It's been years since our last real snow here, but the wait was worth it. I don't know that I've ever seen a prettier snow.
Three days later and the ground remains covered, though tomorrow's temperatures will see to that. Until then, though, it's lovely, and enough snow remains to muffle even the sounds of its falling from the trees.
The drive, steep and shaded, remains covered as well, which means the car remains parked at the top of the ridge that runs along the edge of the farm
Walking to and from it through the woods that cover the slope of the ridge reminds me, every time, of just how much I love these woods, this land, and just how deeply that love can be renewed by seeing the land and the forest through new eyes.
Eyes squinting, just a bit, against the glare rising from the snow.
Editor Retiring — But Not Shy!
My friend Dan Smith retired yesterday, and celebrated his birthday at the same time.
Then he got right to work on a brand-new project.
Considering how hard and constantly Dan's worked as a journalist and editor over the last four decades — and then some — there isn't a lot of surprise to this. He's spent the last twenty years editing the Blue Ridge Business Journal, a publication serving southwest Virginia, each page reflecting Dan's standards and integrity, providing its readers with news, features, opinion and attitude that equaled any such publication anywhere.
Every two weeks Dan produced a paper that was always lively, that took stands, that shared insights, and that reminded us that business is only part of life: Dan's book reviews ranged across everything from ancient history to contemporary fiction and most categories in-between. Rare enough for a business paper — and increasingly, alas, any paper — to carry book reviews, the Journal under Dan was absolutely committed to them.
He's just as committed to helping young writers become better writers. I've watched him work with dozens over the years, making the best of them better and then helping them get better still.
Dan always goes out of his way to credit the freelancers who provided the bulk of the Journal's copy; those young writers are a big part of his legacy.
Not that he'd use a word like legacy. Dan is not one to rest on his laurels, or to rest much, period. He's always looking for the next story, the next book to read, the next person to tell about that story, or that just-read book.
He's a fine writer, too; his memoir, Burning The Furniture, gives good picture of a life that in many ways promised not to last nearly as long as it has. (Dan learns from his mistakes; some of those, well-recounted in the book, were large and long-lived: Dan's ability to learn large lessons is at the heart of his own long-livedness.)
Dan's also one of the funniest people on earth. Presenting me with an award a few years back he remarked that, "Keith Ferrell is like a Marseilles whore: he comes in on time and his work's always clean." I laughed as hard as anybody — and have taken the opportunity, more than once, to repay the favor. Dan can laugh hard at himself, too.
And he's nowhere near done with any of it. A mite too early to talk about that new project Dan's got in mind, but when the time's right I'll let you know — if Dan hasn't gotten to you first.
And if you're in the Rocky Mount, Virginia area next Friday evening, August 8, stop by Edible Vibe (a terrific restaurant/coffee shop in downtown Rocky Mount) come here Dan read — he does that well, too — as part of our 4th Annual Franklin County Library Book Festival. There willl be half a dozen writers sharing their work. You'll know which one's Dan because he's the one I'll be making the most fun of. The balloon goes up at at 6:30.
It's been my pleasure and, no exaggeration, my privilege to write a number of pieces for Dan over the past four years.
I was pretty well full-formed as a writer by the time I met Dan, but I still learned a few things from him, not least of them what a fine, fine man Dan Smith is.
I'm glad I know him.
Amy Hanek said...
I was busy that weekend, but would have enjoyed meeting you and Dan. I just began freelancing for the interim editor at the BRBJ - too bad I missed working for Dan.
2:40 PM
Overview Institute Unveiled
A long day in DC yesterday, making the formal public announcement of The Overview Institute, an organization aimed exploring the ramifications, implications, and the possibilities for changes in perceptual and consciousness that arise (as it were) from our ability to rise from our planet.
The Institute is named, and its concerns and avenues of inquiry and speculation flow from, the exemplary work of Frank White, whose The Overview Effect: Space Exploration and Human Evolution marked, upon its publication in 1987, the first sustained and consistent attempt to examine how human perception is altered (and perhaps transformed) by off-Earth experience.
Frank's book was of (groundbreaking) necessity anecdotal — reminiscences, accounts, insights from individuals who'd been to space, all of them at the time astronauts or cosmonauts. To those anecdotes Frank brought and brings his sharp analytical intelligence and clear, focused thinking.
An indispensable book, and one that has refused to release its hold upon the imaginations and scientific curiosity of those who've read it.
Twenty-one years later and the handful of people who's been off-planet in 1987 has now swelled to more than 500, a number that will itself grow dramatically as various private-enterprise human space transport enterprises come on-line over the next few years.
At yesterday's event we unveiled our Institute's Declaration of Vision and Principles as well the other members of the Institute's Core Overview Group.
Most importantly, we called for others to sign our declaration, and join us in exploring the issues, opportunities, and areas of scientific, cultural, artistic, spiritual, philosophical inquiry raised by the Effect's effects.
As Frank pointed out in his eloquent remarks, the Overview Institute doesn't have an ideology or agenda — the implication of his work and findings is that 500, or 500,000, or 500,000,00 people experiencing the effect in orbit might well manifest 500,000,000 different personal responses to and manifestations of the experience.
What we're hoping to apply quantitative scientific methodology to is whether or not the Effect itself exerts measurable neurophysiological/cognitive effects on the brain.
But we're also quite deliberately seeking to engage the vision of artists from all media, cultural and thought leaders, activists, and above all interested individuals of whatever stripe and profession in exploring the question of just what space means — and can mean — to and for us here on Earth.
In my remarks I noted that it's now close to forty years since Norman Mailer launched his magnificent (if magnificently underrated) Of A Fire On The Moon with the words:
"Are we poised for a philosophical launch?"
As I said yesterday, and believe, "Now we are."
Take a look at our Declaration and, if it appeals, sign up for The Overview Institute (it's free.)
And tell others about it.
Rick said...
Well said Keith!
I am sorry I missed the event, but gather the team did great!
We are developing a cultural ripple effect here, that begins a transformation that will, when the wave grows high enough and strong enough, be Copurnican in its effect.
And if those of us working the cause of opening the frontier to mass access do our job the Effect will be something each one us can experience.
Poco a poco d'estrella, Rick N. Tumlinson Space Frontier Foundation Orbital Outfitters Space Diver Inc.
6:47 PM
—
Pat Cadigan said...
Hey, pal!
Completely off-topic: Happy Birthday, dear friend!
HOH
3:50 AM
ARTHUR
The October, 1993, gathering of many of the world's leading AI and brain researchers, science journalists, philosophers and others in Cambridge, Mass., to celebrate the ongoing life and works of Marvin Minsky was an intellectual and social delight from start to finish, but one of the high points for all there was Arthur's telepresence.
He looked great, all smiles and good wishes, and it was a pleasure to pose one of the day's first questions.
I can't remember what it was I asked, but I'll never forget — or want to — Arthur's response as he gazed out over the packed house in full color from the big screen that dominated the stage:
"Hello, Keith, and let me begin by saying thanks so much for rejecting my latest article!"
Brought down the house.
I was at first chagrined, but realized as the day passed that Arthur's comment brought me a certain cachet — "You really rejected an Arthur C. Clarke article?"
"Not up to our standards," I said, making sure my eyes were twinkling as I did so.
When I dropped Arthur a note relaying the fun I'd had his expense, he responded with a lovely funny note of his own, along the lines of how he was eager to help me get a good laugh.
But the best laugh I ever got from this man who laughed so deeply and well, came a few years later, after his investiture by the Queen.
Now that he was Sir Arthur, I wrote him, he could view his various wheelchairs and other devices as support mechanisms existing... Against The Fall Of Knight.
He wrote back immediately, certain that I could have heard his laughter all the way from Sri Lanka.
I have no doubt that I had indeed heard it — and I hear that laughter now, and think of the joy and insight, the vision and inspiration, the provocation and speculation, the smiles and, yes, the groans at the puns he loved, the treasure shelves of fiction and the nonfiction.
Arthur brought all of this and more to so many millions of readers over the course of one of the great careers in the world of ideas.
And even better, one of the great joyous lives in the world of humans.
Buckley
Add to your blog as infrequently as I do, and the risk is that it become a necrology. My last entry marked Norman Mailer's death; today William F. Buckley died.
What a pair of blogmarks! And what reminders of the virtues — and rewards — of the productive life.
Reminders as well of a time in American political discourse now long past, and long since in need of resuscitation if not outright resurrection.
They were giants in those times — the 1950s and 1960s — and not just in retrospect. Buckley and Mailer each perceived and understood (not the same thing at all) both the readiness in America for a revolution, and also the need for one. That each pursued his revolutionary goals with wit and bonhomie as well as intellectual audacity and literary zeal gave the era a frisson sadly missing since.
I remember my father and myself watching Mailer on Buckley's Firing Line sometime in the latter Sixties. They went at it, they did — at one point Mailer (my memory tells me) remarking that Fidel Castro was his idea of a great man, and Buckley falling most uncharacteristically silent.
But he was never silent for long.
What has stayed with me since that night was Dad's remark that, after all the fireworks, it was easy to imagine the two of them going out for dinner together. A distance and then some from the levels of invective hurled witlessly from both sides today.
My first professional publication came around that time, a review for the Raleigh News & Observer of Buckley's essay collection The Governor Listeth. I liked the book and Buckley's writing then, I like his writing now.
Politically, I was in his orbit if not his thrall for awhile, but only for awhile.
The revolution he sought — and that so largely succeeded, or appeared to — seemed to me to become derailed around the time Buckley (and a substantial portion of the electorate) became captivated by the Actor (I use the term loosely, to say the least) whose depth of inauthenticity in the wake, a decade later, of Barry Goldwater's genuineness, turned out to be exactly what America, and most but not all American conservatives wanted, or thought they did.
But Reagan was electable — and how! And with his election — which, to hear his name invoked during this year's primaries was the Ascension made American — so much of what intrigued me about intellectual conservatism as propounded by Buckley, most vivaciously, disappeared, subsumed by Reaganism which rested its multifold cruelties and criminalities on an anti-intellectualism so severe and yet so charming (and marketable) that even the truest and most philosophical conservatives chose to follow the tide, Buckley chief among them.
Yet I never stopped reading him — the essays, the novels, the wonderful sailing books and the exuberant memoirs. His ferocious productivity never fully flagged, and when he was found dead today it was at his desk in his study.
Where he wanted to be.
Amy Hanek said...
I saw a great snipet on Buckley on CBS this morning. He seemed to be both conservative and prolific in the way he made his dent on the world.
9:31 AM
—
Brad Sparrow said...
Hi Uncle Keith,
This is Brad. Found your blog and enjoyed reading it. Hope everything is going well.
12:14 PM
—
Marion said...
Keith, I hope you read the last Vanity Fair's article on Mailer. Now Buckley is gone...who is left to make us think?
And it is only "us" because the public in general seems fascinated with the Britneys, the Paris Hiltons, the mindless party-goers (who charge huge fees to dance on bars for the photogs).
The inside front page of the Roanoke Times began with a single "celeb" photo and a blurb.
Now, nearly the entire page is taken up with these so-called personalities. ARGHHH, as Charlie Brown would say.
9:39 PM
Mailer
He changed the life of his times, back when times could be changed by a writer. No writer of his generation had Mailer's ambition -- or, fortunately for his ambition and his readers, his range.
I was 13 or 14 when I first read him, Barbary Shore, whose first sentence —
"Probably I was in the war."
— struck me then and strikes me now as a marvelous, frightening gambit, a hook that's also an existential jab, a signal that we are not embarked upon anything like a traditional novel.
Nor were we, nor was he.
The vastness of his gifts was matched by the acuity of his eye and ear: while the political writing is rightly celebrated for his sense of how things work, Mailer was also an acute social novelist and observer. The societies of which he wrote best in fiction and nonfiction — ancient Egypt, the CIA, soldiers on patrol, the familial and social structures and strictures surrounding young Adolph Hitler, the astronaut /engineer corps in the summer of the first moon landing, marchers approaching the Pentagon, murderer and murdered in Utah, more — were from his perspective and in his prose representative of the cosmic as well as the common, the divine as well as the bedeviled, the orgiastic and the disciplined, the brilliant and the brutal, the contemporary and the timeless.
He tried to get it all between the covers of his books, each of them different, each informed by a mind relentless in its pursuit of the ultimate, its sense of language, its adherence to the importance of writing not only well but also challengingly.
No less in the last year of his career than the sixty years of work and words that preceded it. He wrote once:
Every moment of one's existence, one is growing into more or retreating into less. One is always living a little more or dying a little bit.
His own moments now ended, his moment, that moment of history that was our times from The Naked and the Dead in 1948 to On God published a few weeks before his death, remains alive and lively, his voice ongoing in his books and his essays and all the rest, themselves though now artifacts of a time and of times when writing and writers mattered more to the culture than they do now.
Which itself doesn't matter: he did his work and did remarkable work, and through it all was engaged in an exploration the equal of any writer one cares to name, nearly every page reminding us of his commitment to a journey best described by one of his best narrators:
We sail across dominions barely seen, washed by swells of time. We plow through fields of magnetism. Past and future come together on thunderheads and our dead hearts live with lightning in the wounds of the Gods.
Marion said...
Thanks, Keith. We all need reminders about the way a great writer or poet views the world and is able to express those views in a way that causes us to say to ourselves: Oh, yes, of COURSE.
7:14 PM
—
cadigan said...
I thought of you yesterday when I heard the news, dear friend.
2:51 PM
—
Carol said...
I too thought of you when I heard the news, having recently listened to you at Selby's reminiscing about Mailer's impact on your life as a writer. Reading the quotes you posted, it's clear that every great writer writes his own eulogy. Mailer certainly did.
10:01 AM
—
Amy Hanek said...
I will have to find time to read some of his work.
"Every moment of one's existence, one is growing into more or retreating into less. One is always living a little more or dying a little bit." - I love this! We are forced to choose sides - ask yourself, "are you on the living side, or the dying side?"
Nice post!
11:41 AM
Dry
We got a quarter to a half-inch of rain last Thursday night, the first real rain in over six weeks. Not nearly enough, and little on the horizon.
My neighbors, who farm for their livelihood, have already cut their cornstalks — such as they were — for what silage they can get out of them. They sure weren't going to get any corn. Their cows are already eating next winter's hay, and I've been hearing that some of the herds are about to be dramatically reduced to save feed (and money). Some wells are starting to sputter and spit mud.
Our own well is doing... well.
As I write this, the Midwest is still trying to dry out from its floods, and Hurricane Felix is dumping up to 25 inches of rain on Nicaragua.
The hope among the farmers here is that we get a goodsized storm system that tracks up the east coast and begins refilling the land's water-coffers. Too late for this year's crops but for farmers, like so many of us, it's never too soon to begin thinking about next year.
Mower
I assembled my new high-power but low-octane mower today, and gave it a quick test-drive (test-push?)
Quick because using a reel mower seems to take only a little getting used-to: I learned within a few feet what the mower wants to do, what it doesn't want to do, and how to respond to each.
But I also learned that you're just not going to do a lot of mower-pushing in this heat. couple of quick swaths was about all I could manage before
becoming sweat-drenched.
Nor should the grass be mowed in its current desiccated state. I've seen it dryer here, but only once in the last twelve years.
The mower sounds wonderful — whitttrrr whitttrrr — as the reel spins, but the grass sounds like ice crunching beneath your feet. My neighbors are cutting their corn already, in hopes of cutting their losses. Twenty days or so since there's been any rain, and not much to speak of in the twenty days before that.
But when the rain does return, and the grass gets some life back in its blades, the blades of this new mower will be ready. I'm thinking of calling it Mo.
JDM
Lynne Barrett and colleagues have launched a lively new site, The Florida Book Review that's worth more than a quick look, and not just because I was asked to contribute.
But I was, and did, and my feature on John D. MacDonald and Travis McGee (more on MacDonald than McGee) gave me the chance to re-visit, re-read, and reflect on a writer who was once terrifically popular and whose work once meant a great deal to me.
And still does in many ways — other than for this article I hadn't read (or, really, been able to read) MacDonald for a decade or more. That inability was mine, as much a result of over-reading (and over-re-reading!) him for decades as anything.
But picking up a couple of dozen MacDonalds — costiveness of production was not among his characteristics — his virtues (considerable) and flaws (ditto) all came back in a familiar rush.
I was reminded — not that I needed to be — that the McGees, for all of the charms still offered by the Busted Flush, the clockspring plots, the still-sharp insights into American society and culture ca. 1964-1984, aren't the best of his work.
A half dozen or ten of MacDonald's standalone suspense novels remain about as good as commercial fiction gets, My picks: The Damned, The Crossroads, A Flash of Green, Please Write For Details, The Last One Left, Murder in the Wind, and Cry Hard, Cry Fast.
Add the best of the McGees — the first, The Deep Blue Good-by, and the strangest, The Green Ripper — and some of the short stories and there's a shelf of superb suspense fiction.
Superbly slick, too, every bit of it, which is one of the things I carp about in the essay.
But what do I know?
Other than that for a long time I loved John D. MacDonald as much as I loved any writer, and if that love hasn't lasted undiminished, what has?
Rachel
Rachel Carson would be 100 today, but don’t look for Congress to recognize her centenary or her contribution to our world: a bill that would have done just that is currently being blocked by Oklahoma Senator Tom Coburn (R.)
Coburn’s opposition rests on his assertion that Carson’s 1962 book Silent Spring – which his website tellingly misidentifies as The Silent Spring — was based on “junk science” that turned the world against DDT, condemning tens of millions of people – many of them children – to death from malaria.
Coburn’s hardly alone in vilifying Carson, and using malaria deaths to do so. There’s been a large measure of such vilification, including plenty from Rush Limbaugh, whose loathing of the environmentalist movement, which, in many ways, Silent Spring catalyzed if not actually inaugurated, is all-but constant.
Tens of millions of deaths and the wholesale banning of DDT and other “benevolent” chemicals, all placed upon the shoulders of this thoughtful, graceful writer and thinker.
Whose crime was – what? The raising of consciousness, that’s what.
Despite the blogs and blasts and blather about Rachel Carson and Silent Spring bearing the responsibility for banning DDT and killing those tens of millions of humans, what she actually did was far less draconian – and far more subversive. She raised questions which in turn raised consciousness. She asked us to think.
Carson, it shouldn’t have to be pointed out, had no power to legislate or ban anything. She was a writer – nor did she in that role advocate or encourage the wholesale banning of DDT. Rather, she advocated for a more critical, careful, thoughtful, and research-based approach to the use of broad-kill pesticides in specific and our relationship to nature in general.
Such an argument, of course, requires thought on both sides. Understanding such an argument requires a careful reading of Carson’s book, as any serious book calls for care in its consumption. She was alarmed by trends that she found both in nature and in the scientific literature that had surrounded DDT for a decade and more before she wrote Silent Spring
And what’s all-but forgotten is that there was a time, not all that long ago, when a book—a book, one that you had to read! – could launch a debate, create a movement or, considering the four decades’ worth of Carson-bashing, both a movement and a counter-movement – but it could, at least back in the earlier days of television’s assault on our ability to read, which is to say our ability to think.
That ability itself seems an increasingly endangered species on, it must be admitted, both sides of the argument; on, it must be also admitted, all sides of every argument these days: all chemicals are bad versus all environmentalists are “wackos” (Limbaugh’s word not mine.)
That’s too easy on each side – and that’s why irrational invective has grown so pervasive. Harder to think – and even harder to think seriously.
As Rachel Carson did. Here’s what she had to say in one of the closing paragraphs of Silent Spring:
“Through all these new, imaginative, and creative approaches to the problem of sharing our earth with other creatures there runs a constant theme, the awareness that we are dealing with life – with living populations and all their pressures and counterpressures, their surges and recessions. Only by taking account of such forces and by cautiously seeking to guide them into channels favorable to ourselves can we hope to achieve a reasonable accommodation between the insect hordes and ourselves.”
Sound wild-eyed and fanatical to you? Me, either.
Happy hundredth, Rachel Carson – we’re all the better, despite our every effort not to be, for your presence here, and so is our world.
