Monthly Archives: December 2009

Festive Fun

This blog entry is really an excuse to say a big thank you to everyone who has been involved with Pen Pusher this year: whether as a writer or reader; a performer or listener. It’s been a great year and we hope you’ll be joining us for more in 2010. Meanwhile, here’s a brief overview of what we’ve been up to…

It’s been a really good few months for Pen Pusher since we relaunched the magazine in March ’09… We’ve been selling in shops all round London and have even reached over the pond to our first distributor in New York – McNally Jackson – and are also now being sold in the legendary Shakespeare & Co. We’ve also been accepting submissions online via out account system and it’s fantastic how many of you have signed up for an online account. We should have much more to offer you next year via our website so keep your online eyes peeled…

We are also delighted with the PP ‘Featured Author’ section we began with the relaunch issue, #12. This feature offers writers a chance to showcase an extract from a longer work-in-progress or as-yet unpublished novel. For me as an editor the chance to publish extracts from longer works of fiction has added a totally new dimension to the editing process and the character of the magazine; and for writers it offers a chance to showcase their talents, as well as giving them the possibility to see their work-in-progress in print, which can illuminate aspects of the story/writing process and help them rework or reassess their piece. I think it’s a great way of working more closely with talented writers and we look forward to publishing more extracts next year. Many thanks to the authors whose work we published this year: Pia Chatterjee, author of Unreal City; Susan Barker, author of The Beijing Taxi Driver; and Nikesh Shukla author of Coconut Unlimited. (And you can read Pia in conversation with Essential Writers where she talks about her publication in Pen Pusher here.

We’ve also had three fantastic events to launch issues 12, 13 & 14 featuring some incredible poets and authors & you can remind yourself of some of the action here. Highlights included Hugo Williams and John Hegley at PP12; Roddy Lumsden, Ashna Sarkar and Joe Dunthorne at PP13 & just a few weeks ago at The Castle in Farringdon, readers included Ross Sutherland, Sam Riviere, Dean Wilson and an incredible rabble-rousing performance from Nikesh Shukla.

Favourite new reads of 2009:

Let the Great World Spin by Collum McCann – a brilliant New York novel. Read my review of it at Untitled Books here

Leviathan by Phillip Hoare – bizarrely enjoyable history of the whale that’s also made me want to ready Moby Dick which no one else has ever managed.

The Diaries of Sofia Tolstoy provides a hypnotically mundane and fascinating account of Tolstoy’s domestic world and the pain and problems his difficult nature caused – Sofia is exasperating, strong and brilliantly honest.

The Paris Review – all collected volumes and new issues. It’s simple – read everything.

Obsessive reread of the year

Raise High the Roof Beam, Carpenters by Salinger – another masterpiece about the Glass family that I have reread a couple more times this year. Slight dream of mine to be in some stuffy New York apartment and offered a Tom Collins.

If you feel like commenting, let us know what your favourite read of 2009 has been.

And, just before PP signs off for the festive season, we’d like to introduce you all to the newest member of the Pen Pusher team – Betty. A polymath with a frighteningly short attention span she’s a myriad of contradictions, but she’s brought some strong ideas to the table – more exercise, more snack breaks and more naps. And she gets through books very quickly, severely damaging my Frank S Pepper 20th Cenutry Quotations and my copy of The Cossacks by Tolstoy in a matter of seconds…

Happy Christmas!!!

Advertisements

Down and Out…

A pet hate of mine are those opinion/lifestyle columns that you find in the broadsheet weekend magazines, complete with a photo of the journalist responsible wearing a regulation smug and-yet apologetic expression.

The subject matter is nearly almost always ‘I’; and ‘I’ is horribly insecure about the idea of offending anyone, but desperate to show, in a strictly self-deprecating way, its intelligence. It doesn’t leave much room for good writing. Of course, it’s easy to attack this sort of writing, but I just wonder why it is so popular, so prevalent?

In much journalism that isn’t strictly news reporting, the wish to either gloss-over and sentimentalise seems the order of the  day. For example the word ‘humble’ seems very popular at the moment. People seem to be humble about everything; I would suggest it’s a very rare emotion. Or that type of interview with a star, supposedly to bring us closer to them and the opening paragraph contains something like this: ‘In real life she is astonishingly petite, almost doll-like, and her face takes on an angelic quality as she takes tiny sips of her mineral water’. Ad nauseum.

Very few of these ‘commentators’ seem at all interested in other people – I mean in an observant way. Perhaps the way novelists look at people, with the air of devouring their prey: keenly observant, possibly for selfish reasons, but able to look and see clearly all the same. Political correctness and badly concealed status anxiety  cut out sympathy and interest in others which is why this style of writing is so creepy and annoying.

The reason I’ve been thinking about this is that I have been reading a lot of Orwell non-fiction recently and enjoying its obvious quality. I know Orwell is an exceptional writer and is far from unbiased in his views, but his journalism/non-fiction writing is so clear, and it very much wants to be clear – that is its raison d’être. It does not sentimentalise in any way though he can’t help but make a good story out of what he sees, most of the time – except when he goes off on Socialist rants, which can get dull. (Having said this, someone just told me that The Road to Wigan Pier is really sentimental … I’ve never read it – is this so?)

In Down and Out in Paris and London (1933),in which Orwell records his time spent as a Paris plongeur at ‘Hotel X’ and then as a tramp in England, hanging out with screevers and staying in spikes, Orwell describes people as clearly as he is able: eccentric, foolish, greedy, stupid, idiotic, funny, kind, essentially good, stoic in their bizarre and minor struggles. He also puts their lives into some context.

This passage is taken from the introduction:

‘The Paris slums are a gathering-place for eccentric people – people who have fallen into solitary, half-mad grooves of life and given up trying to be normal or decent […] Some of the lodgers in our hotel lived lives that were curious beyond words.’ […] ‘Poverty is what I am writing about […] The slum, with its dirt and its queer lives, was first an object-lesson in poverty, and then the background of my own experiences. It is for this reason that I try to give some idea of what life was like there.’

As a review of the book in The New Yorker aptly put it: ‘The harshness of this book is an expression of its basic sympathy’.  You cannot truly sympathise, observe and comment unless you try as best you can to tell the truth– in this case to look at the sometimes ugly mundanity of poverty and record it.

Whereas some current writing reminds me of one of Orwell’s old tramps: afraid to loiter on any subject too deeply in case it gets moved on or feels compelled to expose itself. Like Paddy, Orwell’s tramping companion for whom ‘two years of bread and margarine had lowered his standards hopelessly’, who has forgotten what good food tastes like.

In the meantime, though, read Orwell. Penguin are doing a really appealing little volumes of his essays and non-fiction works at the moment.

Of course, Orwell could leave these situations at any time, he was an observer, but he really tried to understand poverty and the less privileged parts of society, and to examine the ideals behind the society he found himself in. Essays like ‘How the Poor Die’, ‘A Hanging’ and ‘The Prevention of Literature’ are all as serious as they sound, though always there is dry wit. And there are more satirical pieces also. In ‘Confessions of a Book Reviewer’ (Orwell at one time reviewed large numbers of books for English publications) he describes a man sitting in a dishevelled state in a chaotic room full of waste paper, unopened packages of books, and final demand bills: ‘He has lost his address book, and the thought of looking for it, or indeed looking for anything, afflicts him with acute suicidal impulses.’

And ‘Bookshops Memories’ – ‘[B]ooks give off more and nastier dust than any other class of objects yet invented and the top of a book is the place where every bluebottle prefers to die.’

Well that’s true enough…