Here's a well-meaning but fairly bland thing on writers "mapping" Toronto through their writing. What's notable, aside from all that is missing, is the tone of most of the examples given: detached, passive, chronically amused/bemused, seeing the city's most obvious landmarks through the wrong end of the telescope. Nowhere is the observer immersed in the city, a part of it. A flea on the back of a dog doesn't stop to say, "What strange and wonderous things, these dogs!" or write prose poetry about canine physiology.
More on writing Toronto here.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
A very subtle and funny writer - one I've become obsessed with over the past year - in a decidedly Muriel Spark mood. Imagine The Pr...
-
August over at Vestige.org has posted a long and very complimentary review/essay about my novel that morphs into a defense of the boring ol...
-
Mark Steyn is a dangerous idiot with a suspiciously homophobic streak for a bearded, show tunes-loving man who is drawn to big, strong, auth...
-
Penniless, woefully obscure Douglas Coupland went on a tear last week in the New York Times ’ subscriber-only online thing: "Can/Lit is...
1 comment:
Jeezis Nathan, it was written by some academic. Of course it's well-meaning and bland. It's the corporate voice.
Post a Comment