I am no longer sure ‘Distractions’ is appropriate.  The summer gig is under way and that is the main distraction from my writing.  But it’s not superfluous like a distraction is.  It’s just a higher priority for the time being.

A lot of processing is done on the computer, so I have spent a lot of time on Netflix streaming The Office.  Why don’t more TV vendors do this?  It will end up on the Net eventually, but if on Netflix or on Hulu then, at least, they make some money off of it.  Here’s the better test.  The shows that I do follow, that are available for me to view for free, even though Netflix is a sunk cost, are harder for me to find on the free non-compensating sites.  Plus, the HBO shows could probably fetch higher premiums from Netflix because havign those shows stream might attract members.

It’s always comforting to find a well known author speak to my overriding sense of theory: there is too much focus, often unacknowledged, on the mind and not enough on the body/mind organism.  Here’s Paul Auster talking about the organism:

Writing is physical for me.  I always have the sense that the words are coming out of my body, not just my mind….Not only do you write books physically, but you read books physically as well.  There’s something about the rhythms of language that correspond to the rhythms of our own bodies.  An attentive reader is finding meanings in the book that can’t be articulated, finding them in his or her body. (2007, 27)

How very Massumi of Auster.

Alexander Star, the editor of Lingua Franca, has a piece about the state of fiction.  It’s mainly a review of literature, which concludes by aping the famous Jonathan Franzen essay.  Not impressive, but it is a good read if you are interested in a survey of the debate.  A debate that has apparently been put to rest since 1996.  Yawn.

A short diddy by a high school friend at The Second Pass about Glenn Beck’s new novel.  It includes links to more robust … hilarity.

Auster, Paul.  (2007).  Jonathan Lethem talks to Paul Auster.  In V. Vida, ed.  (2007).  The Believer book of writers talking to writers (25-42).  NY: Believer Books.

Lawrence Lessig has an article up to-day that makes this thread worth revisiting: http://www.tnr.com/article/the-love-culture?page=0,0

It’s an interesting piece by a smart man that has clearly given it some thought. The personal thread halfway through is scary as shit. Of course, he is a law professor and hence concerned with structural adjustments to solve the problem.

But, there is something he hints at and probably has an ideological block to revealing/exploring. He keeps referring to culture as the problem. That seems to also make it the cure. The reason “fair use” is so limited is because people didn’t want to push on those boundaries and have instead opted for a rights regime which then made “fair use” more and more limited and hence an unacceptable option. I like where this leads if only because it resonates with my overall sense of activisim as seizing and not negotiating. Take back “fair use”. Make Murdoch and others spend so much litigating it that it is not a cost effective means of copyright protection.