<< 1 >>
Rating: 
Summary: Slate's Diaries
Review: Slate's Diaries are a delight to read. Most of the diaries are short, impressionistic descriptions of the contributors' daily activities, which are artfully and, for the most part, humorously written. I can say unequivocally that nearly all of the contributors' weekly journals, selected for Slate Diaries, held my attention. Regardless of vocation, these individuals were able to transform the quotidian into interesting and lively stories. As Mike Kinsley suggests, the diary-genre of writing is more difficult than it looks. For some, it comes naturally-perhaps because writers generally keep diaries and they're used to describing events and thoughts. In my opinion, today's journalists are not practicing narrative writing. Lord only knows what would happen if they were asked to describe a landscape, a person's attire, the scent and sounds of the city or the country, or the way a building is designed. This genre of "descriptive" journalistic writing has nearly all but vanished in our major newspapers. Michael Kelly argued that narrative died when the television camera became the "image-maker". Michael Kinsley initiated the Diarist at the New Republic and thank goodness he has kept the tradition going at Slate. Slate Diaries prove, against the wave of mechanistic writing, that narrative writing is still very much appreciated! It is also fascinating to note that the contributors who are not professional writers-turned out to be the best writers. For example, Lakshmi Gopalkrishnan, a lead site manager for Microsoft Office, wrote a fascinating account of her homeland, while visiting her family in Kerala, India. It has all the qualities of a Chekhov short story: irony, darkness, humor and symbolism. My favorite contributor to Slate is Masha Gessen whose writing rates with Tolstoy's Confessions and Zola's Germinal. There are a few authors in this collection, however, like Tucker Carlson, who write as if the spotlight were directly on them. And even if there are moments of humor in Carlson's diary, the author's ego eclipses the content. But that is to be expected from Carlson. Overall, I give this book a rating of 4 stars. It's a good read.
Rating:
Summary: Slate's Diaries
Review: Slate's Diaries are a delight to read. Most of the diaries are short, impressionistic descriptions of the contributors' daily activities, which are artfully and, for the most part, humorously written. I can say unequivocally that nearly all of the contributors' weekly journals, selected for Slate Diaries, held my attention. Regardless of vocation, these individuals were able to transform the quotidian into interesting and lively stories. As Mike Kinsley suggests, the diary-genre of writing is more difficult than it looks. For some, it comes naturally-perhaps because writers generally keep diaries and they're used to describing events and thoughts. In my opinion, today's journalists are not practicing narrative writing. Lord only knows what would happen if they were asked to describe a landscape, a person's attire, the scent and sounds of the city or the country, or the way a building is designed. This genre of "descriptive" journalistic writing has nearly all but vanished in our major newspapers. Michael Kelly argued that narrative died when the television camera became the "image-maker". Michael Kinsley initiated the Diarist at the New Republic and thank goodness he has kept the tradition going at Slate. Slate Diaries prove, against the wave of mechanistic writing, that narrative writing is still very much appreciated! It is also fascinating to note that the contributors who are not professional writers-turned out to be the best writers. For example, Lakshmi Gopalkrishnan, a lead site manager for Microsoft Office, wrote a fascinating account of her homeland, while visiting her family in Kerala, India. It has all the qualities of a Chekhov short story: irony, darkness, humor and symbolism. My favorite contributor to Slate is Masha Gessen whose writing rates with Tolstoy's Confessions and Zola's Germinal. There are a few authors in this collection, however, like Tucker Carlson, who write as if the spotlight were directly on them. And even if there are moments of humor in Carlson's diary, the author's ego eclipses the content. But that is to be expected from Carlson. Overall, I give this book a rating of 4 stars. It's a good read.
Rating: 
Summary: Excellent reading
Review: I am a loyal Slate reader, and was very glad to see that they had compiled these wonderful diaries from Slate.com into a book. It is a window into some fascinating lives.
Rating: 
Summary: writers turn out to be boring people
Review: I had high hopes for this book, based on the concept and the back cover. However, I far preferred the submissions by regular people writing about their jobs than the tedious entries by writers, which unfortunately overwhelmed the book. Although Michael Kinsley heralded the "instantaneous submission" aspect of these diaries as bringing some extra element, I usually felt they would have been better with more time and thought put into them. My favorite diary was from the woman who worked in Classified advertising (a hilarious must-read); the anthropologist who consulted with police departments was also pretty interesting. And why such a short entry from Karenna Gore? If anyone has good material from her life, it's the vice president's daugher. This book is NOT a lively updated internet version of Studs Terkel's Working, which is perhaps what I wanted it to be. My advice for anyone thinking of getting this book is to read the diaries online for a time to get a flavor for them.
Rating:
Summary: Are Liberals Essentially The Only Interesting People?
Review: Slate editor Michael Kinsley needs a reality check. This is one of the strangest anthologies ever put into print. There is little reason for anybody to purchase a copy. Every single one of the included diaries are readily available for free. One merely needs to go to www.slate.com's web site and use its search engine. The only benefit of this volume is the assurance of its editors that these diaries are the best of the lot. Other than conservative writer Tucker Carlson these decision makers seem to think that only extremist to moderate Liberals are interesting. Of course one should not overlook the fact that according to an in-house poll Slate is so liberal that only a handful of its staff voted for the Republican candidate in the recent Presidential election. Why therefore should we be surprised by the inclusion of Al Gore's daughter Karenna as a diarist? The addition of decontructionist philosopher Stanley Fish was particularly irritating. Even the diary of Microsoft Chairman Bill Gates reflects the pervasive Liberalism of its contributors. Gates might be the current foremost champion of capitalism, but it is disquieting to observe the software magnate attending the 75th anniversary dinner of Time magazine where it seems left of center celebrities are the only ones that caught his attention. Like Kinsley and some of the other contributors, Bill Gates also attended Harvard University, a school which appears to indoctrinates its students body into believing that modern day Liberalism is the font of all wisdom and moral decency. Now that I've ranted and raved about the pervasive Liberalism of the Slate diarists, do I have anything nice to say? The answer is yes. There are many humorous insights concerning how these people live out their everyday lives. They might be mostly Liberal but I do find them to be intelligent and entertaining. James Fallows, one of my favorite neo-Liberal writers, tells us about the decisions an editor of the U.S. News & World Report must make as the printing deadline approaches. Have you ever wondered how film critic Roger Ebert gets through the day? Now you can find out. Novelist Cynthia Ozick remarks upon the obliviousness of an employer who has not a clue that he shares the same name with the great Scottish philosopher David Hume. It has been my experience that most people are ignorant about the fact that there are scholars and scientists with names similar to their own. They seem indifferent unless one can point to a famous sports figure or actor. Jan Reid, a founding writer of the Texas Monthly, recounts about the time he was shot during a robbery in Mexico City. I also cynically appreciated the candor of the anonymous professor who reveals the political infighting that is unavoidable for those without tenure. Last but not least, I envied the UPS driver who spots a car with a bumper sticker reading, "I fantasize about the UPS man." Some guys have all the luck! I recommend buying this book only as a gift. Unfortunately, there are still many people lacking the basic talent of how to find stuff on the Internet. Other than that, simply click five or six strokes to peruse the total diary offerings of Slate.com.
Rating:
Summary: Are Liberals Essentially The Only Interesting People?
Review: Slate editor Michael Kinsley needs a reality check. This is one of the strangest anthologies ever put into print. There is little reason for anybody to purchase a copy. Every single one of the included diaries are readily available for free. One merely needs to go to www.slate.com's web site and use its search engine. The only benefit of this volume is the assurance of its editors that these diaries are the best of the lot. Other than conservative writer Tucker Carlson these decision makers seem to think that only extremist to moderate Liberals are interesting. Of course one should not overlook the fact that according to an in-house poll Slate is so liberal that only a handful of its staff voted for the Republican candidate in the recent Presidential election. Why therefore should we be surprised by the inclusion of Al Gore's daughter Karenna as a diarist? The addition of decontructionist philosopher Stanley Fish was particularly irritating. Even the diary of Microsoft Chairman Bill Gates reflects the pervasive Liberalism of its contributors. Gates might be the current foremost champion of capitalism, but it is disquieting to observe the software magnate attending the 75th anniversary dinner of Time magazine where it seems left of center celebrities are the only ones that caught his attention. Like Kinsley and some of the other contributors, Bill Gates also attended Harvard University, a school which appears to indoctrinates its students body into believing that modern day Liberalism is the font of all wisdom and moral decency. Now that I've ranted and raved about the pervasive Liberalism of the Slate diarists, do I have anything nice to say? The answer is yes. There are many humorous insights concerning how these people live out their everyday lives. They might be mostly Liberal but I do find them to be intelligent and entertaining. James Fallows, one of my favorite neo-Liberal writers, tells us about the decisions an editor of the U.S. News & World Report must make as the printing deadline approaches. Have you ever wondered how film critic Roger Ebert gets through the day? Now you can find out. Novelist Cynthia Ozick remarks upon the obliviousness of an employer who has not a clue that he shares the same name with the great Scottish philosopher David Hume. It has been my experience that most people are ignorant about the fact that there are scholars and scientists with names similar to their own. They seem indifferent unless one can point to a famous sports figure or actor. Jan Reid, a founding writer of the Texas Monthly, recounts about the time he was shot during a robbery in Mexico City. I also cynically appreciated the candor of the anonymous professor who reveals the political infighting that is unavoidable for those without tenure. Last but not least, I envied the UPS driver who spots a car with a bumper sticker reading, "I fantasize about the UPS man." Some guys have all the luck! I recommend buying this book only as a gift. Unfortunately, there are still many people lacking the basic talent of how to find stuff on the Internet. Other than that, simply click five or six strokes to peruse the total diary offerings of Slate.com.
Rating:
Summary: a wonderful collection
Review: This book is a total delight. I can't decide who I like more: the "professional" writers like Ron Carlson, Cynthia Ozick, Allegra Goodman, David Sedaris, etc., or the amateurs whose diaries are amazingly well written and moving. You certainly get a voyueristic sense from some of these--it is a guilty thrill to read someone's diary. But mostly you just get a ton of great writing. This is fabulous!
Rating: 
Summary: Too many writers writing about writing
Review: What's good about this book: the ordinary, everyday people who aren't writers, journalists or who don't work in publishing. Hell, even Bill Gates fits into this category (though his entry is strangely mundane). Intensely enjoyable, harrowing, shocking, uplifting entries from all walks of life. I don't know where else you'd find this. Some serious, important writing in these entries. What's bad about this book: way too many entries from journalists, writers or those in publishing. It's inevitable that Slate staffers are going to know lots of these people, but the urge to indulge has not been curbed. Like so many narcissistic TV shows that are about other TV shows, publishing or the media, this book has way too many writers writing about writing. Well, I have a news flash with story at 11: You're just not that interesting. Give me more of the New York public defender taking on the hopeless murder cases for the homeless; give me more of the school nurse's insight and wisdom glimpsed through the children she sees; give me more of the hilarious classified ad sales person. What I don't need is more of the self-regarding petulance of the author and literary editor whose story got rejected. By all means grab a copy of this at the airport and skip the boring entries -- exactly what I ended up doing during a 3 hour delay in Denver. Or head over to the Slate web site and pick the wheat from the chaff yourself. Not a bad book, but not what it claims to be either -- "the best" Slate diary entries.
<< 1 >>
| 
