I have held Paulo Coleho readers as a special breed of imbicile, and I’ve held them to a standard to guage all others to.  Lately though I’ve begun to wonder if this is fair.  Is it right to be so judgmental against someone just because of who they read?  And is it right to think that these feel good, can’t deal with reality new age bullshit types who don’t know the alphabet are really the epitome of dumb?  I don’t know the answer to this, although I have to admit that it might be the Nicholas Sparks fans who should be rightfully holding the moron crown, or should it really be placed on the pointy little pinheads of James Patterson readers?  In the first two cases the books can be difficult to see since they are on the bottom shelf, it can be difficult to know that those books on the bottom shelf are continuations of the alphabet and not just some crazy shit.  But in the case of Mr. Patterson’s readers he gets a whopping three shelves to fill up with all of the little books he forces some other writer to write for him, meaning it’s difficult to miss them.

I don’t know if I will ever know the answer to who of this trinity can lay claim to having the dumbest reader base.  I will one day hopefully come up with suitable science to figure it out, but until then I can only imagine who in fact has the most clueless readers.

Oh fuck.  I wrote this a couple of weeks ago, and I thought I posted it but I didn’t.  But then I said today that something went wrong with the last time I tried to post and blah blah blah.  Here is my lost little post.

This made me happy today.  I know it’s not very likely but I like to believe that there could be some new Kafka stories out there.  I’m not hoping for a new novel, just some stories.

6/21 New Age Section Barnes and Nobles – w4m – 25 (Union Square)
Reply to:
Date: 2008-06-22, 1:55PM EDT

I was looking for books in the New Age section, I couldn’t help noticing you checking me out, you had brown hair, and a t-shirt. I wanted you to ask me out, maybe to get coffee in the cafe and talk about Astrology or the Secret. Me, black long hair, mid twenties, really cute.

——————————————————————————————————————
I posted this. It’s made up and poorly written, there are things missing like when this sighting happened. Everything is vague. Does someone think it’s them? Yes.
——————————————————————————————————————-
Reply 1
Hey there–so glad you did this post!

Sorry if I my eyes wondered and it made you uncomfortabe–I just ended a relationship with a girl and felt a bit like I was in a mourning period.

Do you really practice the techniques of The Secret??

Greg
——————————————————————————————————————-
Reply 2
Hey, I have been in that section a bunch of times. I
read and interact in some way about Astrology just
about everyday. I am turning 23 really soon. :-)

Tonight I am aware that The Moon is in Aquarius,
approaching Neptune, and I am in the mood to
experience new things, to feel life, also interact
with people.

You sound cool – let’s chat.

I’m good looking (I just don’t want you to think
otherwise,) I’ll send you a pic if you write me back.
Would love to talk about life, Astrology, ours charts,
anything.
——————————————————————————————————————

I sound cool. Yay.

19851985

by Anthony Burgess

Some books age well, some don’t. Some books make prophesies of the future and they are wrong. Sometimes even when they are wrong they are still considered correct and are their jargon enter into the general lexicon as in 1984. Other books miss the mark of being correct about the future but they disappear from the world, as in the case of 1985.

I came across a reference to this book while thumbing through a biography on Anthony Burgess about five years ago. Since then I have kept my eyes opened looking in used book stores and those kinds of places for a copy of the book. I could have probably found the book to buy online, but I rarely ever do that kind of thing for myself. Last week though in a semi-ironic act I actually went to a library and saw that they had the book, so I took it out and finally got the read it.

The structure of the book is a little weird. The first hundred pages are a collection of essays and a faux-interview with the author on George Orwell’s much misused utopian novel. The gist of the first hundred pages is that Orwell’s book was grossly misunderstood by many and that it’s really a bleak picture of London in 1948 and also at heart a comic novel. It’s also according to Burgess the culmination and defeat of a lifetime of a conflicting belief in the working class by Orwell. After getting through this part of the book is a novella by Burgess where he presents his own possible future for England, one which he sees I’m sure as equally comical but also also a little less naive to the state of the world (why Orwell’s naivety is difficult to explain here). Basically Burgess’ version of a horrible future is taken from the idea that the bombs never did end up falling that everyone thought would in the post-war era, and instead of bombs there were even greater horrors to the killing of humanity present.

Burgess wrote his book in the late 1970’s. The book came out in 1978, a time when England was in a lot of trouble. Wide-spread unemployment, striking unions, inflation and general civil-unrest were present. This is the stage that would bring Thatcher and Reagen to prominence, and their own anti-labor acts would put a stop the basic premise of Burgess book, but that was still in the future.

Burgess saw a world destroyed by the power of unions, where strikes were a common thing and they were always held for more money-something that was quickly losing it’s value. In Burgess world everyone went on strike, firemen, the army, chocolate makers, train-operators, anyone you can think of. And if a building burned down, it was the fault of someone who didn’t give into the strike. It’s kind of a conservative horror show here, but there is still something subversive underlaying Burgess story. More than just the awfulness of syndicalism, Burgess also saw a general dumbing down of the culture taken beyond being just the norm but to the regulated norm. Language decided upon the majority usage, if most people misuse words then the misuse must be correct etc., (he called this Workers English, and he saw it as something even worse than Newspeak, or Doublespeak). He also saw a bleak pragmatic future where culture was left behind because it had no market value. As a result only the hooligans, or maybe droogs and the old resistors to the new world knew things like Latin or Greek, or the works of Plato and Shakespeare, or cared about history.

The book has something reactionary about it, and it is certainly an elitists nightmare of a possible future but it’s also a warning cry against the leveling a dumbed down consumerist culture could possibly create. Some of the premises of the book have essentially been destroyed by the actions of Thatcher and Regan in the early 80’s but there is still something to be read in this forgotten book.

I never thought of the idea that printing up this blog to hand in some of the entries for class would be difficult with an all black background. Oppps. I’ll be changing the background at some point temporarily for my own ease of printing, and then putting it back to black again or maybe a very vile color. Who can say for sure.