Well, Maud may have CAAF but we have our Literary Man of Mystery, ARC (Anonymous Roving Correspondent), and we thank our lucky stars for having stumbled over his barely breathing drunken sprawl in that Chinatown alley all those years ago ... because he has once again fulfilled his brief with distinction and offers his front line report of the weekend's book festivities at UCLA.
For two days each spring, the Los Angeles Times Festival of Books takes over the UCLA campus. It’s a massive event. About a dozen buildings are enlisted for the panel discussions, which take place in the largest auditorium. Authors read at the half-dozen stages spread across campus, and hundreds of venders set up shop in tents thrown up in orderly rows. There’s even a cooking stage, a quad for kids, the world’s largest crossword puzzle, and porcelain toilets that actually flush.It’s a democratic affair to be sure. For example, early Sunday afternoon one could choose between a panel discussion with William Gibson and Bruce Wagner on 21st Century Hollywood, a conversation between LA Times journalist Barry Siegel and Elmore Leonard, a panel of women writers from Afghanistan, Israel and Iran, a reading by Neal Stephenson and a sing-a-long by Barney the purple dinosaur that resembles a smiling piece of dung. And that’s only about half of what was available at that particular hour. Demand is huge and there is rarely an empty seat to be found. The LA Times estimates 130,000 people attended, which is really quite remarkable when you consider the beautiful weather, the NBA playoffs, the Dodgers home stand against the hated Giants, the Fiesta Broadway downtown and the million and one other distractions in this fair and fucked-up city of ours.
I attended both days: panels on Saturday and readings on Sunday. Here’s the lowdown. The conversation between Lawrence Weschler and Ricky Jay was the most enjoyable hour of the day. Jay, who plays a casino owner on the HBO series Deadwood, compared writing to sleight of hand because a con is only as good as
its patter, which practitioners think of as a piece with a beginning, middle and end, so that the rube believes what the con artist wants them to believe. In other words, the ear participates in what the eye sees and vice versa. (Question for Mr. Jay: Is this what Joyce was getting at with the modalities of the audible and visible being ineluctable?)Next I attended a panel called California’s Invisible History, which was mostly about the Big Middle—the part of the state between San Francisco and Los Angeles, that is Central California, which I think I’ve heard of but, I’m not sure. (Isn’t that where all grapes, cheese and Dodger Dogs come from?) The conversation was about a pair of books but I kept getting distracted by the weirdo behind me who blew his nose. In fact, there was an inordinate about of phlegm processing going on in the audience, which was decidedly older. Is this what I have to look forward to in my old age? Reading books about migrant workers and evacuating chest oysters? If so, sign me up for the complete works of Samuel Beckett and a loaded revolver, please.
I moved on to more pleasing pastures, if you will, and sat among the young bodies who congregated at the panel about independent magazines, which was presided over by Dave Eggers (McSweeney’s), Tamara Straus (Zoetrope All-Story), Edwin Frank (New York Review of Books Classics) (Hunh?) and Lawrence Weschler (Omnivore). The topic was “Can Independent Magazines Survive” which amused Eggers and perplexed Weschler, who stole the show with his inspired rant against “the reign of the Pavlovian address” that dominates media today with its mission to “jolt, salivate, spend.” Eggers used cheap laughs and easy applause whenever he didn’t feel like giving a straight answer, which was always, and I can’t say I blame him. An independent magazine’s ability to “survive” is a weird question since the last time I looked into the matter, no one trying to kill them off. (A prey without a predator isn’t really at risk, is it?) Whether an independent magazine “survives” is largely a fiscal question (the psychiatric state of those who undertake such ventures notwithstanding). Still, young people laughing is better than old people hacking and we’ll volunteer to sit quietly and gaze at Zoetrope’s blue-eyed editrix any day of the week. That was enough panels for me, and I left UCLA in search of a burrito and a baseball game, and ended up at the public library, which is a little like leaving a demolition derby and rear-ending an uninsured motorist on the way home.
Sunday morning found me sitting in the shade listening to Dana Gioia reading poetry. He won me over right away by reciting a sonnet by Shakespeare from memory and pointing out that poets don’t read enough of other poets’ work at their readings. Gioia has a poet’s voice: rich, rumbling and pleasing to the ear, but he doesn’t look like one. That’s because he happens to be chairman of the NEA. Go figure.
Everyone has been talking about Chang-rae Lee’s new book Aloft, so I went to the Barnes and Noble stage to hear him, and even though he read a bit too quickly and needs to do something about his Rick Springfield hair, it was instantly apparent why Aloft has generated breakout book buzz, and I can’t wait to read it. I wandered around for an hour and made the mistake of cutting through the kiddie quad, aka Strollerville. The people here were nice, but slow, and you have to watch out for those WASPs with the drag racing stroller with the single wheel in front: these women are made of the skim milk of human bitchiness and will cut you off at the knees.
I came back to the B&N stage to see Neal Stephenson, whose Cryptonomicon I go ga-ga over. No one has more fun with a sentence than Stephenson, who looks like a 19th century anarchist but burst onto the scene with a couple of sci-fi novels. Even though his work now seems more concerned with the past then the future, the geeks showed up en masse to make sure he knew they hadn’t forgotten. Pity the man.
While I was taking notes during the Q&A the woman behind me zipped and unzipped every compartment in her backpack as she removed and then put away the program to see where she should go next. The man next to me kept looking down at my notebook to see what was writing, a kid a few rows in front of me draped his jacket over his head and went to sleep. Weschler was right. Without the Pavlovian jolt hardwired to their genitals and/or wallets, the crinklers, expectorators and nosey assholes didn’t quite know how to deal with the information coming in. Where was their sense of wonder? Where was the passion? Maybe the LATFOB is too democratic for its own good.

Comments