Sitaram
kickbox
A SEARCH on Ruark in this forum reveals nothing, so perhaps I am safe in posting this, and shall not be held guilty for redundancy.
As a child, I was always conscious of “Something of Value”, a Readers Digest selection, on our bookshelves.
My parents were not great readers. It is strange how books have been considered as a kind of necessary decoration. We are all familiar with coffee table books (of course, never to be read while actually drinking coffee as there might be a spill or crumbs).
I often laugh to myself when I see some important politician or intellectual being interviewed with a back drop of a shelf of library books. There are sets which have phony books, to give the illusion of intellectualism. It is particularly amusing to see a certain president photographed with such a bookish backdrop.
I suppose I am saying that "Something of Value" was part of the home decor, but I did choose to read it one day anyway, in my sophomoric zeal.
As a Sophomore in high school, I chose "Something of Value" for a book report. My English teacher, David Baumgartner (now long retired), a Yale graduate deeply into the psychoanalysis of literature, rebuked me for choosing such a pulp fiction potboiler, as he put it. He also felt that Bertrand Russell’s "History of Philosophy" was a potboiler, along with Will and Ariel Durant's Histories. A recent author comments that it was "fashionable" at one time to turn one's nose up at such books, without ever actually having read them. Fashion and Literature make strange bedfellows.
I have recently made a number of internet friends in Africa. I began to think about this novel which is concerned with the Mau Mau uprising.
Speaking of large coffee table books (above), I just purchased a thin but huge Oxford Atlas of the World, for $20 in a used book store. I have a great urge now to study the maps of the African nations, and learn various curious facts and statistics. Just the other day, I learned that Ethiopia was the first independent nation in Africa, in the 1800's. And some countries, I noticed, have a population of only 2 million, a fraction of certain large cities.
As I searched on Ruark, I read of how people criticized him severely for imitating Hemingway's style. One recent critic draws the conclusion that Ruark's novel was financially successful and has stood the test of time.
Literary styles are brilliant inventions/discoveries, but far less useful than something like the wheel. The first e.e. cummings is inspired, and all the rest are lame imitators. No one ever rebukes a particular wheel for lack of originality. Is there not something tragic in this? What is the point of developing something that no one else should use? A book is a book is a book. There, you see? Gertrude did not turn over in her grave. I wonder of Postmodernism involves recycling of genres with descretion? For that matter, I wonder if Andy Rooney ever poses with a backdrop of bookshelves.
http://amsaw.org/amsaw-ithappenedinhistory-122903-ruark.html
As a child, I was always conscious of “Something of Value”, a Readers Digest selection, on our bookshelves.
My parents were not great readers. It is strange how books have been considered as a kind of necessary decoration. We are all familiar with coffee table books (of course, never to be read while actually drinking coffee as there might be a spill or crumbs).
I often laugh to myself when I see some important politician or intellectual being interviewed with a back drop of a shelf of library books. There are sets which have phony books, to give the illusion of intellectualism. It is particularly amusing to see a certain president photographed with such a bookish backdrop.
I suppose I am saying that "Something of Value" was part of the home decor, but I did choose to read it one day anyway, in my sophomoric zeal.
As a Sophomore in high school, I chose "Something of Value" for a book report. My English teacher, David Baumgartner (now long retired), a Yale graduate deeply into the psychoanalysis of literature, rebuked me for choosing such a pulp fiction potboiler, as he put it. He also felt that Bertrand Russell’s "History of Philosophy" was a potboiler, along with Will and Ariel Durant's Histories. A recent author comments that it was "fashionable" at one time to turn one's nose up at such books, without ever actually having read them. Fashion and Literature make strange bedfellows.
I have recently made a number of internet friends in Africa. I began to think about this novel which is concerned with the Mau Mau uprising.
Speaking of large coffee table books (above), I just purchased a thin but huge Oxford Atlas of the World, for $20 in a used book store. I have a great urge now to study the maps of the African nations, and learn various curious facts and statistics. Just the other day, I learned that Ethiopia was the first independent nation in Africa, in the 1800's. And some countries, I noticed, have a population of only 2 million, a fraction of certain large cities.
As I searched on Ruark, I read of how people criticized him severely for imitating Hemingway's style. One recent critic draws the conclusion that Ruark's novel was financially successful and has stood the test of time.
Literary styles are brilliant inventions/discoveries, but far less useful than something like the wheel. The first e.e. cummings is inspired, and all the rest are lame imitators. No one ever rebukes a particular wheel for lack of originality. Is there not something tragic in this? What is the point of developing something that no one else should use? A book is a book is a book. There, you see? Gertrude did not turn over in her grave. I wonder of Postmodernism involves recycling of genres with descretion? For that matter, I wonder if Andy Rooney ever poses with a backdrop of bookshelves.
http://amsaw.org/amsaw-ithappenedinhistory-122903-ruark.html
