Yes, I am a procrastinator!

Not that we need additional proof of how wonderful of a procrastinator I am, but the fact I haven't written on my blog in over a month is a clear indication of how lazy I can get with respect to my writing. It's probably why being a journalist for the first part of my career actually suited me: I needed that looming deadline to really buckle down and concentrate. I'm discovering this deadline need with respect to a newsletter I'm supposed to be putting together for a literary society. I had hoped to finish it up by the last week of June, but here we are, entering the first week of July, and it's still in an embryonic state. It's partly procrastination, but also fear: that perhaps I'm just not cut out to put this thing together, that I'm not really qualified. The job was thrust upon me by my current boss, and didn't feel I could really say no (particularly since it was presented under the guise as "resume building). Anyway I know I shouldn't fret much, especially since I get the impression that the membership of this society doesn't really read the newsletter anyway! Crank it out, and do better on the next one (in the fall) - that should be my immediate goal.

I'm also suffering under general restlessness of late. I'm struggling to concentrate on my reading. Should I chalk it up to the summer heat? Maybe what I need is something light and fun, perhaps a mystery. Yes! See, this is why I need to write more often (even if I don't have an audience): it does help to clarify my own  thinking.

the poet

Came across this decade-old quote from Alberto Manguel the other day while at work: "In our time, the role of the poet has declined from that of fearful soothsayer to that of eccentric provider for the remainder tables."I'd say it's even worse today - that one is lucky to find poetry books in the shops at all, let alone the remainder tables. So that will be my book-buying goal of the month: to purchase at least one book of poetry, preferably a Canadian poet.

Not much to report otherwise (hence the paucity of posts). About a third of the way through Dostoyevsky's Crime and Punishment (it's a classic!), a book I originally read when I was in high school. I long pointed to C&P as the first "serious" book I read on my volition - that I picked it up from the library simply because I wanted to read it, and not because it was part of my schoolwork. However, I'm not entirely sure I ever finished it. So technically this doesn't come under the banner of re-reading (a theme from last year, and one I hope to continue through 2010). It's been a fun ride so far. One forgets how much of a page turner the big Russians novels can be!

Revisiting, reevaluating

There are two themes to my reading this year. The first is that I've been reading a lot of "big" books. That was especially true early in 2009 when I read Roberto Bolano's 2666 and Tolstoy's (no first name necessary) Anna Karenina, pretty much back to back. I used to joke that I have the attention span of a gnat (without knowing, of course, if a gnat indeed has a limited attention span; but it sounded good), and that I was never much good at reading anything above, say, 300 pages. Although I've read large-ish tomes in the past - Norman Mailer's Executioner's Song comes to mind (all 1000 pages or so of it!), and as a teen I read Stephen King's massive It (it was a b-day gift from my parents, who figured because I enjoyed reading that I'd like the book that was #1 on the best-seller's list that year) - I tend toward more manageable works. You know, the ones around 200 to 250 pages.

I expanded my horizons this year though and pulled off the shelf some larger works. Bolano's 2666 was a no-brainer. Since devouring his Savage Detectives (yes, it's a long novel!) during the 2007 xmas season, I was hooked on the guy's work. I bought 2666 (at my local bookstore - remember to support your local book shop) about a week after it was released, with the intent of saving it for the 2008 xmas season when I had two full weeks off to devote to nothing more than reading and loafing (two of my fave activities). What a joy it was to spend time in Bolano's world for approximately 950 pages. (I can't fact check the exact page count; I've lent the book to a friend.) And reading Anna Karenina ... well, what could I possibly add to the far-more intelligent insights already out there on the novel? As I've said many times since: "That Anna Karenina, I think it's a classic."

Which brings me to the second theme of my reading year: re-reading. After I finished 2666, and after reading an article (sorry I can't link to it since I don't remember where I saw it) that suggested a clue to the 2666 title could be found toward the end of Savage Detectives, I decided to re-read Savage. Although I consider myself a somewhat-serious reader, I've never been one to re-read a work. My argument? There are far too many books to read once, so why bother picking up something I've already finished?

Upon reflection, and as I continue to read for the second time the wonderful first Zuckerman trilogy (+ the final Zuckerman book, Exit Ghost, which I'm about halfway through) by Philip Roth, I realize how shortsighted this "no re-read" strategy is. The Zuckerman books mean so much more to me now than they did on my first read over 10 years ago. For one, I'm in a better space to better understand the works - I have more life experience (I almost used the word "maturity," but fear it might be a misuse of that word...), for one, and I'm far-more self-reflective. The novels speak to me in ways they couldn't when I first read them while in my early 20s. The reading experience is totally different - it's more fulfilling in so many ways.

All hail to the re-read!