![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Not looking back
Jan. 3rd, 2012 09:45 pmAll over my f-list, people are posting retrospectives of 2011. I'm not good at this. There's a passage in Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance in which a student is required to write an essay about the town; when she says she can't think of anything to write, the topic is narrowed down to one street, but she still can't think of anything; finally, Phaedrus tells her to write about just one building: "Start with the upper left-hand brick."
Maybe if there'd been big changes in my life in the past year, I'd feel differently about it. As it is, I look back at what I've posted, and think that this whole journal is a retrospective of my life, day by day, brick by brick. It doesn't get any more interesting if I try to condense it - on the contrary.
This isn't an absolute rule, though. When the Guardian published its 'Books of 2011' (all the usual contributors selecting books by all the usual contributors), it included an invitation to readers to send in their own lists. OK, I thought, I can be professional about this. I didn't simply pick books by my friends - but I did think of all the books I had particularly enjoyed during the year, and from that list I picked the books I most wanted to see succeed - and, I admit, the ones that I thought I could write briefly but coherently about, that seemed to fit neatly together:
It worked, up to a point. I made it into the online listing of readers' recommendations, which I suppose counts as a result, but didn't make the final cut, the ones which were actually published in the paper. It's probably just sour grapes that gave me the impression that those readers whose recommendations were included were the ones who agreed with the contributors' choices.
And that's as close as I'm getting to a look back at 2011; onward and upward!
Maybe if there'd been big changes in my life in the past year, I'd feel differently about it. As it is, I look back at what I've posted, and think that this whole journal is a retrospective of my life, day by day, brick by brick. It doesn't get any more interesting if I try to condense it - on the contrary.
This isn't an absolute rule, though. When the Guardian published its 'Books of 2011' (all the usual contributors selecting books by all the usual contributors), it included an invitation to readers to send in their own lists. OK, I thought, I can be professional about this. I didn't simply pick books by my friends - but I did think of all the books I had particularly enjoyed during the year, and from that list I picked the books I most wanted to see succeed - and, I admit, the ones that I thought I could write briefly but coherently about, that seemed to fit neatly together:
"Three chilling tales with a warm heart: Ben Macallan's DESDÆMONA (Solaris) is an inventive twist on the urban fantasy which opens with the banshee at the bus station and doesn't let up. Anne Fine's THE DEVIL WALKS (Random House / Doubleday) combines pitch perfect Gothic pastiche, action packed adventure and serious moral consideration into a real all-ages book. Peter Bennet's BOBBY BENDICK'S RIDE (Enchiridion - included in THE GAME OF BEAR, Flambard) is a fine poet having fun, erudite, allusive and adorned with drawings by Birtley Aris."
It worked, up to a point. I made it into the online listing of readers' recommendations, which I suppose counts as a result, but didn't make the final cut, the ones which were actually published in the paper. It's probably just sour grapes that gave me the impression that those readers whose recommendations were included were the ones who agreed with the contributors' choices.
And that's as close as I'm getting to a look back at 2011; onward and upward!
