The author and illustrator, inspired by an assignment for The New Yorker, chose 75 independent bookstores from around the world and painted a watercolour of each storefront.  Superimposed on these illustrations are quotes or stories about each shop, told by the owner, an employee, or a customer.  Some have a definite 'wow' factor, some are sweet, some are funny.  At the back of the book are a collection of stories that didn't fit into the book but couldn't be left out.

 

All of them reaffirm my desire to own a bookshop someday. 

 

 

London is one of those long books that I love but as usual, sends me off to google. There are SO many other books referenced in the text that sound fascinating - and you have to wonder, is this book as interesting as it sounds from this quote? Is the interest aided mainly because Ackroyd loves the subject, or would I find it readable even if this book hadn't made it sound good? And for older books that might be out of copyright and online - well, I always have to go look to see if I can find the book, or at least read an excerpt. Of course finding them is the trick.

 

This often leads to websites which will sell you the books but that have little info about the contents - IF I actually can find any info about them online, that is. And that brings me to one book tease - the review that doesn't tell you anything, just hints at info. I'm not linking because I'm not wanting to spotlight this person, there are SO many people that do this. Example, not an exact quote:

This book contains many stories of this European city that I'd heard before, some that I haven't. It's a fascinating city, and I really want to make time to visit it someday.

I'd have been the slightest bit happier if there'd been mention of at least one or two of the stories this reviewer had heard - or hadn't. A noun, a place name, a person, maybe? Then I'd have something to go on and understand the star rating. As it is I have nothing to glean from that (except that this person wants to travel), and no one else reviewed this particular old book. So...yeah. Set that aside and moving on to other books I can find out more about.

 

The other book tease is done by authors when they cite something in the text, but there's no footnote. Ackroyd has an entire chapter at the end of this book that's an essay on his sources - but there's no way to tell within the text exactly where some of his references come from - unless he cites the book and author. (And then you'll know that much, but not where in the book that quote comes from.) Here's an example of a tease without a source:

 

p 111: "...At the very beginning of the nineteenth century a London journalist known as "Aleph" wandered down Lothbury, recalling its previous "tortuous, dark vista of lofty houses" lit only by oil lamps; since Aelph's journey it has changed many times, yet it still remains unique and identifiable, most particularly with its recurrent "darkness" and loftiness."

 

Yes, I'll get around to googling that. But just from previous reading and knowing how many newspaperfolk in that area used single names (or humorous pseudonyms) - you're not going to find them easily unless the author published multiple articles, in online-accessible papers. Or so I've found from past searches like this. (Will update if I find anything later.)

 

More babble later, am being paged to go help...

 

LATER:

 

Aelph apparently (I think) wrote London Scenes - ah ha, here we go:

 

London Scenes and London People

 

Had to look through several ugly .txt docs before I finally found that link - it's at archive.org. It would have helped to know that Aelph was a pen name of William Henry Harvey, 1811 - 1866. That's if archive.org is correct with that author name/date. I only know that the wikipedia page for him only mentions his botany work. And see, I think it's NOT the same Harvey - because other sources note: "William Harvey, wood-engraver, illustrator and writer of verse for children." Soooo, hmmm.

 

This is now become the mystery of Who is Aelph? Or Which William Harvey?

 

Which is again why I say footnotes: I read them, I love them. If you care enough to cite authors, please footnote so that I may then go read their books too. Don't be a tease about it.

I forgot, going into Brief Interviews with Hideous Men, about the experimental David Foster Wallace. After some time away from his work, I remembered the most distinctive parts - footnotes/endnotes, long recursive discussions  about sincerity vs. appearance, elevated vocabulary - and forgot his abilities as a storyteller and the ways he played with voice and structure. Every feature we associate with Wallace and many that get forgotten are deployed in some story or another in Brief Interviews.

The story, "Datum Centurio," for example, is written as a dictionary entry (from the future). "Octet" starts as a collection of pop quiz/thought experiments that quickly breaks down into some confessional digression on the gulf between feeling and expression, what  the writer wants to say and what the reader perceives. Adult World (II) appears to be authors notes for what a story yet to be written and, of course, the titular series of interviews with men who have IDEAS about sex and power and relationships and what those ideas reveal (the inquisitors contributions replaced simply with "Q.," a method he used in parts of Infinite Jest as well).

Experimentation can, of course, be Difficult, and the rewards are not easy. There is a lot of melancholy in  Wallace's works and one need only read the list of titles including "The Depressed Person" and "Suicide as a Sort of Present" to understand that these stories will be plumbing some depths, but, if you can reckon with these subjects, you can find plenty of humor as well and solid storytelling, particularly (the storytelling) in the Interviews, I could not put the last one down.

Of the Wallace that I have read, the stories presented here are the most obsessed the viewer/performer hall of mirrors, the idea that the writer or character is trying to be honest and sincere and wants to get that across but can only do so by insisting that is what they are doing, which, of course, be seen as a narrative ploy and so the writer/character then sees how the reader is perceiving their attempt at sincerity as maybe not sincere and must try to convince the reader that really s/he is dropping all pretense, which can be perceived as etc. ad nauseam.

(This all adds an interesting fold to the ongoing debate about the conflation of the works of David Foster Wallace and who he was as a person, the constant stressing of sincerity and pieces such as "Octet" which discuss breaking that fourth wall and appealing directly to the reader. Is it that our culture that demands to know the man behind the art or that this man seemed to invite us to look beyond the art? That's all I will say on that.)

This, like all Wallace I've so far read, is a rewarding experience, but expect the difficulty both in thought and emotion that is a hallmark of his fiction. It can be work, but like exercise it is asking you to push beyond what feels good, to think harder and deeper so in daily life you will be up to the task. Brief Interviews does not rise to the height of Infinite Jest, a ridiculous mark to judge by in any case, but many of the same elements can be seen here making it good for those familiarizing themselves with his work or looking for more after reading his masterpiece. 4 Stars.

For the Pratchett completist.

The Goldstones, apparently on their way to a trilogy, successfully followed their first book with this one. It’s another delight. Becoming more accomplished as rare book aficionados, they are able to provide even more enlightening and amusing anecdotes of the book trade. They are informative as well about many of the authors whose books are collected. I had never heard of "Bloomsbury" members, being literature-challenged, but it seems the august members of that strange coterie are very collectible, not just because many were good writers, but also because they were prolific and lived lives (there are more than twenty-five 900- page biographies of the members) that would be unbelievable on most soap operas.

The group consisted of Lytton Strachey, Virginia and Leonard Woolf, Clive Bell, Roger Fry, Duncan Grant, and John Maynard Keynes, although there is some dispute about others. The group had a unique ethos "which can be summed up by the sort of incisive comment the group and Lytton Strachey in particular were known for. Upon arriving at Clive and Vanessa Bell's apartment one evening, Lytton noticed a stain on Vanessa's dress, 'Semen?' he inquired." Another interesting story of the Bloomsbury folks is that Virginia Woolf and her husband, Leonard had often spoken of starting their own press. One day, while walking by a small printing supply company, they saw a hand press for sale in the window. They bought it, took it home, and taught themselves how to set type.

Thus began Hogarth Press. It reflected their ineptitude visually. Virginia routinely confused the h’s with the n’s. They had trouble with the ink, and the woodcuts they used for illustrations never inked up just right. These volumes are, of course, quite valuable today, especially because their print runs were so small (the first was 134 copies, which sold out, making them a small profit). One of the delights of the Goldstones’ books is learning about many authors of years ago with whom I was completely unfamiliar, for example, William Mcfee (nautical stuff) and Josephine Tey (British mystery writer who died in 1952).

No stranger to book signings, having traveled along to many of Sheila’s, not to mention many at ALA and ABA, I got a huge kick out of an anecdote they relate that happened to a friend of theirs. This author was sitting at the table in the bookstore with lots of his books but hadn’t been aproached by anyone for over an hour when a woman and child came over. “Are your the author of these books?” she asked. He assured her he was. “You wrote them,” she inquired again, “and you’ll be here for a while.” He answered again in the affirmative. She then asked if he would watch her child while she went shopping. The Goldstones don’t relate his response.