When Prose Writers and Poets Take Over a Newspaper

Today's Haaretz is the third annual Writers' Edition (Hebrew here), marking the beginning of Hebrew Book Week. 53 Israeli and foreign authors have taken over the entire news section, op-ed pages and some of the culture section (but interestingly, TheMarker, Haaretz's economic section, is still in the hands of professional business journalists, at least in the Hebrew edition), plus there is a 120-page book section.

Here are some highlights worth reading:

• Etgar Keret joined Benjamin Netanyahu on his trip to Italy, and although he couldn't get Netanyahu to go off his talking points, it is a well-written behind the scenes look at political journalism (Hebrew here).
• Americans think Avigdor Lieberman is a warmonger, says author and literature professor Nurit Gertz, based on WikiLeaks documents (Hebrew here).
• Sami Michael wants Haifa to be a refuge for persecuted writers. The mayor and city council agree, while the government hasn't done anything to make it happen (Hebrew here).
• Leon Wieseltier says the Arab Spring means Israel needs to make peace with its neighboring peoples, not just their leaders (Hebrew here).
• Natan Zach does not believe Gilad Shalit will be released. He hopes he's wrong. I hope so, too (Hebrew here).
• Nava Semel visits a multilingual library for foreign workers and their children (Hebrew here).
• Ron Leshem is worried about the natural (and unnatural) growth of the illiberal sectors within Israeli society (Hebrew here).
• Mario Vargas Llosa calls for legalization of drugs (Hebrew here).

Ian McEwan's Response to Boycotters

From the Guardian's letter section (Jan. 26):

I write in response to the letter you published from the British Writers in Support of Palestine (BWISP), which I have read with care (Letters, 24 January). I have my own concerns about Israel and the situation of the Palestinians, which is worse than ever. The recently published leaks to al-Jazeera/the Guardian are depressing, the present outlook for negotiations is bleak. Many Israeli writers feel this way too. But BWISP and I disagree on what one should do. I'm for finding out for myself, and for dialogue, engagement, and looking for ways in which literature, especially fiction, with its impulse to enter other minds, can reach across political divides. There are ways in which art can have a longer reach than politics, and for me the emblem in this respect is Daniel Barenboim's West-Eastern Divan Orchestra – surely a beam of hope in a dark landscape, though denigrated by the Israeli religious right and Hamas. If BWISP is against this particular project, then clearly we have nothing more to say to each other.

As for the Jerusalem prize itself, its list of previous recipients is eloquent enough. Bertrand Russell, Milan Kundera, Susan Sontag, Arthur Miller, Simone de Beauvoir – I hope BWISP will have the humility to accept that these writers had at least as much concern for freedom and human dignity as they do themselves. Their "line" is not the only one. Courtesy obliges them to respect my decision to go to Jerusalem, as I would theirs to stay away.

Ian McEwan

London

Predicting the Nobel Prizes 2010

It is well into Nobel Week, with the Nobel Prizes in medicine and chemistry already having been announced. Today, the winner of the physics prize will be announced, and tomorrow and on Friday the non-scientific laureates will be declared. These two, the literature and peace categories, are what interest me the most. People are guessing who will win, and I'll join the game, even though there is a 99.9% of being wrong.

And my nominees for the Nobel Prize in Literature are:

1. Amos Oz - he's mentioned every year, and he is one of the most respected authors in the world. I read somewhere that all kinds of bookies have his chances listed as being very low this year, compared with very high chances in 2009. They say this might mean that information leaked that Oz wasn't even on the shortlist. I'm hoping that's wrong.

2. David Grossman - he's both a great author and a bereaved father through whom the Nobel Committee can send an anti-war message.

3. Margaret Atwood - novelist, poet and essayist all in one.

4. Etgar Keret - he's too young to win, but one can still hope that one of my favorite authors will win. Not this year, I guess, but in 2030 perhaps?

5. Art Spiegelman - will the Nobel Committee have the guts to award the prize to one of the first people to prove that comics are a respectable genre?

And my nominees for the Nobel Peace Prize are:

1. One or more of the Afghan women leading the fight for equal rights in the war-torn country.

2. Parents Circle - Bereaved Families - this year no Israeli or Palestinian leader deserves the prize, but maybe the Committee will award a grassroots effort by those hurt the most by the conflict.

3. Bill Clinton - Two US presidents year after year? Slim chance, but I'd like my favorite leader to win for his Clinton Global Initiative and other efforts.

4. The International Committee of the Red Cross - the Nobel Committee can always go with a safe choice and award the ICRC with a fourth Peace Prize, which it last won back in the Mad Men era, 1963.

5. Liu Xiaobo, a Chinese dissident - he seems like the top candidate on the lists of other bloggers and pundits, so I'll mention the possibility, too, just to be on the safe side.

Umberto Eco Opposes the Boycott of Israel

Italian author Umberto Eco came out against the boycott of Israel in L'espresso. A full Hebrew translation is available here. I couldn't find a full English translation, but parts of it were published in the English edition of Ha'aretz:

"A brochure circulated in Turin by the Italian Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel claims that most Israeli universities, academics and intellectuals have supported and are supporting their governments ... and that Israeli universities are used for the most important weapons development research programs, centered on nanotechnology and on technological and psychological means for subjugating and controlling the civilian population," Eco wrote in L'espresso magazine last weekend. "I don't remotely agree with the policy of the Israeli government ... but I find the claim that most Israeli academics are actively supportive of their governments to be deceitful."

"I would understand," Eco continued, "if the physics department at the University of Rome or at Oxford decided not to cooperate with their colleagues in the same departments at universities in Tehran or Pyongyang if it turned out that the latter were involved in developing a nuclear bomb. But I would still find it difficult to understand why these universities should also sever ties with the departments of Korean art history or classical Persian literature."

Goodbye, Holden Caulfield

Coincidentally, the news of J.D Salinger's death came just a few days after I started reading his short story collection, "Nine Stories" (a.k.a. "For Esme with Love and Squalor"). At the end of every single story I just said "wow". His writing skills were amazing, and I believe he was the best author I have ever read.

I read "The Catcher in the Rye" when I was in high-school and absolutely loved it. Even though I wasn't much of a rebel and didn't particularly think of adults as phony, I completely identified with Holden Caulfield. Every time I heard a reference to the book as the crazy assassin's bible, I was pissed as hell. There was nothing in the novel that promoted murder. So what if Mark David Chapman, John Lennon's killer, and John Hinckley Jr., who tried to assassinate President Ronald Reagan, were fans of the book? So was Reagan's VP, former President George H. W. Bush!

I'm thinking of re-reading "Catcher". I'm sure it would be a totally different experience from the original reading, not just because it would be the second time around, but mostly because I'm in a different place in my life now. A teenager reading about a teenager is not the same as someone in his late twenties reading about a character who is a decade younger than him. I have no doubt I'll still love the book, and I'll discover new things I didn't notice in high-school.

I'll also probably get around to reading Salinger's other works sometime.

The Writers' Haaretz

It took me two days to finish reading Wednesday's special edition of Ha'aretz. To celebrate the annual Hebrew Book Week, the entire news section of the paper, an op-ed piece, the weather report and the "letters to the editor", were written by Israeli writers and poets. Two pieces were written by Turkish Nobel laureate Orhan Pamuk (translated from The New Yorker) and Italian author and philosopher Umberto Eco (an amusing essay about taxi drivers originally written 20 years ago).

It was the first time I've read the entire news section cover to cover and I enjoyed every single one of the articles (except for Shimon Adaf's over-technical report about quantum physics). The different writers wrote beautifully and from very special perspectives. I especially liked Etgar Keret's interview with Ehud Barak (Hebrew here), David Grossman's report from a rehab center for youth (Hebrew here) and Nurit Gertz's observations about the disconnect between Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman and the staff of his ministry (Hebrew here).

To see all the articles in Hebrew click here. For the articles in English click here and choose June 10 from the drop down menu on the left (sorry, there doesn't seem to be a static URL for the English edition of the writers' table of contents).

Haaretz's Poetic License

Ha'aretz will conduct an interesting experiment tomorrow, in honor of the annual Hebrew Book Week, a nationwide celebration of literature. The paper's usual journalists will have the day off, and instead, the entire newspaper - news, opinions, features and even the weather report - will be written by 35 prose writers and poets, "through their own experience" (whatever that means).

Yes, it's mostly a publicity stunt (though not a very good one - since I only know about it because I read today's print edition - the website has nothing about it and I haven't seen any commercials about it either), and writing subjectively about the news by people who usually write literature is very un-journalistic. I don't see the New York Times, Washington Post or Le Monde handing over their news pages to non-journalists. I really don't care about all that, though. Since it is just a one time thing, I don't see this as an insult to the idea of objective, professional reporters covering the issues in as balanced a way as possible.

So, if any of you notice new bylines and offbeat reports tomorrow on Ha'aretz's website, don't be surprised.

Expect more on this tomorrow, after I read the special edition.

Is Oskar Schell Autistic?

After reading Jonathan Safran Foer's "Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close" I went to Wikipedia's entry for the book. The 9-year-old narrator Oskar is described there as "possibly autistic (at the very least he shows some signs of Asperger's Syndrome)". What the? While I read the novel I never thought he might be autistic. He's so not autistic!

So I Googled the novel's title and Oskar along with the word "autistic" and found many book reviews and references where he received an autism or Asperger's Syndrome diagnosis from several commentators. Again, what the? Oskar is often compared to Mark Haddon's autistic protagonist in "The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-time", a book I haven't read. But for the purpose of "diagnosing" Oskar that doesn't matter. I may not be familiar with the famous fictional autistic boy, but I do know a real autistic kid from, well, incredibly close (and when he was a little baby he was also extremely loud).

First of all, not every child who is extremely intelligent and takes an interest in sciences is an autistic savant. We neurotypicals have our fair share of geniuses. Secondly, Oskar doesn't show any anxiety about meeting new people, going to places he has never seen before and entering into new situations. In fact, he is very friendly to strangers (maybe even too much).

Some people cite Oskar's rules as evidence of his autism. He doesn't use public transportation, elevators and bridges. Considering the fact that his father was killed in a terrorist attack that is a perfectly normal reaction. Besides, Oskar is willing to break the rules when he must. There is one eccentricity - Oskar's insistence on wearing only white clothes - that I cannot explain, but it in itself is not enough to make a case for an autism spectrum disorder.

People also say Oskar has difficulty expressing his feelings. After the trauma he has gone through, wouldn't most normal children, or even adults, have trouble expressing themselves?

I haven't seen anyone write about Oskar's grandfather being autistic - but if anyone in this novel has the condition, it is Grandpa. He doesn't speak. He expresses himself in writing. If he's autistic and autism is genetic, maybe it makes more sense that Oskar is indeed autistic. But even this old "empty Schell" of a man is not autistic. He loses the ability to speak when he is in his 20's or early 30's, and though it is suggested it is a psychological problem and not a physical one, I have a hard time believing an autistic adult would regress at that age. The guy experienced the horrors of the Dresden bombings during World War II. That's enough of a trauma to render anyone speechless (though he lost his speech gradually).

Anyway, do you agree? Have I missed any points? Do you think Jonathan Safran Foer meant for Oskar to be autistic? Your comments are welcome.

Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close

I just finished reading "Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close" by Jonathan Safran Foer. I found it to be extremely good and refreshing. Since it tells the story of a boy who lost his father on 9/11 I didn't expect it to be such a funny book. Oskar Schell, the narrator, reminded me of Holden Caulfield from "The Catcher in the Rye", and I'm quite sure Safran Foer intentionally imitated J. D. Salinger. The only part I didn't like about the book was the ending of the grandparents' storyline, which seemed kind of pointless. I won't elaborate so as not to spoil the ending for those who haven't read it yet.

Just a few days ago I wrote that I was afraid I might have lost the ability to concentrate on a novel. "Extremely Loud" has shown me that the problem isn't with me - it's the books. I finished "Extremely Loud" in 3 days because I found it fascinating. I guess the books that took me months to read are just not my cup of tea. The next novel I intend to read is Safran Foer's literary debut, "Everything Is Illuminated".

My next post: "Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close" and Autism