(no subject)
Mar. 25th, 2019 08:47 pmI have at least a month of Reading Wednesdays to compress and catch up on, but in the meantime, some miscellaneous things on the internet that have caught my eye as of late:
10 Great Irish Novels Not Set in Ireland
Worth reading if only for the quoted review of Dorian Grey (which perhaps obviously dates from 1890, rather than 1980): "Mr Oscar Wilde has again been writing stuff that were better unwritten; and while The Picture of Dorian Gray, which he contributes to Lippincott’s, is ingenious, interesting, full of cleverness, and plainly the work of a man of letters. . .it is false to morality—for it is not made sufficiently clear that the writer does not prefer a course of unnatural iniquity to a life of cleanliness, health and sanity. . .Mr. Wilde has brains, and art, and style; but if he can write for none but outlawed noblemen and perverted telegraph-boys, the sooner he takes to tailoring (or some other decent trade) the better for his own reputation and the public morals.”
It's also intrigued me about Let the Great World Spin and The Lesser Bohemians, both of which are going on my already greatly burdened TBR.
A Counterculture Portraitist’s Chronicle of New York’s Youth
Some great photographs; I'll definitely be checking out the forthcoming book of Green's work.
The house that inspired Wuthering Heights could be yours
...if you've got $1.62 million lying around.
(And speaking of the Brontës, I found the review/recommendation of Villette in the most recent Slightly Foxed to be horribly disappointing: as someone who loves the book well past the point of rationality, that review would never have made me think twice about picking it up.)
Letter of Recommendation: Sleep, ‘Dopesmoker’
The origin story of ‘‘Dopesmoker’’ sounds like a light-bulb joke co-written by Nancy Reagan and Sisyphus: Three California stoners decide to write a song about how much they love marijuana, but they’re so high that it takes them four years.
I just remembered that this existed, and the immediate reread was well worth it. Reads like an Inherent Vice tie-in picked up off the cutting-room floor.
(Incidentally, I feel as though a drinking game of some kind should be started for historical fiction whose time period is woefully mis-described in reviews; this brought to you by my having to read with my own two eyes the setting of A Gentleman's Guide. . . confidently asserted to be "Victorian." Though Lee certainly brings it on herself--historical, well, anything, was not that book's strong suit--it does say right up front that it's set in the 1700s, so this one's on the blogger (and an appallingly non-satirical iteration of the "Victorian women in the 1700s" joke that's been circulating around tumblr of late.))