Podding II: Commentary

After mining the resources of online radio dramas, I became aware of what most people use podasting for—commentary and news. I know, I’m always behind the curve on this stuff, but once again, I was surprised and elated by all the stuff out there.



When I lived in Boston, I was a regular listener of Christopher Lydon’s The Connection. Lydon, whatever might be said about him, is a brilliant man with an amazing base of knowledge, allowing him to speak equally astutely with physicists, composers, novelists, diplomats and garbage collectors. So cool is he, that Boston’s own Brechtian punk-cabaret band, The Dresden Dolls, wrote an ode called “Christopher Lydon”. So one can imagine my excitement at finding the streaming site for The Connection.



OK, it won’t go on my iPod, but it’s a wealth of listening pleasure nonetheless.



Even in the far reaches of Eastern Europe, I’m connected to such old regulars as NPR and WGBH. But just recently, the online airwaves have gotten more exciting, due to local expat Drew Leifheit, a man with a long radio history, who’s just set up Budacast, a weekly podcast dealing with news, culture, and entertainment in the area. Yours truly will be interviewed on a future show, but check out the premier episode, which focuses on the festivities celebrating the anniversary of Hungary’s 1956 uprising against the Soviets.

(Originally posted at the Contemporary Nomad)

Podding I: Drama

In the past year, since first getting hold of that life-changing accessory, the iPod, I’ve been finding a variety of online resources to fill it up with. The first things that really caught my attention were the OTR, or Old-Time-Radio, dramas. Fantastic stuff here. For free, I’ve gotten hold of the epic collection of Orson Welles’ Mercury Theatre recordings, including the famed “War of the Worlds”and another treat: the baffling but ever-entertaining “The Man Who Was Thursday”.



Radio drama was—and is (see below)—vast and far-reaching. One of the best sites I’ve found for the old stuff is RadioLovers, which has a huge collection. Like any genre, it’s a mixed bag, but some highlights for the mystery fan include Cloak and Dagger and The Adventures of Philip Marlowe.



Radio Memories Network is a more proper podcast service, which has a stunning array of shows. The most obvious way to tune in to this is to visit the wealth of possibilities through your iTunes in the Podcast directory, the way I get hold of a lot of interesting stuff these days.



Two real gems I’ve come across from other sites are the Ray Bradbury science fiction classic “Zero Hour” (which I had at one time, lost, and can’t find online at the moment—but it blew my mind), and an episode from Welles’ “The Lives of Harry Lime”—“Ticket to Tangier” (which I also can’t find online now, so I’ve uploaded to my own site, here).



I think I originally became aware of radio dramas because of my audio book producer, the immensely talented Yuri Rasovsky. He’s not only a brilliant producer of audio books and dramas, but he’s also a radio historian, as well as a cool guy.



What his passion showed me, which I’d never really realized, was the range, depth, power, and innate potential of the radio drama. I’m always fascinated and excited by people who tell stories in a completely different way than myself, and Yuri’s one such person. One of his strokes of genius was to write and produce, of all things, an audio version of the silent film, The Cabinet of Dr Caligari, which AudioFile described, rightly, as “orgasmic”!



Who woulda thunk it?

(Originally posted at the Contemporary Nomad)

Good/Bad

I have to take this in stages. Because it’s a slippery thing, art. There are no hard rules, no concise checklists to verify that something’s art or it isn’t. Which leads some people to think that value judgments are utter pretension. But that’s not so either.



My real interest is not in “What is art?” My real question is, “What is great art?” But to get to that point the first question must be dealt with. What separates art from entertainment?



[This entry will be repetitive for those of you following such arguments on other blogs, and for that I apologize. But I want to get it out here, so people at least know what page I’m on.]



First, let me state that I love entertainment. I watch a lot of TV, sometimes too much. I watch Alias like it’s going out of style (and perhaps it is; living in Hungary I don’t know), as well as 24 and each James Bond film that appears (though I can’t say I love even half of those). These things are, I think we’d all agree, entertainment.



It’s been stated many times elsewhere: Art is entertainment, but entertainment is not necessarily art.



I would amend that slightly. Art is entertainment, and entertainment is art, but it’s not necessarily good art. (Let’s ignore things like sporting events and Jackass for now.)



Bad art is everywhere. To me, Damien Hurst is bad art that I don’t enjoy. Alias is bad art that I do enjoy. They’re bad for different reasons, but neither’s particularly good.



Bad art is distracting without being provocative. It tells us things we already know, and know consciously. It never threatens us; it makes us feel safe. Which is one thing we like, the way we won’t turn down a cloud of cotton candy. It tastes nice, but in the end it’s just sugar. We can’t live off of it.



The issue of knowledge is important. Art that reinforces what’s already fully accepted by the mainstream of our society is either bad art or propaganda (which is just a particular kind of bad art). Sometimes the distinction is confusing, because bad art can be masked in wonderful prose, great acting or cinematography (see Leni Riefenstahl). But we have to see beyond this and ask what it’s revealing to us.



In crime fiction, the obvious message is, “Murder is bad.” But that’s a self-evident truth. If a story tells us, “Murder is good,” then it’s clashing with what we already believe. And while this is not an absolute criterion, if the story tells us convincingly that murder is good, then that story just might be good art.



I say this is not absolute, because simply convincing us that murder is good is not enough—an essay could do that—but it’s a start. Why is murder good? And how does that reasoning take into account the delusion we’ve all been living under, that murder is bad? And how does the writer go about convincing us? With an original story? With believable characters and dialogue? With an individual writing style? And finally: Does the story convince us emotionally? Because one great attribute of art is its ability to touch our emotions and, through them, make believers of us.



Now, good art doesn’t have to convince us that what we once believed is wrong. It can even tell us things we already knew—but things we didn’t know consciously. Things we could never quite put into words.



Andrei Tarkovsky’s film, Mirror, does that for me. The first time I watched it, by the end of the film I was confused. What the hell had just happened? The second time I watched it, I cried—at that moment, I couldn’t even explain why I was crying. The third time, I was just beginning to be able to put my tears into words; even now, I tear up at the end. While Russians have a particular, often political, reaction to his work, mine was entirely personal. I wept because the final scene seemed to show me, in a completely original and unexpected way, that life is vast and painful and beautiful, not something to be squandered.



Now, I place Mirror in the realm of great art. But that’s just me. It’s certainly good art, I have no doubt, because it told me what I should already know, but it told it to me without ever lecturing. It depended entirely on story and image, and through those things it communicated with a power that no essay could have carried. In an essay, it would have been cliche. In good art, it’s transformative.



Power is what it’s about. Good and great art have the power to transform in some way. My suspicion is that transformation is one of the central hallmarks of great art. That doesn’t mean making a Democrat vote Republican. It means transforming how you look at existence, how you look at your life.



Put that way, I hope you can see that this is deadly serious business. Which is why I’m spending time writing out thoughts on it. Ken Bruen says he writes in order to survive. It staves off the lure of suicide. You can see it in his writing, which certainly meets the measure of good art.



I don’t think I’d die if I couldn’t write books anymore, but I might if I no longer had an outlet for communicating in narrative. Luckily, the act of writing requires no publisher and no market. But it’s clearly nice to have those as well.

(Originally posted at the Contemporary Nomad)

Ambition, Part The First

I mentioned below that I wanted to restart this blog with a discussion on literary ambition. And instead, I gave you over the last week what I referred to as “boring”: just some news on me. This delay is explained by my sometimes contradictory and often muddled thoughts on the subject of ambition. So I want to take this piece-by-piece, and perhaps through these fragments, and with the help of your comments, I can come to some kind of understanding of the subject.



First, I’ll define my terms. I’ll refer to the Donald Hall essay I linked to below: “Poetry and Ambition”. He opens with this statement:

I see no reason to spend your life writing poems unless your goal is to write great poems.


Great





I do not complain that we find ourselves incapable of such



achievement; I complain that we seem not even to entertain the desire.


Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man































The Bridge of Sighs















broadsheetcrafting clichesMr WignallThe DaVinci Codead nauseum







artistes





























Writing, at its best, is a lonely life…For [the writer] does his work alone and if he is a good enough writer he must face eternity, or the lack of it, each day.


The List of Excuses

As mentioned below, I’ve been keeping myself a little too busy these days. Some projects have led to kinds of completion, while others are just marks on a page, taking up time I should be spending on other things, like writing this blog.



Here’s the list I recently sent to Ms Weinman to excuse my absence:



1. In a little over a month, I wrote the first draft of a non-crime novel I’ve mentioned here before: about a man who fakes his own death on 9/11, and years later runs into his widow on a Budapest street. While it still needs to be rewritten—the plotlines kind of slide and slip out of control—the first draft is promising, and I hope to have a solid draft by the end of the year for editors to look at.



2. I went to Istanbul in order to work through edits, and then the final copyedits, of what’s still being called Liberation Movements, the 4th book in the Eastern European series. Those final edits took significantly more work than the previous books, largely because it’s a different type of book. It’s much more minimalist, clocking in at around 55,000 words (Yalta was in excess of 100,000) and following multiple characters in a non-linear fashion. I’m very pleased with it, but the work became intense.



3. For a while I was obsessed with a nonfiction idea, and spent a lot of time on a proposal that hasn’t really taken shape yet. Inform: How the Snitch Shaped the Twentieth Century. The title says it all.



4. As I’ve recently become a fan of a few television shows, in particular the SciFi Channel’s remake of Battlestar Galactica—which has some of the best writing around—my head’s been lured to boob-tube ideas. In particular, a WWII series involving a US Army CID (Criminal Investigation Division) officer from D-Day to Berlin, primarily tracking US-committed crimes. Of course, this means that the WWII stories are less than heroic, but that’s how I like it. I also like the potential to examine contemporary politics through the lens of “the Good Fight.”



5. Also on the visual arts front, I’ve been editing an old screenplay once called The Confederates, now called Syndrome. I believe I’ve mentioned it before. It tells of a man who steals his brother’s wife, only to lose her while they’re in Jerusalem. She falls victim to the religious lure of that city and wanders into the desert in an imitation of Christ. I think it’s a good story, though the script still needs significant work.



6. More recently, I headed out to a cafe to work on one project, then found myself almost involuntarily writing the first chapter to, of all things, a sci-fi story—no doubt influenced by my love of Galactica. Though I stopped after 10 pages, the story, which involves time travel and the decolonization of the United States in some unspecified future, still sticks in my craw. I’m sure I’ll come back to it.



7. And though it’s proven to be an utter waste of time, I’ve made about 5 beginnings to a pseudo-Bond book. No doubt I’ll waste more time with it in the future. Being a fan of the Bond-candy our culture’s saturated with, I can’t help but want to try my own take.



8. And, of course, I’ve been working on the 5th and last book of the series, called The Falling Sickness. I’m about 100 pages into the first draft, but that’s only a drop in the bucket of what is going to be by far the longest in the series. I have a vague target of 900 pages, but it’ll be as long as it needs to be. Why so long? Because it will work as three novels under one cover, dealing with three years: 1986, 1989, and 1990, spanning the decline, revolution, and post-revolution period of my fictional country.



Those are the projects that have been taking up my time. But writing, as everyone knows, is also a business venture. I’d like to pretend that I ignore this fact entirely, leaving it to my agent and publisher. But the fact is that even when there’s nothing you can personally do about publicity (because, say, you live in Hungary), you can at least ask questions. I’ve been asking why Yalta hasn’t received more press attention.



There have been some big-name glowing reviews, and I’m pleased about them. Texas Monthly, the Houston Chronicle, Chicago Tribune, Toronto Sun, and even Esquire. And the web-based reviewers have been exceptionally supportive, in particular Kevin over at Collected Miscellany. But we’d been expecting more, at least from other places that had enjoyed the previous books. And these reviews didn’t seem to build up much presence—much word of mouth—much hype. So I’ve been discussing with my publisher why this happened, and how we can plan for the next book. The greatest fear for any published writer is a slow slide into insignificance.



In the end, though, there’s no explanation. A certain amount of this business comes down to luck, and I’ve heard plenty of stories about titles editors were sure would break out, which received press silence. So now the discussion is solely about what to do next year, with the next book. This, too, takes an inordinate amount of time, and leads to insecurity, fear, and an overall questioning of why one does what one does. Screw it, why not take a real job? Why be subject to the notorious mood-swings of the market? Why not got yourself a day-job so the sales don’t matter as much—so they don’t threaten to make you homeless?



I know why. Because this is the place I’ve always dreamed of being, to be able to pay my rent solely with the profits of my imagination. I may complain, but for Christ’s sake, I never imagined I’d actually make it this far.



And it’s only money. The real challenge is writing well. Which is a topic I’d like to lead into next, a discussion on literary ambition.

(Originally posted at the Contemporary Nomad)

Silence

In a comment below, anonymous asked, “Have you abandoned this site?”



Fair question, given nearly 3 months of silence.



Contrary to appearances, I haven’t officially abandoned it. I’ve primarily been distracted by an immense amount of work. I have a nasty tendency to load myself down with too many projects, so that no free time exists. An additional problem is that, when you’re working on upwards of 10 ideas at once, none of them get finished. So I’ve recently, after a short vacation in Slovenia, limited my load to 2 projects—a screenplay and the final book of the Eastern European series—which has helped considerably.



Also, looking over what this blog had become, I found myself somewhat dismayed. Ideally, a blog is about ideas. About insights into whatever the blogger has privileged access to. And while over the previous year I’d made a few posts along those lines, the bulk were simply house-cleaning pieces. Links to reviews, website modifications, career tracking. Essentially, it had become a board to display updates about me.



Which struck me as kind of boring.



Recently though, I’ve been thinking a lot about this blog, and about things which can be discussed with some fluency. And anonymous’s question is encouraging me to stop thinking about these subjects, and start writing again.



For example, I’ve been thinking a lot about ambition. Literary ambition in particular. What is it? And how, in today’s McWorld (to steal a metaphor from Donald Hall), can one sustain it? Check out this particularly interesting essay by Mr. Hall over at The Academy of American Poets’ site, on “Poetry and Ambition”.



I think that subject will begin my re-introduction into the blogosphere. And this time, I’ll do my damndest to stick to it.



But first, the boring update (see above in a little bit).



-Olen

(Originally posted at the Contemporary Nomad)

Amazon Shorts

A few weeks ago, my agent was contacted about a new service from Amazon: buying shorts from authors directly and selling them for 49 cents a pop as downloads. While buying downloads of articles is not new to Amazon, these are not reprinted from magazines that have previously published them, and so the cost for Amazon, and the reader, is quite low. It’s an interesting concept, and so I sumitted some pieces, two of which were taken and are now on-line:



Courtship, a story from my grad-school years, about a man trying to get his wife back.



Half-Lives, my essay on living in exile, which once used to be free on my site, but now ain’t. (Sorry about that, but the Amazon rep, after taking it, pointed out I better take it off my site.)



According to the press on it, the real star attraction is a cinch to figure out. Though it doesn’t seem to be up yet, Dan Brown’s “alternate ending” to The DaVinci Code is bound to make some waves when it arrives.



Amazon Shorts

(Originally posted at the Contemporary Nomad)

Monocle 04

Which was prepared at Exit 05



is now on-line.



(Click issue IV.)



Enjoy this tardy installment.

(Originally posted at the Contemporary Nomad)

Re-Views

A couple great reviews surfaced this past week, the first one from Dick Adler over at the Chicago Tribune. The great compliment was that it was the headline review—clocking in at one-and-a-half web pages—and went into great depth about 36 Yalta Boulevard, using quotations from the book—luckily, passages that I wouldn’t be embarrassed about anyone reprinting.



As a writer, I look for two things in reviews: 1) Criticism and 2) Blurbs. The interesting thing about Dick’s review, lengthy as it was, was that it gave me neither. While it gave a kind of criticism—that is, “criticism” which is aimed at understanding the book—it said not a bad word about the book. But neither did it give any lines that could be excerpted and pasted on the back cover (except for “fascinating and original” to describe the series as a whole) of Yalta. Nothing like, “the best literary puzzle since The DaVinci Code” or “mouth-wateringly delicious!”



I’ve said before that what I like most about reviews is the sense that the reviewer gets what I’m doing, and for that reason, if no other, I love Dick’s review of Yalta, as well as his reviews of my previous books. He says in one part,

As the complicated story unwinds, the sad, inventive survivors of the exile community in Vienna give Steinhauer the chance to do what he does best: produce ironic truths about recent history.






the other great reviewPowells.comEsquire Magazine

Thirty-Six Yalta Boulevard, like its namesake, is full of tricks; it is a brainy thriller motored by stylishness and brevity. Steinhauer evokes the baroque, bureaucratic nature of the Ministry without choking his readers on it, and he can render it humorous without being satirical. His characters, too, are subtle and biting. They are lonely and at risk, but they are beholden to a world more vast, secretive and calculating than they could imagine. That is comfort of a kind.




When Friends Get Famous

Well, maybe famous is a strong word at this point, but I just got done watching my friend Adam LeBor on CNN’s “Diplomatic License” talking about Slobodan Milosevic, the UN war crimes tribunal, and the possibilities for future arrests of war-criminal politicians. He did an excellent job.



Funny thing, when someone you don’t know does an excellent job on a talk show, you never notice it. But when it’s someone you know, you can imagine yourself in that nervy situation, and know that you wouldn’t do it half as well as him.



If you’re in the States, you can watch it later today to see a real pro in action, as well as get yourself interested in his excellent biography, Milosevic, to learn about this intriguing and disturbing character.

(Originally posted at the Contemporary Nomad)