Sunday morning misanthropy

Today's NY Times has a lengthy and adulatory review of Nora Ephron's new book, and the NY Times Magazine has an interview with Nora Ephron, and  there are photos of Nora Ephron looking sleek and stylish, and you can get enough of a glimpse of her apartment to see that she has very charming and comfy digs on the Upper West Side, and I bet anything she has never needed gum surgery, either.

So I am clearly a humliating minority of one for not having liked her new book.  Today's review does point out that it contains a great deal of recycled material, but the reviewer is forgiving of that (as I am not) because she recycles in amusing ways. (Now there's a phrase! Where I live, in Maine, recycing consists of taking your trash to the dump; and now I am trying to think of a way to do that which would be sophisticated and witty. I'll have to get back to you on that.)

I m not going to dwell on this. I didn't like the book, but my grandmother used to say "That's why there is vanilla, and also chocolate."  I will read something else. I am already reading something else. Specifically I am reading Laura Hillenbrand's Unbroken and liking it very much.

Day after tomorrow I head to NYC where that night I will vsiit with old friends, and on Wednesday will spend the day at The Riverdale School in the Bronx. I very rarely...well, close to never...visit schools. But for complicated reasons I agreed to do this one. Coincidentally, back when I was a photographer of children, i did portraits of a number of kids who attended that school. Of course they're all grown up now, as is the young girl on the cover of Number the Stars whom I photographed at about that same time, in the 1970's.

 

 

Looking at these, at me (age 30-something) with that old M-4 Leica, I am nostalgic. In those days I studied photography in graduate school; I used  (this is of no interest to anyone except other photographers, I know...) a rangefinder camera (albeit a very fine one) and a hand-held meter; then I developed and printed the photos myself. I sometimes made photos sepia by bathing them in potassium ferrocyanide...lethal stuff!... I spent hours and hours and HOURS in the darkroom (loving every minute).

Now, with the advent of digital photography and Photoshop...it is all so easy. Anybody can do good photos. Anybody can buy a DSLR and become a photographer. I guess that's a good thing, that people no longer spend long days in lightless rooms, breathing in chemical fumes. But there seems a downside to me, in everything becoming so easy.  I think I liked it better when you had to work at stuff, and earn it.

I guess that's actually related to my previous semi-rant about spending time learning the craft and art of writing, instead of looking for the immediate gratification of publication.

Oh, I am getting old and crochety. Probably Nora Ephron has never grumbled about anything in her life. (And did I mention her very slim hips?)

 

 

Comments

[Mary Kay Bieker]

I am doing an author study for a Children's Literature class and chose you. I am enjoying your blog and might have to read the book just to see if I agree with your critique. I am nostalgic for NH where I have a house for sale. I wanted to return to PA to be near my children who are having children.I have shared many of your books with my students during my 30+ years of teaching. Thank you for sharing your talents and providing thought provoking texts.
Mary Kay

[ojimenez]

Technology is great, when it works. Nevertheless, without the SKILL necessary to create outstanding art, writing, even with the latest computer, would still read as if created by a computer if the writers is not skilled. Same with photography: owning the latest and greatest tools, will not make one an artist. Trust me, I see mediocre, well exposed photos daily!

That "old M-4 Leica in your hand: "Yummy"

Cheers!

[Greg]

One of my favorite books is The View from Saturday by E.L. Konigsburg. The simplicity of modern photography reminds me of her ideas about using the ball point pen. I can still remember taking my photography class in high school and waiting in the dark room for the film to develop. (That was only eleven years ago!) Entire rolls of film would yield a few choice prints. When I received my first digital camera, I was thrilled by the ability to delete substandard shots immediately. However, I wish sometimes that there was still that waiting period when I wasn't sure if I took the best shot. The suspense was part of the process.

As for getting old and crochety, perhaps there is a correlation between all of the extra time that modern technology affords us. If you were still in the dark room or handwriting everything, maybe you'd be too busy to notice.

Enjoy your visit to NYC.

[T. Crockett]

I was recently involved in a project to create a library for an underfunded (is there any other kind?) after school program. I took Number the Stars out of a box and people on both sides of me got excited and started talking about how much they enjoyed it. One of them was in her late 30s, the other was 12 or younger. I'd say reaching such a range of people is better than slim hips any day!

[Moira]

Coincedently, Minnesota Public Radio aired an interview with Nora Ephron yesterday. I listened to it and thought, "She's a good interview. But I still can't stand her books. Or her movies." We be a minority of two, I guess.

[Moira]

On the subject of learning the craft of writing vs publication gratification, you may or may not find this video amusing. (Be warned, it may have some salty language.)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c9fc-crEFDw

[ojimenez]

Digital photography and history: Dirck Halstead told that he got the cover of TIME magazine by going back to his negatives and finding the frame where then President Clinton was hugging a woman wearing a black beret. An innocent enough moment that became historic. He said he now sees photographers deleting their 'substandard' shots on camera, as they shoot. He feels that they are deleting possible historic moments.

Often, whole cards are 'wiped clean' in the interest of space. With a 16gig card you can shoot thousand of images, and then, push delete and send the stuff to oblivion.

Recently Magnum ( a famous photo agency) sold all its prints of historic photos to an institution, after Magnum digitized its collection: how long will digital images last before they fade into oblivion or absolesence ? or Google books, for that matter..?

Cheers!

[M. Benami]

Dear Lois Lowry:

Although your work "Number the Stars" mentions the Danish king, I am wondering if the research for writing this book ever brought the German diplomat Georg Duckwitz to your attention. Mr. Duckwitz played a key role by letting active Danish people know the timing of the impending deportation of Danish Jews in 1943. Otherwise, Jewish Danes and their fellow citizens who helped them would have been caught unprepared.

Duckwitz was recognized for his courage by Yad Vashem in the 1970s. This link tells his story: http://www.shoah.dk/Courage/Duckwitz.htm

Mr. Duckwitz acted courageously against a group that he belonged to, which was doing something that he found ethically wrong. This is an extremely difficult thing to do. Taking action is much easier when you can feel that you are a good person acting against "bad guys" who are represented by some other group "outside the tribe".

My question: Did your research for this book not bring Mr. Duckwitz to your attention; or did you decide to leave him out of the story for a specific reason?

Very best regards, and I hope you enjoy your trip to Germany that you mentioned elsewhere on your blog. I hope that you will act as an ambassador of goodwill and better futures for all our children.

Best regards,
M. Benami

[Lois Lowry]

You will find that Georg Duckwitz is described and thanked in the "Afterword" at the conclusion of NUMBER THE STARS. It would not have been appropriate to mention him in the book itself since neither the child protaganist—nor the average Danish citizen—would have been aware of the role he played.

[Jude]

I spent many hours in darkrooms with my brother and his pals. Yesterday I scanned an interesting double-exposure photo. I explained to my teenagers how they happened, and that even though you can apparently create the same effect using a digital camera, it's not the same as our old accidental fun double-exposures where that great shot of a ruin at Palenque was ruined, but for some reason you kept it anyway, and now that you can easily access thousands of great shots of that same ruin, you're glad you have the authentic double-exposure instead. http://www.flickr.com/photos/jlcrook/5250097837/