang for their buck, no?

Some people crave a particular genre. Okay, c’est la vie. They don’t know what they’re missing by refusing to be more adventurous but...

Hopefully those who exclusively plunder a single category within a particular genre at least try to find whatever diversity may exist there.

But at what point is there simply nothing new to say about how cool vampires are? Surely the possibilities have been exhausted by now.

I can only conclude there are people so anti brain use that they basically read the same book over & over, the next version of it already pre-ordered.

Obviously those who churn this stuff out are out to make a buck, plain & simple. They require & expect no comparison to Faulkner.

I’m cool with capitalism & what it yields. Some enter the medical field to save lives, some for $. Some enter the law profession to fight for justice, some for $. Writing is no different.

There are authors who hope that their books will be assigned to your great great grandkids in school one day, others who are simply looking to make quick cash.

I have no beef with those who write from the wallet rather than heart. Where there is demand, someone will always take advantage & supply.

I suppose this means I have a problem with readers so unimaginative that they refuse to digest any more than one flavor of book. This practice simply astounds me. Could you eat the same thing everyday? Watch the same movie & nothing but? Listen to the same song to the exclusion of all others? Surely this would become maddening.

If nobody was affected by such singleness of purpose, no harm done I suppose. But there is an effect from such mindsets. Fresh, bold books by legitimately talented writers do not see the light of day because shelf space in what bookstores are still left standing is taken up by the 30th title in some insipid series.

So I funnel my frustration toward those who know not what they do, even though I firmly believe in freedom of choice, which includes the right to make bad choices.

I suppose I’m left with no option but to be peeved at God. Hopefully HE/SHE reads my tweets or this blog.

What are your thoughts on this topic? Do you wholeheartedly agree or vehemently oppose my opinion? Have at it. This space is very lonely without reader feedback.

If I've offended anyone for any reason, most likely I meant to. Sorry about that. This space is meant to express the truth as I see it, not to conform. Hope that doesn’t mean we can’t still be friends.

~

~

Here's my reading list: past, present & future. What do YOU read?

This is the sort of thing that happens in a world such as our very own when pseduo celebrities and trend followers are glorified at the expense of true storytellers. It's a sad day indeed when children learn that Snooki is a much bigger deal than Dr. Seuss.

Yet Another Magazine Cover Controversy

Another day, another magazine cover controversy (See here for example of one I've discussed previously. It also features a prominent black athlete and pretty white girl. Coincidence?). This time the perpetrator is Essence and the offensive (to a number of black women) image is of Saints running back Reggie Bush with his shirt open. The fact that he’s showing off his abs isn’t at the root of the bruhaha, but rather, the fact that he’s there at all. Those unfamiliar with all things celebrity related might be wondering why a picture of a black man on the cover of a magazine with a black female audience is problematic. It’s not as if the cover boy is Rush Limbaugh or Glenn Beck. It isn’t even Michael Steele who technically has the melanin count if not the street cred to qualify, being an obnoxious conservative republican and all. So far as I’ve been able to tell, the thing bothering Essence subscribers/readers is that the focus of the issue is “black love” and Reggie is famously not romantically involved with a fellow African American at the moment. His girlfriend is Kim Kardashian who happens to be rather bootylicious, but she’s Armenian, not black. There is some logic to the irritation since one might reasonably if not always correctly conclude that a cover story called “black love” would be accompanied by a photograph of two black people in love. Technically the cover says "Black Men, Love and Relationships Issue" and obviously not every black man is in love or in a relationship with a black woman. So the reasoning for the annoyance is iffy at best. And if one's contention is that Reggie doesn't belong in Essence under any set of circumstances pertaining to his love life or desirability due to his being in an interracial relationship, I'd strenuously object to that theory. The editorial board of Essence (presumably black women dominate it, though not necessarily, I'm too lazy to check) made their decision to feature him for whatever reason, perhaps to stir up this very controversy and generate a few more news stand sales. Times are tough for magazines nowadays and controversy sells. As cover boys go there are certainly more objectionable black men to feature than Reggie Bush, regardless of who they happen to be dating or married to. R. Kelly and Chris Brown jump to mind as particularly bad choices. So far as I know Reggie is a decent enough guy even if he doesn't require that his mate be a rocket scientist. He’s famous, he’s black, he’s good looking and in great shape so therefore popular with the ladies, and he hasn’t been convicted or even accused of any heinous crimes or acts of depravity. If that doesn’t qualify you to be in Essence I have no idea what does. The fact that Reggie’s girlfriend is considered to be a celebrity in her own right may be ridiculous (go here to see what I mean), however that's neither the fault of her, Reggie or Essence, but the taste in entertainment of the American public. One need not look very far to find social issues to be concerned about or troubled by. As I see it, Reggie and Kim shouldn't rate very high in this category.

Who are these people

I must confess that after a little fiddling around to figure out what the heck was going on I quickly became addicted to Twitter. Of course you've heard of it already so I won't bother to describe. Earlier today on the way to work a subject popped into my head that I thought might be interesting to "tweet" about. I knew my rant would go on for awhile, but that was fine because I'd only be posting in increments of 140 characters (including spaces and with minimal regard to grammar) or less at a time. Even those with the shortest of attention spans could tolerate such miniature bursts of prose if they chose to pay me any attention at all. Below is my sequence of 46 concise comments on the state of modern day celebrity, in case you missed a few on Twitter and wish to follow my train of inane thought from start to finish. Enjoy!

* I’ve decided 2 rant a series of tweets about the current state of American celebrityhood, if not for your amusement than @ least for my own.

* Preface: Years ago I chose not to closely follow college sports. Reason – too many damn teams to keep track of.

* I can handle the # of teams in AFC/NFC – American League/National League, Eastern Conference/Western Conference.

* But there’s like a million colleges in the USA. Too many teams, too many divisions, too many players, too many bowl games to keep track of.

* I figured the players who were good enough I’d eventually see in the pros. In the meantime, ESPN highlights of college careers sufficient.

* Celebrities are now like college teams IMHO. Too many damn many of them. The requirements for admittance are ridiculously lax.

* It used to be that to acquire pop culture fame you needed to regularly appear on TV or in movies or have a few hit songs.

* Celebrities once did things worth noting and paying attention to, which is how they became celebrities in the first place.

* Nowadays it seems about as easy to be considered a celebrity as it is to get a 500 SAT score. Talk about lowering the bar.

* The celebrity bar is on the friggin’ floor. Make a YouTube video, you’re a star. Appear on a “reality show”, you’re a star.

* Be related to at least one person who actually did something to become a legit celebrity, guess what, now you’re a celebrity too.

* Being a child of Rod Stewart for example should not be enough to be called a celebrity. At most it’s a good line to help get you laid.

* Being the child of 2 whole celebs like Bruce Willis & Demi Moore should make you WAY better looking than Rumer, but not worthy of a Wikipedia page.

* How many half actual celebrity parented – half groupie parented kids must there be out there? Do they all qualify for celebrity status too?

* If an NBA All Star has a dozen kids by a dozen random women, are there now 12 new people to potentially be on the cover of People magazine?

* For a few months for some godforsaken reason I became a regular reader of Perez Hilton’s blog. Hilton became a celebrity in his own right by “writing” about and obscenely doodling on photographs of so called celebrities.

* I’m not knocking Hilton’s hustle. He no doubt worked damn hard to put that blog together. He actually accomplished something.

* In fact, ridiculous as his existence may be, Hilton was doing way more than many of the people he was either fawning over or ridiculing.

* I’ll grant Perez his fame, but why should the guy who came in 10th on America’s Gotta Dance While Eating Prawns be considered a celebrity?

* The word “celebrity” has become totally devoid of legitimate meaning. Shouldn’t a talent and an accomplishment be involved?

* Gossip columns were intended to be devoted to people who did something worthy enough for us to actually care about what else they did.

* Is the married Spencer Tracy hooking up with Katherine Hepburn or is she still involved with Howard Hughes? Now THAT’S gossip.

* Spencer Tracy, Katherine Hepburn and Howard Hughes were each monumentally famous in their own rights, even more in collaboration.

* Is a cast member from Survivor Season 17 dating a cast member from The Apprentice Season 12? Maybe, maybe not, but who sincerely cares??!!!

* Apparently plenty of people DO care about mating rites of insta-celebs, which makes the appropriate question – Why? That one has me stumped.

* These hotel heiresses & reality show participants & game show contestants & kids of the formerly famous get all mixed together in my head.

* I stopped reading Hilton blog because I had no idea what Heidi Montag's done 2 make her worth repeatedly mentioning & didn't care 2 find out.

* What I do know is that there are a whole bunch people nowadays who are famous for being famous. That’s absurd, isn’t it? Or is it just me?

* Perhaps I’m just getting old. I want to remain in the loop of contemporary culture, but not if the loop is so flimsily constructed.

* I don’t mind reading about emerging movie or pop stars doing films & music I don’t care 4 because I can at least respect that they’re making something.

* Remember the flack Anna Kournikova took for getting way more endorsements & attention than her level of success warranted?

* At least Anna played tennis, won far more matches than she lost, even a couple titles. She didn’t just hold racquet & pose for camera at 1st.

* Being a Big Brother cast member is just sitting there holding a racquet. Nothing wrong with it but can we hold off on the Walk of Fame star?

* I’ve yet to see Zac Efron in anything but I know he acts/sings while being ridiculously pretty, and I can tolerate having this knowledge.

* Before he was Zac Efron he was Rob Lowe. Keith Partridge is now Hannah Montana. Different generation same principle, I get it.

* But why should I care about Jon & Kate and their 8? I’m 1 of 5, my mom 1 of 9, my dad 1 of 13. Not a single TV show resulted from any of this.

* And even if you do make it to TV, or to the internet which accepts everybody, that alone should not be enough to be considered a celebrity.

* Doesn’t the word celebrity imply that something is worth celebrating? Why would I celebrate someone becoming known for becoming known?

* Story on the ass size of daughter of the guy who defended O.J. appears directly next to story about volcano eruption that kills 2000. WTF?

* If side by side coverage was not the norm, existence of faux celebrities would fail to register & I’d have no complaint. But it is, so I do.

* The Maytag Repair man was on TV all the time but at no point did I know a damn thing about his sex life, and I was totally cool with that.

* Or maybe I really did want to know. Maybe I am subconsciously interested in the doings of those who have done little to nothing of note.

* Nah, that can’t be right. I’m much deeper than that. After all, I tweet therefore I am of significance.

* In fact, as of this tweet I declare myself a celebrity. Come see if you can snap my photo without getting slapped upside the head, paparazzi.