An Interview With My Favorite Author

image via Farrar Straus and Giroux

There are certain books, certain authors, which I may never be able to write about at length on this blog. Authors whose work I hold too high, books I value too much, to be in any way eloquent about them. Marilynne Robinson is one of these authors.

Once, when I was in Seattle for work, I discovered that Ms. Robinson was visiting and would be doing a reading at the Seattle Public Library on my last evening in town. It didn’t start until 7 or so, and I had a five hour trip to make yet that night, but I stayed; I stood in line for an autograph; I asked, embarrassed though I was, for a photo with her. In the photo, I am smiling hugely, if self-consciously, as she signs my book.

She has just published a new book of essays (in case anyone was wondering what a great gift for me would be), and Linda Wertheimer just interviewed her for NPR’s Weekend Edition. I hope you’ll take a listen.

NPR Weekend Edition interview with Marilynne Robinson

Happy Valentine’s Day, Middlemarch.

One of the many ways I reconciled myself to the idea of not majoring in English in college was my knowledge, even then, that I am perfectly terrible at completing required reading. A significant number of works considered classic I find myself unable to read, including (a moment of truth!) Dickens. How it came about, then, that I forced myself through all those accounting textbooks and read practically every single page of each assigned chapter remains a mystery to me.

I think what’s always hung me up about Dickens, and, frankly, George Eliot, is the sheer quantity of characters and tangential plotlines. I am a person who reads for character in that I like getting to know characters – but I want to relate to them in some way, to champion their causes, and to feel their joys and sorrows; at the very least I want to sympathize with them, even if I can’t fully relate. But particularly with Dickens, and to a certain extent with Eliot, there are so many characters, and sometimes so much time is spent on characters about whom I care less than little, that it makes for very hard going. My attention wanders. I stagger the truly dull points with other material: froth fiction, or magazines, or books where things happen (much more quickly), or books I know I’ll enjoy because I’ve read them before.

image via an anthropologie mailer

The first Valentine I received this year was from Anthropologie, encouraging me to treat myself for the holiday. It included the graphic off to the left.

I had a brief moment of panic where I thought about privacy on the internet: had Anthropologie gotten access to my GoodReads account, and seen the amount of time Middlemarch has been “in progress”? What information about us do the search engines we prefer really capture? What are the implications for me as a person and society as a whole? Reason returned when I realized, beyond the extreme unlikelihood that they would customize an ad for each customer, that if they had, they probably would have chosen Jonathan Strange & Mr. Norrell, as it’s been “in progress” for (probably much more than) twice as long – yet I’m significantly more certain I’ll enjoy Jonathan Strange & Mr. Norrell, if I could only just devote a lot more time to it.

But perhaps you have had the same question, reading this blog. Is she really reading Middlemarch? Yes. She is. Just very slowly. The speed of my progress is defeated by the depth of character details without any way to easily classify these characters as “good” or “bad”. (This is clearly not what impedes me with Dickens, as good-bad classification there is generally easy; it’s solely the quantity of tangents and characters that waylays me.) It may be a gaping weakness in my character and reading habits that I search for the characters I like best in stories. And where I’m struggling in Middlemarch is that there isn’t anyone I really like, except (so far) the Vicar, Camden Farebrother. But he’s only recently come on the scene, so it’s really too early to say.

Or maybe I just subconsciously wanted to go through an entire year of holidays with Middlemarch.

Happy birthday, blog.

Happy birthday, blog.  I’m sorry that I’m a little late in writing this.

Had I written birthday well-wishes on January 19, however, I would not have been able to share how I celebrated your birthday, that is, by the consumption of an entire package of whoopee pies over a three-day period (aka moon pies, aka maybe better than cupcakes) and a marathon viewing of Parks and Recreation (seasons two and three).

whoopee pie

whoopee pies!

You know how when you spend a lot of time with a character, whether in a book or a television show, you sometimes find yourself thinking the way the characters think?  Imbibing words and phrases and manners of speaking that the characters might use, the same humour?

Since I spent so much time with that show this weekend (there’s no shame in good television, even if I am a book lover and this blog is mostly about books), I have pretty much convinced myself that I’m pretty clever and also funny.  (Or do I mean pretty, clever, and also funny?  Commas are so important.)

Maybe these feelings of sparkly self-confidence are artificially inspired by:

  1. all 2,000 calories (literally only 1,920) of whoopee pie hitting me simultaneously.
  2. my deep infatuation with the character Ben on Parks and Recreation.
  3. extended periods of giggling resulting in not enough oxygen reaching my brain.
  4. All of the above are true.
  5. None of the above are true.

Regardless, it’s been quite a lot of fun for me to share some thoughts on this blog in the last year, and I want to thank everyone who has visited. It’s a joy for me to share with you, and hear from you.