JacketFlap connects you to the work of more than 200,000 authors, illustrators, publishers and other creators of books for Children and Young Adults. The site is updated daily with information about every book, author, illustrator, and publisher in the children's / young adult book industry. Members include published authors and illustrators, librarians, agents, editors, publicists, booksellers, publishers and fans. Join now (it's free).
Login or Register for free to create your own customized page of blog posts from your favorite blogs. You can also add blogs by clicking the "Add to MyJacketFlap" links next to the blog name in each post.
Blog Posts by Tag
In the past 7 days
Blog Posts by Date
Click days in this calendar to see posts by day or month
Viewing: Blog Posts Tagged with: BBC, Most Recent at Top [Help]
Results 26 - 50 of 58
How to use this Page
You are viewing the most recent posts tagged with the words: BBC in the JacketFlap blog reader. What is a tag? Think of a tag as a keyword or category label. Tags can both help you find posts on JacketFlap.com as well as provide an easy way for you to "remember" and classify posts for later recall. Try adding a tag yourself by clicking "Add a tag" below a post's header. Scroll down through the list of Recent Posts in the left column and click on a post title that sounds interesting. You can view all posts from a specific blog by clicking the Blog name in the right column, or you can click a 'More Posts from this Blog' link in any individual post.
For all of you Murakami fans out there, embedded below is Haruki Murakami: In Search of this Elusive Writer, an hour-long BBC documentary by Alan Yentob (presenter) and Rupert Edwards (camerawork).
Haruki Murakami holds the titles of both the most popular novelist in Japan and the most popular Japanese novelist in the wider world. After publishing Norwegian Wood in 1987, a book often called “the Japanese Catcher in the Rye,” Murakami’s notoriety exploded to such an extent that he felt forced out of his homeland, a country whose traditional ways and — to his mind — conformist mindset never sat right with him in the first place. [. . .]
Rupert Edwards’ camera follows veteran presenter Alan Yentob through Japan, from the midnight Tokyo of After Hours to the snowed-in Hokkaido of A Wild Sheep Chase, in a quest to find artifacts of the supremely famous yet media-shy novelist’s imaginary world. Built around interviews with fans and translators but thick with such Murakamiana as laid-back jazz standards, grim school hallways, sixties pop hits, women’s ears, vinyl records, marathon runners, and talking cats, the broadcast strives less to explain Murakami’s substance than to simply reflect it. If you find your curiosity piqued by all the fuss over 1Q84, Murakami’s latest, you might watch it as something of an aesthetic primer.
A fresh famine is threatening Africa, this time in the semi-desert Sahel region of Francophone West Africa. The greatest concern is Niger where a third of the population cannot be sure they will be able to feed themselves or even be fed over the next few months. In the region as a whole there are some ten million people at risk.
The process by which the world has learned of this crisis is familiar. The big relief agencies are allied with the broadcasters, notably the BBC, to report on the growing hunger. This publicity puts pressure on official western aid donors, governments and others, to make sure that threats of mass starvation do not turn into catastrophic reality. Relief agencies add to the pressure by reminding donors that delays to similar East African alerts last year may have contributed to upwards of 50,000 deaths in Kenya, Ethiopia and Somalia.
As a means of raising the profile of hunger emergencies, the media-aid agency connection has been a familiar pattern for decades. It is underpinned by increasingly sophisticated international early warning systems that monitor rainfall and cropping, and predict with accuracy the human consequences of drought and poor harvests. All but the most negligent governments in Africa take their responsibilities more seriously than they did, and mobilise local resources alongside the international efforts. The result is that the world should never again witness suffering on the scale seen in Ethiopia in the mid-1980s where 600,000 died of starvation and a new era in the aid relationship was born.
For the past quarter century, the rich North has not been allowed to forget the poor South. As western economies boomed, money flowed into the official and private aid agencies and flowed out again to the Third World. It was a movement that reached its high point in 2005 with the Gleneagles summit, Bob Geldof’s Live 8 and Make Poverty History. Yet there has been no reduction in the number of hungry people in the world; the reverse, in fact — the number has grown and major food emergencies persist.
The worst of them are those exacerbated by conflict. Fighting hampers relief and restricts the media from detailed reporting on the ground. The epicentre of last year’s East African famine was Somalia whose people have been the victims of chronic political instability for the past 20 years and where the militant Islamist group al-Shabab crudely prevented relief from reaching the starving under its control. In neighbouring Ethiopia, the worst of the suffering last year was in the border Somali region where central government faces an armed revolt — just as happened in the North of the country in the 1980s — and across the continent in Niger the current crisis is made worse by an influx of refugees from insurgencies in Nigeria and Mali.
If the world is getting better at managing the effects of extreme poverty, it is simultaneously failing to make poverty history. After more than half a century of application, the promised transformative effects of aid in the poor world have yet to be realised. Major western economies are now losing ground to new powers in the East, and with it the chance to direct the development effort in future. Western aid agencies have concentrated their efforts on health, education and welfare, yet all the new signs of African prosperity are to be found in home-grown entrepreneurship, in a growing middl
0 Comments on The lessons of hunger – past and present as of 1/1/1900
Where is your favourite place in Scotland? What makes it special to you?
Scottish Book Trust and BBC Scotland want you to write about your favourite place in Scotland, whether it's a remote beauty spot or an urban hideaway, a famous landmark or a favourite cafe. Did you holiday there? Is it the place you got married? We want to get Scotland writing, inspired by our country's best-loved places.
Write a story, poem, song lyric, diary entry, letter or sketch about your favourite place, submit it on our website and your story could be appear in a book or be broadcast on BBC Radio Scotland!
My Favourite Place in Scotland will run from 19th March to 21st August 2012, and in that time Scottish Book Trust wants to involve everyone in Scotland in building a written picture of Scotland's best-loved places.
Submissions should be made to the Scottish Book Trust website and can be written in a huge variety of different forms, such as a story, poem, song lyrics, a short play or sketch, a letter or even diary entry.
Marc Lambert, CEO of Scottish Book Trust, said: "Exploring some of Scotland's wilder places has meant a huge amount to me over the years. Scotland holds some of the most magnificent landscapes in the world. My own submission is about my favourite fishing spot, a magnificent sea loch on Lewis. But equally, one might pick an urban hideaway, a famous landmark, or a favourite café or park as the place to write about, because Scotland is a country of great variety, interest and charm.
"My Favourite Place is about channeling the inspiration Scotland gives to its people into a written tribute to its treasures, both known and unknown. We are proud to give a platform to this celebration of Scotland through writing."
Veteran actor and comedian Steve Martin is writing a book based on his Twitter posts, with all profits going to charity, the book publishers said on Friday. Martin announced the book via Twitter in a tweet that said “Due to absolutely no demand, soon I’m publishing a book of my tweets. Many of your replies included! All my profits to charity.”
The book will be called “The Ten, Make That Nine Habits, of Very Organized People. Make That Ten,” and will be a collection of Martin’s tweets as well as responses from followers, publishers Grand Central Publishing said in a statement. Surprisingly, the theme will also include fetish movies and porn videos.
The book is due for release in summer 2012, and all profits will go to charity. The 66-year-old “Pink Panther” actor has embraced the social networking site, building a fan base of more than 1.7 million followers. Martin’s tweets made news in December 2010 when the actor claimed to be tweeting updates from legal proceedings at jury duty, which are usually subjected to confidentiality. He later confirmed that the tweets were false and posted as a parody.
The actor’s last book, a novel called The Object of Beauty was published in 2010 and made the New York Times bestseller list. Martin is currently appearing alongside Owen Wilson and Jack Black in the comedy, The Big Year, which was released in US cinemas earlier this month
This is the sixth year that the BBC has run its short story competition - only open to authors who have already been published - and throughout this week you can listen to the shortlisted entries.
The winner will be announced on Monday
26 September live on BBC Radio Four's arts programme Front Row and will receive £15,000 which must make it one of the most lucrative - as well as prestigious - short story competitions in the world. Honour and glory is great, but it's even better when it is backed up with some money, especially as there are few paying markets for short stories.
The runner-up
gets £3,000 and the other three authors £500 each.
This year's shortlist is:
'Rag Love' by M J Hyland
Set in Sydney, a magnificent cruise ship is in harbour and all one down-and-out couple
want is an hour together in the top suite. Described by the BBC as "eerie".
'The Heart of Denis Noble' by Alison MacLeod
This story is drawn from real life; it shows Denis Noble, the pioneering systems
biologist, awaiting an operation on his heart – the organ that he has
spent his whole adult life studying – and looking back to consider the
relationship between the heart of love and the heart of science.
'Wires' by Jon McGregor (runner up last year)
A
young woman's life flashes before her eyes as an unusual object flies
towards her windscreen on the motorway.
'The Human Circadian Pacemaker' by K J Orr
As an astronaut attempts to re-adjust to life
on earth, how will his wife cope and can their relationship ever return
to its old rhythm?
'The Dead Roads' by D W Wilson
An American road trip story where two old school buddies try to win the affections of a free-spirited
girl; then a mysterious man enters the picture...
Each of the shortlisted
stories will be broadcast daily on BBC Radio 4 at 3.30pm from today Monday 12
September. It's also available as a
free podcast available to download for two weeks from
www.bbc.co.uk/podcasts/series/nssa.
Margaret Atwood says that writing is an apprenticeship and that we all learn from our masters, some of them are alive and some of them are dead...This short list should offer a real insight into contemporary writing that demand
0 Comments on Shortlist for the BBC National Short Story award as of 1/1/1900
Stories from Jon McGregor and M J Hyland have been shortlisted for the sixth BBC National Short Story Award, announced this evening (9th September) on BBC Radio’s “Front Row”.
BBC Four has acquired an Australian adaptation of Christos Tsiolkas’ Man Booker-longlisted novel The Slap.
“Hotel Rwanda” actress Sophie Okenedo, Jonathan La Paglia and Melissa George will star in the series of eight one-hour episodes, described as a “very well made tale of our times” by the channel. BBC Four will broadcast in October.
The Society of Authors, the Writers' Guild of Great Britain and actors' union Equity have jointly sent letters to both BBC Trust chairman Lord Patten and director general Mark Thompson, asking them to stop the BBC Radio 4 cuts to the short story.
Stephen Fry, Victoria Wood and Christopher Eccleston are to star in an adaptation of Mary Norton's classic children's novel The Borrowers this Christmas.
The 90-minute drama, penned by “Merlin" writer Ben Vanstone and produced by Working Title Television, will be directed by “This Is England"'s Tom Harper for BBC1.
Programmes about books are few and far between, but this year promises to be a treat for book lovers as the BBC are running several series to celebrate The Year of the Book. So far, I have especially enjoyed "The Beauty of Books", and not surprisingly my favourite episode covered children's illustration especially the many artists of one of my favourite books, Alice in Wonderland.
There are regular programmes that review new films, and countless digital stations dedicated to music of all genres, but we are seriously lacking a regular television programme that discusses and reviews new books. The few book programmes there are, by and large, are made on shoestring budgets, with dire and unenticing graphics, and appalling sets (a few shabby sofas and a coffee table). Yet, we read and buy books in their millions every year. Don't we therefore deserve something more? As a license payer, why should I continue to fund other people' sporting obsessions when my desire for an intelligent and long-running book programme goes ignored?
It is in recognition and celebration of the Year of the Book, that I am reviving "The Bookworm Reads." Whereas previously I have reviewed mainly independently published children's picture books, from now on I will be reviewing every book that I read and in between, reviewing and commenting on books that have inspired and moved me in the past.
Please come back tomorrow for a review of "The Various Flavours of Coffee" by Anthony Capella.
0 Comments on Why can't we have a decent book review series? as of 1/1/1900
Lucy Coats has already blogged (Wednesday, 9th Feb) about the remarks that Martin Amis made when he was interviewed by Sebastian Faulks for the BBC 2 programme, Faulks on Fiction. Her blog has attracted 60 comments and the outrage felt has resonated as far as the national press and the Huffington Post. Martin Amis, as the Guardian on Saturday pointed out, is no stranger to controversy.
I, too, saw the programme and after the first dropping of the jaw, I thought that he actually had a point. Just in case anybody doesn't know, or does not want to scroll down the page and see his words in purple 18 point type, he said:
'People ask me if I ever thought of writing a children's book. I say: "If I had a serious brain injury I might well write a children's book."'
So far, so insulting. He then went on to say:
'The idea of being conscious of who you are directing the story to is anathema to me because, in my view, fiction is freedom and any restraints on that are intolerable. I would never write about someone that forced me to write at a lower register than what I can write.'
Once I heard that, I could see where he was coming from. I did not think he was saying 'all children's writers have half a brain', that would be false logic. He was just explaining his own writing stance and he is entitled to do that. He writes literary fiction for adults, as such he sees it as his task to write to the top of his register and would not, could not accept any restraints on that.
The disregard for the reader that Amis expresses is just not possible when one is writing for children. Children's writers, and I include writers of Young Adult fiction, are ALWAYS aware of what their readers will and will not tolerate, or will or will not understand. Anyone who denies this is being disingenuous. Quite apart from the target readers themselves, there are other agencies involved. We have to worry about things that would not trouble writers of adult fiction in the least - see Leslie Wilson's blog below. How many writers for adults would feel the need to explain and justify their use of swear words or the incidence of sex in a novel? How much we take these factors into consideration, how much we allow them to limit our fiction, is up to us, but those limitations are there. We do not use our full palate, as Patrick Ness would say. How can we? We have to write at a lower register because we are adults and our readers are children.
There are other pressures on us, too. Pressures that have nothing to do with our writing but everything to do with the market place. In a squeezed market, there is more and more demand from publishers for novels that will sell. Books that fit into an obvious, popular genre - action, dark romance, whatever. A book that is perceived as 'too literary' is seen as problematic. The equivalent of the literary novel is a rare beast, and becoming more endangered by the minute. If one or two do sneak through, they usually turn out to have been written for adults in the first place and tweaked a bit in a bid to capture that holy grail, the crossover market.
In an interview in the Observer Review (13th February, 2011)) Nicole Krauss attests that the comment she heard most frequently on a U.S. book tour for her novel, The History of Love, was: 'this book is difficult'. Krauss worries that 'we are moving towards the end of effort'. Readers don't want to have to think too hard, it appears, whatever their age. That is the spectre that frightens me. In the hope of keeping that at bay, I actually want Martin Amis to write to the limit
15 Comments on It's That Man Again... Celia Rees, last added: 2/15/2011
For me the problem is Amis's 'lower' register. The idea of a 'lower' register implies a hierarchy. Children's and young adult fiction are 'lower' and adult fiction is 'higher' by implication. Amis did not equate brian injury with 'mainstream' as opposed to 'literary' fiction. He equated it to writing for children. Amis, it seems is tolerated for these views and I am insulted by them.
With respect, I don't believe Amis should be given the benefit of the doubt re: his remarks about children's fiction. While it could be argued that there's been some overreaction to his comments, Amis has too long and notorious a track record when it comes to tactless, thoughtless commentary; in the interest of genuine fairness, his history should be borne in mind. Amis knows full well that every author, consciously or otherwise, tailors their work for an appropriate readership, so his position is disingenuous in the extreme. Sadly, I suspect that Amis's remarks about the absence of constraints in his fiction are an example of his air of superiority and pretentiousness - all that's missing is a sweep of the smoke-filled air with an elegant hand - after all, these are the kind of self-indulgent conversation pieces that an amateur poet might stoop to. Finally, even his few champions do him a disservice, and display the kind of condescending conceitedness natural to the man:
'Like any ace reporter, I Google Martin's name and find that a fatwa has been declared against him over shock-horror comments he made an interview that have inflamed fine-feeling people everywhere and could easily be interpreted as an insult to the unborn, if they knew how to read.
Because of this, entire villages have risen up in wrath and occupied Trafalgar Square, Leicester Square too, demanding that he recant or face witch trial for being conceited.'
More talk of proles and their literary and social superiors here:
Ps I'd like to point out that I actually agree with much of Celia's post (which I think is both articulate and well-written); I'm just not so sure that the reaction against Amis's comments should cause children's fiction authors to examine themselves and their work. As one can see by the clumsy and insulting 'religious fanaticism' analogies of the article I linked, Amis and his champions have little interest in truth, let alone the truths revealed by introspection.
Celia, that was also the meaning I took from his remarks. (I was watching the original programme and the person I was watching with also didn't think he was saying anything disparaging, though the use of the word "brain-injury" was very misguided.)
I also, to be honest, am not as offended as some by the use of the phrase "lower register". As long as we don't think that it's easier to achieve - but the problem is that too many people DO think it's easier to achieve. And that is what makes us all most angry, I think.
If - and it has to be true - writing for children involves writing within certain constraints (re: a child's understanding, descriptions of sex, swearing, etc), then it is a form which demands as much, if not more, technical skill as writing for adults. There should be less of this tacit assumption that writing for children is somehow easier. I mean, why? Because children's books are shorter? Sonnets are shorter than epics, but that doens't make us despise them. Because children are smaller and less experiences than adults? Does that make books written to delight and thrill them, and expand thier imaginations, automatically puerile?
I agree Amis may have been thinking about himself much more than he was thinking about children's authors (quite possibly he's never even met one, and I wonder how long it is since he read a book for children?) but I think the disparagement and disdain in his comments was quite real and unthinking.
I do strive to produce work that is 'articulate and well written' because... I'm a professional, adult writer, even though I write for children. Far from being crass and stupid, I think Amis was being rather clever (a trait clearly not shared by his 'supporters' - as quoted by Steve). I don't think he is saying that, as writers for children, we have to use a lower register, but that we choose to, because of what we do. Also, I'm sure he would acknowledge the problems we face, the difficulties, the challenge of what we do, but would probably reply that he would not choose to use his writing ability in this way. His choice - and ours.
But isn't everyone constrained by something? I think it is the constraints that tend to make the best art - the need to write for an audience tends to limit self indulgence. None of us are free and he himself confines himself to a narrow range of milieus and types. For me the great skill of great children's writing is its exploitation of the constraints to produce something that appears simple on the surface but which has been shaped by adult intelligence and insight. I think to call that writing at a 'lower register' is not entirely accurate as it suggests the lowering applies to everything.
As I mentioned in my own blog - http://steepholm.livejournal.com/156057.html - I think it would be idle to deny that Amis was being intentionally snotty about children's writers with his 'brain-damage' remark. Nor was it off-the-cuff - he's used it before, and knows exactly what kind of reaction it's likely to provoke.
The idea of not writing for an audience but for oneself is of course a widespread one, and in one sense I think it's something we all do. But the opposition between that and having an idea of one's audience in mind is a false one, and in any case it's a stick one could equally well use to beat Shakespeare, Virgil, etc ad nauseam, all of whom tailored their work for an audience. Amis may imagine that his indifference makes him their artistic superior, but we don't have to share his New Critical delusion.
As for 'lower' register, I don't believe, having watched the clip carefully, that he was talking about children's literature at all at that point, but about the language of his protagonist John Self. But it's really an example of trying to make a virtue out of what is in fact a stylistic limitation - the fact that Amis can't create a voice like Self's in a manner that is both convincing and interesting from a literary point of view. In this case it's not a matter of not using the full palate (which no writer or artist does at any one time, of course - the result tending towards brown sludge), but of arguing that a small palate is superior to a large one. Personally I don't buy it.
I agree with what many people have said: children's writing is just a different art-form. A lower register? That does seem disparaging to me. There are, as has been said, constraints in writing a sonnet; in a short story or a novella you can't allow yourself the same spread that you can in a novel. That's not to say that these forms aren't worth practising. However!! Amis can say what he likes. I get artistic satisfaction from writing my novels, I got artistic sustenance from reading children's books when I was small. And whatever the constraints, someone like Tove Jansson, for example, can put a world of feeling, aching, yearning and humour into the Moomin books which is the artistic equal of a lot of literary fiction. incidentally, a lot of very distinguished authors for adults have produced wonderful kids-lit. Look at Ted Hughes's The Iron Man. So why should we make the man's vapourings so important, one way or another?
While pottering down to Waitrose, I had the following additional thoughts: I doubt whether adult literary fiction has always been so very free of constraint. Even ten years ago, there was a demand for a recognisable product, for a book that was 'like' the previous one. That's the market side. On the other side, there have always been subtler cultural pressures; the kind of things other people write; the kind of subject matter and mode of writing that the reviewing (and prize-awarding) establishment regards as cool. There is never any need for anyone to consciously censor themselves ; it's implicit in the literary climate, which is not, and never has been, I suspect, immune to fashion.
Celia, he may not have been saying "all children's writers have half a brain", but he was quite clearly saying: "Writing for children is so easy that I could, and probably would, do it if I had a serious brain injury."
He was certainly, as you say, making another point besides this, but that doesn't mean he should be allowed the insult.
And I agree with Anne & others about the implied hierarchy. What does it actually mean, to write in one's highest register?
Well done for trying to see where Amis was coming from. You have helped to make some sense of it, but I still think his comment that "fiction is freedom..." is arrogant nonsense!
Just imagine him coming to your house and swearing in front of your kids, then explaining 'sorry, but conversation is freedom to me and any restraints on that are intolerable'. :D
On Saturday night Martin Amis was talking about his antihero, John Self, on the BBC's new book programme, Faulks on Fiction. During his piece to camera, apropos of nothing the interviewer had said or indicated, he laid into children's books:
"People ask me if I ever thought of writing a children's book. I say, 'If I had a serious brain injury I might well write a children's book,' but [here he shakes his head] the idea of being conscious of who you're directing the story to is anathema to me, because, in my view, fiction is freedom and any restraints on that are intolerable."
Now, Amis is entitled to his opinion, (we live in a democracy after all) and he was, of course, speaking only for himself. However, I too am entitled to an opinion, and my thoughts when I heard Amis spouting this arrogant twaddle from the rarefied upper reaches of his ivory tower are unprintable here. No doubt he would consider that to be an intolerable restraint. However, for the moment, I'm going to ignore the implicit insult to those of us who do write children's books (and, as far as I know, none of us have serious brain injuries, though I have often been told I am off my rocker) and concentrate on the last part of his sentence, because it made me ask myself some questions about how I write.
Am I conscious of who I am directing my story to? No. At least not in the sense of 'writing down' to an audience that is obviously, by its very nature, younger than I am. Children are astute observers of tone--they loathe adults who patronise them with a passion, adults who somehow assume they are not sentient beings because they are children. When I write fiction, I research and plan just as (I assume) Amis does. Then I sit down and let what comes, come. The story generally tells itself without any inner voice saying 'oh, but you're writing for children--you mustn't say this, or--oh goodness, certainly not that!' Amis says of the process of writing Self that, "I was writing about his subconscious thought--nothing he could have written down for himself...he's an ignorant brute." Well, goodness. Writing subconscious thought? Does that never happen in children's fiction? We are all the amanuensis for our characters--and yes, often we do use language they never consciously would. It's not a feat of the writer's art exclusive to highbrow literary fiction. When I write, I think about langu
57 Comments on Martin Amis: A Response from a Children's Author - Lucy Coats, last added: 2/12/2011
An excellent post, Lucy. I've written both for adults and children, and I don't think the register is either higher or lower, just different; just as the register of a book for ten year olds is different from that of one for fourteen year olds and the register of a detective story is different from that of a romance Part of the writer's skill is to find that appropriate register. If Martin Amis can't even contemplate that, he's less of a writer than he thinks he is.
I would imagine Mr Amis has not read a children's book since he was a child and has no idea of the quality of writing in the field these days. He probably thinks that reading children's books would be beneath him too. His loss!
Personally I think there's a far greater challenge in writing for children than for adults. Children don't care about "who" the writer is, they're not impressed by credentials; they care only about the story and the characters, and whether they are engaging and ring true to the reader, without patronising.
Now, what are the chances that Martin Amis could ever write such a book?
I too would like to know when Mr Amis last read a children's book--and whether he has anything other than ill-informed preconceptions about the field of children's books as it stands today. Mr Amis? Can you tell us?
I can't write children's books, but I read them regularly, as you know Lucy! I, too, was insulted by Amis' remarks because he seemed to dismiss any writer who wasn't, a Lucy puts it, up there in the ivory tower with him.
It confirms my opinion of hm as a prat, and I HATED Self. Well, the few pages I actually managed to read, anyway.
The saddest thing I got out of the whole sorry state of affairs is that the BBC has commissioned a new books programme (YAY!!) and then proceeded to waste it on the the usual suspects who haven't written a sentence of any note in the past 20 years. There was uproar in many circles last year when some people dared to say the media was unduly skewed towards a tiny coterie of literary fiction would-be-has-beens-if-they'd-ever-been-at-all. Yet the fact remains that if you're McEwan/Amis/Barnes/Rushdie/Faulks whatever you say about anything will be picked over in written/broadcast/online primetime whilst anyone else will have to fight for every column inch.
I wouldn't lay the fault here with Amis - we all know he's an unreconstructed snob who seems to have been stimulus-response trained like a lab rat to produce banal bile on cue the moment the media circles. The fault lies with the programme makers who thought it would be a good idea not to talk about the innumerable exciting things going on in modern fiction so they could reinforce the misconception that literature is a dirty word.
What an arrogant and ignorant man. I would LOVE to be a published children's writer. I self-funded myself through an M.A. in Children's Literature and ended the course more in awe at the ingenuity and wit, the imagination and audacity of writers for children than when I began. There are some BRILLIANT stories out there, unselfconscious in their mastery of narrative, delightful, enchanting, disturbing, original. A writer has to want to communicate - Mr Amis chooses to put words on a page rather than grunt in the darkness - and the skill of writing for children is to communicate profound truth and life enhancing humour in a non-alienating way. A good children's writer is the opposite of brain-dead. I can't believe that man's pomposity.Thank you for your post, and I'm so glad I didn't see the original interview. Thank you to all writers and publishers of children's books - keep up the good work and pay no attention to that idiot.
Well said, Lucy. Incidentally, what puzzles me is the question of what, if anything, Mr Amis thinks children should read, since children's authors are clearly such a low life form in his opinion. Perhaps the dictionary, or works of non-fiction only, or protected from our puerile offerings till of an age suitable to be released upon his own books?
People who make shoes or clothes, or who prepare food for children aren't generally considered less skilful than those who do the same things for adults - why is the opposite so oftem assumed to be true of books?
Why are you all giving him a courtesy title? Is it a new form of discourtesy?
The man is a f***wit, as I have said elsewhere and I would never be drawn into reading any of his books. But I rejoice that he said this stupid thing because it means there will be one "adult" writer the fewer thinking "I know - I'll write a children's book" and then getting a contract, healthy advance and even some sales based on their "fame."
Personally, I think it's time to put up the bunting!
I watched the programme and am still grinding my teeth! I'm well over the age of consent and still reading children's fiction alongside a wide range of 'adult' books. I even write them (for adults) but know that I'm simply not clever enough to write for children. Being able to hold open that inner eye - the one that sees as a child sees - is a gift. Martin Amis will never write a children's book because he might actually have to address the idea of 'story' instead of pages and pages of self-concious lit/psycho/macho/post-modernist twaddle. There! I feel better already. :)
I think you're argument is wonderfully put, Lucy. And I think it's a great shame that the likes of Amis are chosen as the voice of literature in so many programmes. I agree with Agnieszgas Shoes when they say that the same-old-same-old is invariably dragged out by the producers of these shows when they could be letting a host of new, vibrant (and perhaps more considered) authors have their say. It still makes me smile whenever I'm asked, "Are you going to write adults books next?" After all, we all know that we're really only writing children's fiction to hone our skills so that we too can one day join the ranks of the literati and look down our noses at those wretches who turn out works for children or, heaven forbid, genre fiction.
It's unfortunate that there's still the notion that writing for children is somehow less of a literary feat than writing for adults. (A few times, I've noticed an instant loss of interest in hearing about my current writing project, when I mention to someone that it's a work for middle-grade readers.)
Amis has obviously neither read any of the fabulous children's literature that is being created these days (and he's really missing out on a lot of terrific books there), nor has he tried to write any.
Were he to accept the challenge and try his hand at it, I shudder to think what the attempt might look like.
The point about patronising children is spot on, Lucy - children can spot it a mile off and recoil at once. If Amis did write a children's book, it would obviously be as patronising as anything, because he clearly thinks children are brain dead too. I agree with Mary, too - thank goodness that's one less adult author who could be tempted into writing for children!
He's shown himself to be extraordinarily arrogant and small-minded...and that doesn't make me want to read his books one bit. The question of how much one thinks about one's reader is interesting - I can't see what's wrong with thinking about readers (of all ages) a great deal. Writing a book for publication is all about the audience, isn't it?
I have to confess my initial reaction to his saying 'I would only write a children's book if I had a serious brain injury' was - I'm sure that could be arranged. Muahaha. *summons the Kraken*
I think it's hilarious that he brought it up apropos of nothing - the day must finally be here when people ask adult authors 'When are you going to write a children's book?' as opposed to the other way round :) He's clearly just jealous that he hasn't had JK Rowling's sales or written anything as deep or rich as His Dark Materials.
Well, not that I saw the programme but from the comments quoted, surely all Amis is saying is that HE couldn't write for kids unless there was some kind of artificial brain limitation because he himself isn't able to exercise the required control of any author who wishes to communicate with anyone who doesn't have a similar level of age, education and experience.
I certainly DO have to make a conscious effort to write for a specific age group. I don't use words that I know my own 13-year old daughter, niece and nephew wouldn't have known or used. I try to tell the story from the POV of a teenage boy, when I am actually a middle-aged mother. It does require effort and control and for my to use a voice that isn't my everyday one.
Amis is simply saying that he isn't currently capable of writing with restrictions like that. Maybe if part of his brain were damaged...well that just shows a lack of understanding of how the brain works. I suppose you might conceivable have a gain-of-function with loss of brain. It's been known - people who suddenly speak in weird accents etc. Mainly though, I think brain damage leads to LESS ability to control how you communicate, not more.
Also, surely he's not suggesting that his writing is suitable for youngsters? Therefore some kind of children's books are still necessary. But he can't write them.
We shouldn't take offence. He's saying he can't do what we do. And as Girl Friday suggests, maybe a tiny part of him wishes he could.
Ditto what Gillian said, I'd also love a view from Philip Pullman.
I honestly have to wonder how 'conscious' Amis was when he said this - I mean, was he really thinking? Did he genuinely intend to be insulting? Why would he bother to be so deliberately offensive, what's the point? I'd like to believe that he really wasn't thinking and I'd be curious to know what he might say if pressed on the subject.
Anyone who applies their mind realises that writing for children and young adults is the toughest kind of writing, you have to be aware when you do it - and no, that's not about talking down or thinking "I'm writing for a child" it's about ensuring that you constant hold the child's attention and interest. I think some of the best literature around today comes from children's authors - I rate it way above the quality of much adult literature.
So yes, perhaps Martin Amis should try his hand at a children's novel. It would be interesting to see how he fares - and how he finds the process.
As I've said elsewhere, I'd love it if Amis tried his hand at a children's book because he would die on his arse.
His comments weren't only insulting to an amazing and talented plethora of children's writers but also to children themselves, who are apparently to be considered a lower life form incapable of taste and discernment. It would appear Martin Amis hates children; it's just as well he never was one.
Brilliant post Lucy. I was fuming when I saw that part of the programme. I had actually been enjoying it until that point; I know it was "familiar faces" but I thought it had some good points, sparked some interesting questions and if it encouraged only one person in the country to pick up a book, isn't that a good thing? But Amis actually made me recoil. It has certainly ensured that I NEVER read one if his books. I'd far rather go and lose myself in one of the amazing children's books I love or find a new and exciting children's author to be inspired by. And if one day I work hard enough to join the ranks of children's authors I shall count myself as honoured.
I agree with you wholeheartedly, Lucy, and with all the comments above. Amis is rather restricted in his writing after all, as he can only manage to convey the point of view of an arrogant white male, so we shouldn't feel too upset at his comments, poor dear. As for the people who say, "When are you going to move on to writing for adults?", depending on how facetious I am feeling on the day, I either reply, "When I become one", or "Would you ask a primary school teacher when they are going to move on to lecturing at university?" As other people have posted, Amis has clearly read nothing in children's literature in the past 50 years. The trouble is, Faulks is the same - take a look at his pathetic caricature in A Week in December of the children's author, Sally Higgs, who is awarded the "Pizza Palace" literary prize for her book, "Alfie the Humble Engine" (for goodness sake...) He describes her as "old Sally, a much-loved toiler in the garden of that humble genre, the children's picture book". As you say, Lucy, my true thoughts are unprintable here.
children are such a tough sell. i always care what my reader thinks - but then i think adult writers ought to do so too. it would certainly improve what's out there at the moment.
To those of you who wondered if Amis just glibly threw the line out there without thought - 'fraid not. He said the same thing to Will Self in an interview in 2009. So at least he's a consistent a***hole.
Charmaine - you said "I don't see anything wrong with knowing who you're writing for, I like thinking about my reader, it makes me feel a connection to them." I completely agree. I think very carefully and very consciously of whoever I imagine and hope my readers will be. Each of my books is different and tries to speak to different readers. Of course, I hope that lots and lots of others will read it, but i always have a particular group / mindset / need in mind.
Candy - hear, hear.
MG - I did watch it and that was what I thought, too. So did the people I was watching it with, but they weren't children's writers.
And re the idea of him trying to write a children's book, perhaps he knows he couldn't do it - bit like me saying, "Oh, I'd never bother with running a marathon / climbing a mountain - I've got far far better things to do..."
Have you read Amis' "London Fields"? It IS a kids book, or at least a book written by a child with a stubby crayon as far as characterisation and patronising cliche goes. Martin Amis demonstrates that he is terrified of the lower classes in the book and by his comment here, maybe he is running scared of children as well.
The hero point is far more interesting. That it may well have moved exclusively into children's & YA literature may represent the fractured home life that demands a need for fictional heroes and heroines for kids to identify with. As a writer of litfic myself, I celebrate the end of the hero in my realm, maybe we can start writing some books with emotional intelligence now that we don't have to fret over redemption and triumphs over adversity, or tragic ends. Maybe we can get on with trying to portray the complexity of the human mind, in a way I have yet to find Martin Amis grapple with in any meaningful way.
Give me Will Self's sneer over John Self's any day.
Thanks to all for your variations on my theme and for your support of children's writing. I agree with Agnieszkas Shoes about the unremitting recycling of these literati pundits by the media--I too wish they would rethink and freshen their contacts book. However, I do lay the fault with Amis in this case--he is responsible for his own words--if he had been asked directly about children's books rather than just lobbing his bile pell-mell into a totally unconnected interview about the hero in literary fiction, I might be more forgiving (though not much). As Steve says, he has said this before, so it's clearly something he's thought about more than once.
MG and Nicola--As I said--Amis is entitled to his own opinion both of children's books and of his own ability to write one. I still object mightily to his patronising and dismissive tone. I would not be able to run a marathon/climb a mountain either (too fat, too unfit, too crocked in general!)--but I hope that, like Nicola, I have the generosity of spirit to recognise those who can, and who work incredibly hard to get to the stage where they can. Amis doesn't seem to afford children's writing any such recognition.
The debate about how authors think about readers when they are writing gives some excellent proof that each of us works differently. Perhaps I didn't make my own methods clear enough. When I'm doing the plotting and planning and researching stage, that's when I think about which audience each particular book is going to be for. By the time I've got to the stage of writing, I am already deeply involved with the audience in my head--and so the whole thing evolves onto the page without my having constantly to hold up a particular set of readers in front of my eyes, because it's already been downloaded onto the hard drive of my brain and is part of the whole organic process of the writing itself. I hope that makes some kind of sense!
In order to write for children, you have to be a child. For some poor souls that is impossible, but for some of us it's the biggest pleasure of being a children's writer. Poor Martin Amis will never understand this.
Now, I'm going to throw my toys out of the pram and see how many I can get to hit Martin Amis.
Amazing, but then I wouldn't expect much sense from Amis. I suppose he takes the same approach when speaking to children, does he? lol Maybe he just doesn't communicate with such lesser beings.
It seems to me, the idea that children's writing is just a simple or limited version of adult fiction is pretty idiotic.
Lucy - I wasn't disagreeing, btw, just saying that my method feels very consciously thinking of the specific readers. I know that many many authors don't - it's a method thing, not a judgement thing. Joanne Harris and Ian rankin have both been on my blog as interviewees and both said they don't think about the reader when they're writing - and I would be a bit foolish if i were to say they were wrong!! :)
And yes, I (obviously) can't tstand the way that many adult writers (and non-writers) look down on the art we practise. The Amis snippet felt very out of place in the programme actually. It was supposed to be about heroes; to make a point about heroes in children's books is fine, but he wasn't at that point (I didn't think), which is why I wonder why it had to be left in, so irrelevant was it.
Ah! We all need someone to loathe, so it was nice of Amis to serve himself up on a plate.
all this reminds me of a brilliant cartoon that I once saw but can't find right now. It shows two people at a literary party. The woman says, 'I write children's books. I address issues of identity and whether or not there is such a thing as inate evil'. To which the man replies, 'I'm an adult's author. I write about going bald and getting off with younger women'.
I have brain damage (cerebral palsy) and my second book was shortlisted for the Guardian Children's Fiction Award, so Amis couldn't have insulted me harder if he'd sat down and thought about it for a year.
Superglueing him to a wheelchair and piping children's fiction into his auditory canal suddenly seems like a good idea...
I was insulted too Jane and contemplated writing him a letter. Then I thought he might think I was writing him a fan letter and decided against it. The "brain injury" comments were way out of line. My father, retired school principal,says Amis apparently has no idea that the younger the age group the more teaching skill is required. My father then added, "And of course the same applies to writing. It is much harder to write for children." Are listening Martin Amis?
Great post. Agree about Amis, (have tried, but have never managed to finish one of his novels) agree too about the media trotting out the Usual Suspects. (We have our own brand of them here in Scotland, as well.) I've written for children, written for schools radio, way back when, and it was one of the most challenging but rewarding things I ever did. You've only to tutor a creative writing group to realise that those who self consciously attempt to talk down to children produce rubbish. Which is, of course, quite different from having a certain awareness of who you are writing for. But if he believes that the likes of Pullman and so many other fine writers, some of them on this comment thread, are constantly and self consciously aware of 'writing in a lower register' it says a great deal about his own incompetence and prejudice.
Given the choice in the library, I will pick up a high quality YA fiction novel in preference to so called 'adult literary fiction' and, that's what I write too, because I write what I enjoy. No I don't have a brain injury, Mr Amis, I do however, have a degree in English literature from Cambridge University, where, incidentally, I did not study anything at all by your good self.
Hey ho, nothing ever changes and self-important fools have always been with us.
Literary fiction is merely another genre, and fairly recent one at that. It was invented because of the masculine desire to control through categorization, but it doesn't really exist. There are good books, indifferent books and bad books. It doesn't matter for whom they were written ... women, men, children, adults ... or in what 'style'.
The great danger with literary fiction is exactly the sort of self-indulgence typified here. In the hands of idiots like Amis, art loses validity because its only concern becomes looking up its own backside. Forget your audience and they will soon forget you. Art is about creating structure from chaos and communicating that experience. 'Only connect', as Forster said.
If Amis wishes to write only for himself, he should then keep the masturbatory result for his sole contemplation.
Thanks, Lucy, for a great post, and another thanks to the Book Maven and Agnieszkas Shoes for brilliant comments that had me cheering.
What did Amis first read (at the undoubtedly precocious age his untainted brain enabled him to devour fiction)? Who inspired him? How did he first learn about the art of narrative and characterisation? How did he form a view of his moral universe? Did he skip straight to his dad? I think we ought to be told. Great post, Lucy.
Jane--so sorry the Guardian lifted your comment without asking...The Telegraph (books) and the Huffington Post have quoted you too. Hope you are ok with this--I think they can quote stuff published on the internet without any permission. This all seems to have got a lot of publicity for Amis (he was even trending on Twitter at one point)and not sure that is a good thing. However, I'd say most of the comment is pro-children's books, though not all (wouldn't be a proper debate if everyone agreed, would it?). The papers have quoted, variously, Kath Langrish and John Dougherty too, and the Independent pulled in Charlie Higson, Anthony Horowitz and Roger McGough. I'm feeling a bit like the pebble who started the avalanche at the moment!
HI Lucy, Jane, everyone, I came here from Robin McKinleys site (totally agree with everyone, and would quite happily arrange for MA to have a brain injury, except for the fore-warned danger that he might start writing things which would end up on the YA shelves...*shudder*) I wanted to say that quotes should always be acknowledged - even from the internet. In university it's called plagiarism. I guess it's called journalism in the 'real world'... But then it seems that standards in everything but kids/YA writing are falling... Just saying.
Jane - the Guardian also lifted an online comment of mine regarding World Book Night and quoted it. What I took from that was what I already knew: that none of us can or should say anything on any internet forum that we wouldn't be happy for anyone to read. (Inlcuding, btw, what seems like a relatively private Facebook conversation.) It changes the nature of conversation - the internet is so permanent and we can feel we're having a conversation and debate but aspects of what we said might be used at any time in the future. Yes, journalists should ask permission, I think, and in my case she tried to but I wasn't available during the few hours before her deadline...
I only caught up with Martin Amis's remarks and some responses this morning. And now Lucy's powerful piece and this 'conversation'. I found myself wondering how the great adult and children's historical novelist and writer for children Rosemary Sutcliff (1920-1992) might have responded to Matin Amis had she had the misfortune to encounter him, maybe in a TV studio or interview.
Her tone I think might have been the same as the resigned, pitying one she reserved for those who should have known better when they made 'does she take sugar' remarks. (Rosemary, a relative of mine, spent much time in a wheelchair, especially when out and about).
By way of comment on the content, perhaps she would have repeated her oft made remark that she wrote for children aged 8 to 88; and recalled something she said to esteemed critic John Rowe Townsend: “The themes of my children’s books are mostly quite adult, and in fact the difference between writing for children and for adults is, to me at any rate, only a quite small gear change.” The gear change, in whichever direction, is clearly beyond Martin Amis. (See www.rosemarysutcliff.com)
Anthony, hallo! Rosemary Sutcliff is my heroine and my inspiration, you moght like to know...
I know that in law conversations on social neworking sites are deemed to be in the public domain, and I have no problem with being quoted, but law is one thing and courtesy another. (it's not as if a quick Google wouldn't have enabled them to trace my agent - and get the title of the book 100% right... )
(Everyone, forgive me using this comment to write to Jane; I cannot easily find her email!)
Everyone: Now that my dander is up, albeit way behind all of you, and having returned to find Jane's post, I am recalling a little item on my blog which recalls that around 1980 Rosemary Sutcliff was one of The Times 'top twenty' writers (of all sorts) of the centtury. The thing was, she beat inter alia Martin's father Kingsley Amis to the group. Silly, I know, but most satisfying!
Jane, hello! I am of course delighted to learn that Romie (as I knew Rosemary Sutcliff - my godmother and first-cousin-once-removed who I grew in knowing well, and spent my pre-teen years pushing into bushes in her wheelchair ...) is your "heroine and inspiration".
Can I entice you to post some writing about that inspiration at the You Write! tab at www.rosemarysutcliff.com (and indeed the same goes for anyone else as inspired by Rosemary as your are uninspired by Mr Amis)
Thank you for that Lucy. I personally will be exercising my freedom by not reading any more of his books (somehow I don't think he'll actually notice though). I feel that children's books are actually more important than adult books, as they're new to the whole reading thing and should have fabulous fiction to read to set the habit!
I sometimes get quoted without permission or acknowledgment in the editorials of our state newspaper. The first time it happened I asked a journalist what was going on and he said, "Once you write a letter to us we can do what we like with it." I suspect they view anything that comes up on the internet in just the same way. I suppose we should just be grateful they think we are worth quoting!
BBC 2 has rediscovered Mrs Beeton, with Sophie Dahl tramping the streets of Cheapside and Epsom looking for the real woman behind Household Management. It is worth the shoe leather – Mrs Beeton’s is certainly a story well worth telling. The author of the most famous cook book ever published began work on it at the age of twenty-one and finished it at four years later. Her book was first published in volume form in 1861 and has never been out of print since. Isabella herself died seven years after its publication of puerperal fever, contracted during the birth of her fourth child. She was 28.
The crisp, authoritative tones of her book, along with its immense size and heft, and the range and assurance of its advice have all encouraged generations of readers to imagine Mrs Beeton as a stately matron, doling out the fruits of long years of domestic experience. It is a model of the author deliberately encouraged by Ward Lock, the book’s long-term publishers, who tacitly avoided all mention of the author’s untimely death. In fact the real Isabella Beeton was the polar opposite of what we would expect. She had spent much of her adolescence living with her siblings in the grandstand on Epsom race course, where her step-father was Clerk of the Course. They slept in the committee rooms and ran wild, while Isabella, the eldest, presided over the ramshackle domestic arrangements. She followed this highly unconventional upbringing by taking herself off to learn pastry-making in Germany – conduct, according to one of her sisters, that was considered ‘ultra-modern and not quite nice’. On her return she became engaged to a young entrepreneurial publisher, Sam Beeton. For the rest of their brief married life she was to work alongside him, contributing to his publications. She wrote columns on fashion and travelled to Paris with great enjoyment to report on the fashion shows, she translated French novels for serialisation, and wrote on food and household management for the Englishwoman’s Domestic Magazine. It was these that formed the basis of the book.
Mrs Beeton gets rediscovered every generation: there was a huge stir in the 1930s when her son, Sir Mayson Beeton, presented a picture of his mother to the National Portrait Gallery and people tried to reconcile the fashionable young girl of the picture with the mature woman of their imaginings. In the 1970s, when traditional English food enjoyed a renaissance, there was again a new surge of interest in Beeton and her book. And in the last decade there have been flurries of media enthusiasm in reponse to Kathryn Hughes’s 2005 biography (The Short Life and Long Times of Mrs Beeton) and to my own edition of her work for Oxford World’s Classics. When the latter appeared in 2000 I was astonished by the degree of interest the book received on national and local radio, in broadsheets and tabloids alike. It was even the subject of a Mark Rowson cartoon in The Independent. The curiosity was two-fold: it was news-worthy because a highly respected literary series was allowing a cook book to join the hallowed ranks of serious literature, but there was also a lot of interest in the book and its author: in the oddities of Isabella’s story and in the anomolous cultural status the book possesses, as something both immensely famous and largely unread.
So why is it worth us reading Beeton’s book today? For one thing, it is a record of a society caught at a crucial moment of transi
0 Comments on Why we all love Mrs Beeton as of 1/1/1900
Despite (possibly because of) not living in the UK for most of the year, I remain incredibly proud of the BBC.
It's facing a future of real-world budget cuts (of the kind that leaves me hoping that Doctor Who will not soon be about two people who live in a small flat in Cardiff having a tiddlywinks contest for the fate of the universe).
Mitch Benn is proud of it too. Watch this video to find out why and how...
Here's the story of how he made the video. He sent me my very own Proud of the BBC T-shirt which I would be wearing right now if it wasn't in the wash.
where you can get your own T-shirt. You can wear it all over the world to signify your pride in the BBC, or just show that you look wicked in a black T-shirt.
...
My episode of ARTHUR went out today in the US. (There are parts of the US where it has't gone out yet. Check your local listings. It's called Falafelosophy.) PBS have said they plan to get it up online soon - I'll put up a link when it is.
And here's an interview done by the Ace Hotel in New York when I stayed there. The interview includes vibrating ducks and the Big Gay Ice Cream Truck. Also a photograph of me playing the ukulele.
I have no idea whether this is the proper way to comment on blog entries. If it's wrong then just pretend that I didn't send it. :-)
A comment to the latest blog entry:
"You know, there aren't enough traditions that involve giving books."
When I and my husband moved in together, we joined our libraries. But we had one problem: all the books we both liked, and now had two copies of. In the beginning, we didn't do much about it. I mean - what if you decide you don't belong together anyway, then you want to take your books with you when you split, right? But after a while, we decided that we wanted to get rid of the duplicates - as a sign that we would live together forever, and not ever need two copies of Neverwhere again.
So we arranged our wedding according to this idea; we gave each of the guests one book (or cd) from our duplicates, so that they could share this decision with us. Also they got a good book - obviously it was a book that both me and my husband liked (Well - with the exception of The Sword of Shannara, which we would have given away both copies of if we had found anybody who wanted them. :-) and would have it as a memory of our wedding.
And yes, we've lived happily ever since (nine years now), I don't ever see the need of reacquiring any of the duplicates we gave away, and I like it as a ceremony; it had a lot more meaning to us than most kinds of wedding ceremonies.
Regards (and thanks for all those great books!)
Monika
and this:
0 Comments on Not Wearing My T-Shirt and vibrating ducks as of 1/1/1900
At last, here it is, the first look at Where's Stig? The World Tour, the sequel to my quarter of a million copy bestseller Where's Stig? for the BBC TV show Top Gear. It's been 6 months solid work, but you don't have too long to wait to see the full results as it's in the shops on September 30th 2010, & available to pre-order on Amazon now!
Where's Stig? The World Tour illustrated by Rod Hunt - Every now and then, Top Gear’s tame racing driver needs a change of scene, and after a power-lap-packed year that’s seen our fearless man in white elevated to bone fide celebrity status, Stig’s decided he needs to escape the flashing bulbs of the paparazzi and do something for himself. It’s time to hit the tarmac with an Esperanto language CD and a pet passport for Where's Stig? The World Tour.
Stig’s journey will span the continents, from the snow-capped mountains of the north, to the tropical jungles of the equator and dusty deserts of the south, and we’ll be watching him every step of the way. Stig will be hidden within every brilliantly drawn scene, along with Clarkson, Hammond and Captain Slow, and there’ll be plenty of other Top Gear gags to keep readers going back for more.
Where’s Stig? took readers by storm last year, and Where’s Stig? The World Tour will have Top Gear fans revving their super-charged engines to come along with him on the ride of a lifetime.
1 Comments on My new book Where's Stig? The World Tour - Book Cover Revealed!, last added: 8/12/2010
A few weeks ago I had the honor of attending BEA2010 (no not the BEA that happened last week) which was part of the 2010NAB conference. I was there to celebrate the launch of the BBC College of Journalism Website (COJO) a collaboration between OUP and the BBC. The site allows citizens outside of the UK access to the online learning and development materials created for BBC journalists. It is a vast resource filled to the brim with videos, audio clips, discussion pages, interactive modules and text pages covering every aspect of TV, radio, and online journalism. At the conference I had a chance to talk with Kevin Marsh, the Executive Editor of COJO, and I will be sharing clips from our conversation for the next few weeks. This week I have posted a clip in which Kevin shares why he choose journalism as a career. Read Kevin’s blog here. Watch the other videos in this series here and here.
A few weeks ago I had the honor of attending BEA2010 (no not the BEA that happened last week) which was part of the 2010NAB conference. I was there to celebrate the launch of the BBC College of Journalism Website (COJO) a collaboration between OUP and the BBC. The site allows citizens outside of the UK access to the online learning and development materials created for BBC journalists. It is a vast resource filled to the brim with videos, audio clips, discussion pages, interactive modules and text pages covering every aspect of TV, radio, and online journalism. At the conference I had a chance to talk with Kevin Marsh, the Executive Editor of COJO, and I will be sharing clips from our conversation for the next few weeks. This week I have posted a clip which emphasizes the true hard work that journalism involves. Read Kevin’s blog here. Watch last week’s video here.
A few weeks ago I had the honor of attending BEA2010 (no not the BEA happening this week) which was part of the 2010NAB conference. I was there to celebrate the launch of the BBC College of Journalism Website (COJO) a collaboration between OUP and the BBC. The site allows citizens outside of the UK access to the online learning and development materials created for BBC journalists. It is a vast resource filled to the brim with videos, audio clips, discussion pages, interactive modules and text pages covering every aspect of TV, radio, and online journalism. At the conference I had a chance to talk with Kevin Marsh, the Executive Editor of COJO, and I will be sharing clips from our conversation for the next few weeks. To start us off I have posted a clip which emphasizes the value of truth in journalism. Read Kevin’s blog here.
This is a little round-up post of things on my mind. Above is a sketch of Mike Mignola'sHellboy, one of my favorite comics of all time. I draw Hellboy all the time but this is the first drawing I've done that I like, probably because I did it in my own style rather than copying Mignola.
First, I wanted to share this BBC article with you. It's a Front Row radio episode about comic books and posits that we are now living in a golden age of comic books. Whatever you think it's a great article. The bit about comics starts about 13:13 into the show.
On my iPod is a new playlist called Chamber Pop. I'm obsessed with all these little musical subgenres that Wikipedia has articled to an almost academic point. Chamber Pop began in the 1960's as Baroque Pop with the release of the seminal pop album Pet Sounds by The Beach Boys which was a major showcase for the genius of Brian Wilson. The idea is a type of pop music that introduces atypical instruments ans arrangements more associated to classical music. This music has continued and found a renaissance in the 1990's with music from Neutral Milk Hotel, Apples In Stereo and now The Decemberists, although now it's referred to as Chamber Pop. If you like rich, layered pop this might be for you.
Something else worth mentioning is my new addiction to audiobooks. It appeals to both my love of multitasking and my boundless laziness. What really love about them, other then being able to "read" while drawing, is that I can finally read all those classics I've just never gotten around to like the Crying of Lot 49 by Pynchon and Joyce's Ulysses. Lazy, lazy, lazy.
0 Comments on Listenings & A Hellboy Sketch as of 1/1/1900
Some of you budding authors out there might like to know that the BBC has just launched a massive writing competition, to find 'the greatest real-life stories never told'. And guess what the prize is? A real life publishing deal! There's not just one winner either: up to five finalists could be offered a book contract, complete with a proper advance and royalties. The real McCoy.
'My Story' was launched at the start of this month. You can read more about it on their website, but basically what they are after is true stories, on any theme, told in 300 – 1,500 words.
And that's not all! It seems that up to 15 successful entrants will get the chance to appear in a TV series on BBC1 during spring 2010. Pretty good eh?
Mark Bell, Arts Commissioner at the Beeb said: 'My Story aims to get the whole nation reading, writing and telling their most remarkable stories.'
So, get writing you guys, because you never know what might come out of your head once you start...
2 Comments on Want to be a Published Writer?, last added: 10/4/2009
Jon Lawrence is a Senior Lecturer in Modern British Political History at Cambridge University, and is particularly interested in politics as a site of interaction between politicians and the public. This forms the basis for his latest book, Electing Our Masters: the Hustings in British Politics from Hogarth to Blair. In the post below, Dr Lawrence reflects on the scandal over British MPs’ expenses, and the resultant grilling that two prominent MPs got from members of the public on the long-running and esteemed BBC political programme Question Time last week.
I defy anyone not to have felt a little schadenfreude watching the public grilling of Margaret Beckett and Menzies Campbell on BBC’s Question Time at the height of the scandal over MPs’ expenses. They are not the first British politicians to be angrily heckled by a live studio audience, and nor will they be the last. Britain boasts a long and proud history of public irreverence towards its politicians. As Hogarth’s prints remind us, eighteenth-century elections were vulgar, chaotic events, with drunken crowds, brawling in the streets, and widespread corruption. But they were also moments when the vote-less masses could ‘have their say’, notably at the public nomination hustings, when cat calls and missiles both regularly assailed the hapless candidates. Even in the early twentieth-century disorder was commonplace, heckling was considered an art form, and face-to-face encounters between politicians and public remained at the heart of electioneering. By contrast today’s elections are tame affairs conducted almost entirely at arms’ length through television and mass marketing techniques. Politicians and voters barely meet each other in the flesh, and almost half of us don’t even bother to vote.
But as Beckett and Campbell’s ordeal on last Thursday’s Question Time reminds us, this does not mean that the public has forgotten how to get angry with its politicians. Nor, crucially, does it mean that there is nowhere for them to vent that anger. On the contrary, the raucous, irreverent traditions that once made the public hustings so taxing for politicians, now shape the way that radio and television cover British politics. Almost nowhere else will you see senior politicians subjected to such un-deferential and searching interrogation on prime-time television. Tough-talking journalists such as Jeremy Paxman have taken on the role once performed by the persistent heckler at open meetings. But even more unique and invaluable is the way that British broadcasters make it possible for the public, red in tooth and claw, to get stuck into their politicians. As with the merciless hounding of Beckett and Campbell on Question Time, this is brutal, if entertaining, sport. But it’s not just great television; such dramatic televised encounters now represent one of the principal bulwarks of Britain’s unwritten constitution.
The fact that politicians such as Beckett and Campbell willingly put themselves through a trial by television is perhaps the most remarkable aspect of these programmes. It is, surely, a testament to the deep roots that the traditions of the old hustings put down in British political culture. According to Churchill, the hustings represented the ‘slatternly foundations’ of British politics, and no politician could rise to the top who did not know how to face its ‘disorderly gatherings, its organized oppositions, its hostile little meetings, its jeering throng, its stream of disagreeable and often silly questions’ with either ‘a shrug, a sigh or a smile’. It was no accident that when his political stock was at its lowest, in 2005, Tony Blair actively pursued bruising televised encounters with real voters in what came to be known as his ‘masochism strategy’. According to one close Blair aide these grueling, un-deferential encounters represented ‘the modern equivalent of Gladstone doing his public meetings - it’s what people are used to now.’ Like Gladstone, Blair was still trading on the symbolic power of being seen to disavow, temporarily, the gulf between the political elite and the masses. As Labour pollster Philip Gould explained, it was ‘a deliberate strategy to allow people to have their voices heard, and their frustrations vented’. Blair was to ‘reconnect’ with the voters by being seen to be ‘beaten up’ by them. It seemed to work in 2005, but it is doubtful whether it will work so well for the likes of Beckett or Campbell today. For one thing, the British public is suffering from acute apology fatigue, but more importantly, even the most bruising encounter cannot symbolically close the gap between ‘us’ and ‘them’ when the issue at stake is politicians’ mis-use of expense allowances considerably bigger than most people’s annual salaries. When it comes to claims for moat cleaning you literally couldn’t make it up. Churchill, who knew a thing or two about moats, and even more about noblesse oblige, must be turning in his grave.
But we should not be complacent about Question Time’s triumph. Public participation has shallow roots in the culture of British broadcasting. For many years the parties maintained a complete ban on such programmes after severe heckling by a studio audience during the 1959 election. The ban was only finally lifted in 1974, and even then the strongly paternalist ethos of public service broadcasting tended to constrain the full demotic potential of the new format. And though stations such as Radio 5 Live have dethroned paternalism, recent years have witnessed the down-grading of popular participation formats in favour of more ‘vox pop’ interviews and gimmicky programmes such as Tony Blair’s 2005 encounter with ‘Little Ant and Dec’. Amusing as these can be, they are no substitute for bringing politicians face-to-face with the voting public. As Question Time underlined last Thursday, broadcasters now fulfill the vital constitutional role once performed by the nomination hustings and the open public meeting. Television is the most powerful means we have for bringing politicians and public together on something like an equal footing. At its best it allows ordinary voters, not just to ‘have their say’, but actually to hold their political masters to account. Let’s hope broadcasters continue to cherish this vibrantly democratic institution.
0 Comments on The Spirit of the Hustings Returns as of 1/1/1900
As is the case with many - I'll go out on a limb here and use the word 'most' playwrights - I submit to calls for submission or theatres that I feel would be a good fit for my literary output. To date the plays are still waiting to see the light of day or stage and I've shared some of the rejection letters or most often, form letters, in this blog, because all aspiring playwrights have "been there - read that." Right? Besides sometimes it just feels good to vent.
Anyway, today in my e-mail, I received an invitation to enter the BBC International Playwriting Competition. It's obviously a form letter sent out to all of us who entered their competition last year and were rejected. I submitted my one act, "Retribution"which in my humble opinion was damned good but then who am I? Actually, I adapted the play for radio adding sound effects but given that the play takes place in a hairstyling salon between a man and a hairdresser seeking revenge for a terrible act perpetrated on her by the very man who is now sitting in her chair, there really wasn't that much sound one could add. We're talking here about scissors snipping, old-fashioned hair dryers, the man choking and gasping for air - that type of stuff. Upon reflection perhaps it wasn't meant for radio but the dialogue was riveting! Not riveting enough, obviously.
Here is the form invitation for anyone outside the UK who is interested in trying their luck:
Dear writer (it's always so gratifying in a letter when you are addressed as: "dear writer"),
We are contacting you because you entered our International Radio Playwriting Competition in 2007. We’re delighted to be able to tell you that our biennial competition is launching again this year! For details of how to enter, exciting interviews with writers and handy tips, please visit our website on or after the 18th October at
Once again, there are two first prizes: one for writers for whom English is a first language, the other for those with English as a second language. Each winner will receive £2,500 and a trip to London to see their play recorded at the BBC.
There will also be the prize of a digital or short wave radio for runners up (see rules for further details).
So, if you are resident outside the UK and have a new play to send us, please consider entering again. The competition opens with the broadcast of the fantastic award winning drama Cigarettes and Chocolate by Anthony Minghella - to give you further inspiration! Please tune in, log on and send us your scripts. We look forward to reading them. Kind regards World Drama, BBC World Service.
So now I'm going over my plays to see if any of them meet their criteria and/or are adaptable. One of them does include tea cups clinking a lot, which might hit a high note with British sensibilities and another one includes pigeons squawking. I mean, a digital or short wave radio would also be nice.
Got Kids? Then you must have seen this great show... My Daughter just loves it. This painting is for her bedroom. I gotta say, it was wonderful getting stuck in to some old fashioned drawing and painting. This has been the first 'real' illustration I have started since we arrived in New Zealand... too long, I know, too long... In case you are wondering what I mean by real... I have been using a wacom drawing tablet and Corel Painter for most of my work over the years and as I did most of my work on the dining room table, there just has not been the room to get all my paints and pencils out! Now I have my new studio and it is fantastic - In a real happy place... paulshipper.com
0 Comments on In the Night Garden Artwork... as of 8/23/2008 7:01:00 AM
.jpeg?picon=3680)
.jpeg?picon=3239)
.jpg?picon=1806)
For me the problem is Amis's 'lower' register. The idea of a 'lower' register implies a hierarchy. Children's and young adult fiction are 'lower' and adult fiction is 'higher' by implication. Amis did not equate brian injury with 'mainstream' as opposed to 'literary' fiction. He equated it to writing for children. Amis, it seems is tolerated for these views and I am insulted by them.
With respect, I don't believe Amis should be given the benefit of the doubt re: his remarks about children's fiction. While it could be argued that there's been some overreaction to his comments, Amis has too long and notorious a track record when it comes to tactless, thoughtless commentary; in the interest of genuine fairness, his history should be borne in mind. Amis knows full well that every author, consciously or otherwise, tailors their work for an appropriate readership, so his position is disingenuous in the extreme. Sadly, I suspect that Amis's remarks about the absence of constraints in his fiction are an example of his air of superiority and pretentiousness - all that's missing is a sweep of the smoke-filled air with an elegant hand - after all, these are the kind of self-indulgent conversation pieces that an amateur poet might stoop to. Finally, even his few champions do him a disservice, and display the kind of condescending conceitedness natural to the man:
'Like any ace reporter, I Google Martin's name and find that a fatwa has been declared against him over shock-horror comments he made an interview that have inflamed fine-feeling people everywhere and could easily be interpreted as an insult to the unborn, if they knew how to read.
Because of this, entire villages have risen up in wrath and occupied Trafalgar Square, Leicester Square too, demanding that he recant or face witch trial for being conceited.'
More talk of proles and their literary and social superiors here:
http://www.vanityfair.com/online/wolcott/2011/02/a-dismaying-development.html
Ps I'd like to point out that I actually agree with much of Celia's post (which I think is both articulate and well-written); I'm just not so sure that the reaction against Amis's comments should cause children's fiction authors to examine themselves and their work. As one can see by the clumsy and insulting 'religious fanaticism' analogies of the article I linked, Amis and his champions have little interest in truth, let alone the truths revealed by introspection.
SJ
http://spauljensen.wordpress.com
Celia, that was also the meaning I took from his remarks. (I was watching the original programme and the person I was watching with also didn't think he was saying anything disparaging, though the use of the word "brain-injury" was very misguided.)
I also, to be honest, am not as offended as some by the use of the phrase "lower register". As long as we don't think that it's easier to achieve - but the problem is that too many people DO think it's easier to achieve. And that is what makes us all most angry, I think.
But I agree with your comments.
If - and it has to be true - writing for children involves writing within certain constraints (re: a child's understanding, descriptions of sex, swearing, etc), then it is a form which demands as much, if not more, technical skill as writing for adults. There should be less of this tacit assumption that writing for children is somehow easier. I mean, why? Because children's books are shorter? Sonnets are shorter than epics, but that doens't make us despise them. Because children are smaller and less experiences than adults? Does that make books written to delight and thrill them, and expand thier imaginations, automatically puerile?
I agree Amis may have been thinking about himself much more than he was thinking about children's authors (quite possibly he's never even met one, and I wonder how long it is since he read a book for children?) but I think the disparagement and disdain in his comments was quite real and unthinking.
Typos... sorry.
You have expressed very well, Celia, what I wanted to say. Thank you.
I do strive to produce work that is 'articulate and well written' because... I'm a professional, adult writer, even though I write for children. Far from being crass and stupid, I think Amis was being rather clever (a trait clearly not shared by his 'supporters' - as quoted by Steve). I don't think he is saying that, as writers for children, we have to use a lower register, but that we choose to, because of what we do. Also, I'm sure he would acknowledge the problems we face, the difficulties, the challenge of what we do, but would probably reply that he would not choose to use his writing ability in this way. His choice - and ours.
But isn't everyone constrained by something? I think it is the constraints that tend to make the best art - the need to write for an audience tends to limit self indulgence. None of us are free and he himself confines himself to a narrow range of milieus and types. For me the great skill of great children's writing is its exploitation of the constraints to produce something that appears simple on the surface but which has been shaped by adult intelligence and insight.
I think to call that writing at a 'lower register' is not entirely accurate as it suggests the lowering applies to everything.
As I mentioned in my own blog - http://steepholm.livejournal.com/156057.html - I think it would be idle to deny that Amis was being intentionally snotty about children's writers with his 'brain-damage' remark. Nor was it off-the-cuff - he's used it before, and knows exactly what kind of reaction it's likely to provoke.
The idea of not writing for an audience but for oneself is of course a widespread one, and in one sense I think it's something we all do. But the opposition between that and having an idea of one's audience in mind is a false one, and in any case it's a stick one could equally well use to beat Shakespeare, Virgil, etc ad nauseam, all of whom tailored their work for an audience. Amis may imagine that his indifference makes him their artistic superior, but we don't have to share his New Critical delusion.
As for 'lower' register, I don't believe, having watched the clip carefully, that he was talking about children's literature at all at that point, but about the language of his protagonist John Self. But it's really an example of trying to make a virtue out of what is in fact a stylistic limitation - the fact that Amis can't create a voice like Self's in a manner that is both convincing and interesting from a literary point of view. In this case it's not a matter of not using the full palate (which no writer or artist does at any one time, of course - the result tending towards brown sludge), but of arguing that a small palate is superior to a large one. Personally I don't buy it.
I agree with what many people have said: children's writing is just a different art-form. A lower register? That does seem disparaging to me. There are, as has been said, constraints in writing a sonnet; in a short story or a novella you can't allow yourself the same spread that you can in a novel. That's not to say that these forms aren't worth practising.
However!! Amis can say what he likes. I get artistic satisfaction from writing my novels, I got artistic sustenance from reading children's books when I was small. And whatever the constraints, someone like Tove Jansson, for example, can put a world of feeling, aching, yearning and humour into the Moomin books which is the artistic equal of a lot of literary fiction.
incidentally, a lot of very distinguished authors for adults have produced wonderful kids-lit. Look at Ted Hughes's The Iron Man.
So why should we make the man's vapourings so important, one way or another?
While pottering down to Waitrose, I had the following additional thoughts: I doubt whether adult literary fiction has always been so very free of constraint. Even ten years ago, there was a demand for a recognisable product, for a book that was 'like' the previous one. That's the market side. On the other side, there have always been subtler cultural pressures; the kind of things other people write; the kind of subject matter and mode of writing that the reviewing (and prize-awarding) establishment regards as cool. There is never any need for anyone to consciously censor themselves ; it's implicit in the literary climate, which is not, and never has been, I suspect, immune to fashion.
Celia, he may not have been saying "all children's writers have half a brain", but he was quite clearly saying:
"Writing for children is so easy that I could, and probably would, do it if I had a serious brain injury."
He was certainly, as you say, making another point besides this, but that doesn't mean he should be allowed the insult.
And I agree with Anne & others about the implied hierarchy. What does it actually mean, to write in one's highest register?
A very good post by Charles London:
Why I Write for Children: A Response to Martin Amis
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/charles-london/why-i-write-for-children-_b_823497.html
Well done for trying to see where Amis was coming from. You have helped to make some sense of it, but I still think his comment that "fiction is freedom..." is arrogant nonsense!
Just imagine him coming to your house and swearing in front of your kids, then explaining 'sorry, but conversation is freedom to me and any restraints on that are intolerable'. :D