Skip to main content

December 28, 2017

From The Paris Review (Nadja Spiegelman on Favorite Books of 2017):
This year, I found myself swept away by Sally Rooney’s Conversations with Friends. The jealousy-inducing story behind the book (Rooney wrote the first draft in three months, at the the age of twenty-six) is difficult to reconcile with the tight grace of this novel, though all of the volatility and speed is there. Rooney so expertly captures what it’s like to be young today: the conversations that flow seamlessly from email to text message to unspoken glance, the sexual and creative confidence, the admiration for older men who write emails written in all lowercase. Her first-person narrator, the twenty-one-year-old Frances, is a constant, careful observer, and yet Rooney leaves room for the reader to see all the things Frances herself does not. Frances’s deceptively deadpan tone encases moments of revelation; among the many sentences I underlined: “She made us all laugh a lot, but in the same way you might make someone eat something when they don’t fully want it.” I also loved Carmen Maria Machado’s Her Body and Other Parties. Machado plays with the oldest archetypes of myth and genre in ways that feel wholly new. And, when composing this list, I was delighted to remember that Emil Ferris’s graphic novel, My Favorite Thing Is Monsters, was also published in 2017, albeit at the very beginning, which now feels very long ago. It’s a stylistic wonder, dark and beautiful and form-bending, and a profound exploration of monstrousness, both female and otherwise.

From The Paris Review (Lauren Kane on Favorite Books of 2017):
No writer disorients reality quite like Renee Gladman. Or maybe that’s not the right way to put it. Her expert handling of language is not so much a disorientation as a reorientation. The fact that I can’t quite pin it down speaks to Gladman’s particular mastery. Her Prose Architectures is a captivating (and beautiful) book of ink line drawings in which words inhabit extended physical manifestations that hum energetically on the page. For Gladman, language does not just construct our reality, it exists alongside it in space and time. Language as a form of architecture is also a preoccupation in Gladman’s Houses of Ravicka, the fourth of her Ravickian novels. These novels are set in a fictional city, Ravicka, and Houses follows the city’s comptroller as she obsessively seeks a house that has been lost. What I love about Gladman’s world is that it’s not quite dystopian, not quite science fiction, and not entirely removed from our reality–but it’s not entirely a part of it either. In Ravicka, names of streets are impossible for the reader to pronounce (Czorcic, Flvoder, Monstastrajen, Vibja), as we don’t really know the rules of language in this fictional city. Gladman also peppers her prose with invented words such as feleedpur and tij. Since we can’t pronounce them, we’re left with only the visual comprehension of letters on the page and are confronted with the questions: How can something exist if you cannot speak it into existence? Are these literal prose architectures enough to build a world? Gladman’s artful consideration of linguistic limitation is quietly smart, thrillingly unique, and, perhaps most impressively, translates into an thoroughly absorbing narrative.

From The New York Times:
Tax cuts have been followed by fast income growth at the very top of the pyramid of prosperity. But among the bottom half of Americans they have delivered little.

From The Economist:
After three years of more or less stable emissions, a zippier world economy looks on track to belch 2% more carbon dioxide this year. That amounts once again to borrowing more of the planet’s remaining carbon budget against future removal. It doesn’t take a numerate modeller like Mr Tavoni to grasp that, in his words, “If you create a debt, you must repay it.” The price of default does not bear thinking about.

From Harper's:
Sleep deprivation makes an eyewitness half again as likely to select an innocent person from a lineup in which the perpetrator is absent.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

February 24, 2018

From The New York Times : We are willing to pay a premium for convenience, of course — more than we often realize we are willing to pay. During the late 1990s, for example, technologies of music distribution like Napster made it possible to get music online at no cost, and lots of people availed themselves of the option. But though it remains easy to get music free, no one really does it anymore. Why? Because the introduction of the iTunes store in 2003 made buying music even more convenient than illegally downloading it. Convenient beat out free. As task after task becomes easier, the growing expectation of convenience exerts a pressure on everything else to be easy or get left behind. We are spoiled by immediacy and become annoyed by tasks that remain at the old level of effort and time. When you can skip the line and buy concert tickets on your phone, waiting in line to vote in an election is irritating. This is especially true for those who have never had to wait in lines (whic...

February 26, 2018

From The Economist : An equity is a claim on the assets and the profits of a firm; a bond entitles the investor to a series of interest payments and repayment on maturity. Bitcoin brings no cashflows to the owner; the only return will come via a rise in price. When there is no obvious way of valuing an asset, it is hard to say that one target price is less likely than another. Bitcoin could be worth $10 or $100,000. One argument made by bitcoinnoisseurs is that it is a type of “digital gold”. Stores of value are supposed to keep their value; bitcoin, by contrast, is extremely volatile. Its code ensures that no more than 21m coins can ever be created; that sets bitcoin apart from fiat money, which central banks can create at will. Yet being limited in supply is a necessary, but not sufficient, condition for having value; signed photographs of Economist journalists are rare but, sadly, of negligible worth. Nor is supply really limited. Plenty of other cryptocurrencies exist. If the...

February 27, 2018

From The New York Times : [Steven] Pinker contends that we should not be nostalgic for the economy of the 1950s, when jobs were plentiful and unions strong. A third of American children lived in poverty. Sixty percent of seniors had incomes below $1,000 a year. Only half the population had any savings in the bank at all. Between 1979 and 2014, meanwhile, the percentage of poor Americans dropped to 20 percent from 24 percent. The percentage of lower-middle-class Americans dropped to 17 from 24. The percentage of Americans who were upper middle class (earning $100,000 to $350,000) shot upward to 30 percent from 13 percent. There’s a fair bit of social mobility. Half of all Americans wind up in the top 10 percent of earners at at least one point in their career. One in nine spend some time in the top 1 percent. Poverty has been transformed by falling prices and government support. “When poverty is defined in terms of what people consume rather than what they earn, we find that the...