"After the End of History"

IT'S the kind of phrase, however memorable, that the speaker probably wishes he could take back. when francis fukuyama responded to the fall of berlin wall -- the close of the cold war -- by calling it "the end of history" it seemed to make sense, and it fit into an argument by postmodern scholars -- fredric jameson especially -- that we were living in a context-free epoch that had no use for history either in its literature or popular culture.

but history continued to happen, and this week the berlin wall moment is back in the news. i'm also reading an intriguing new book in which samuel cohen, an english professor at the university of missouri, argues that history did not disappear from our literature either. cohen sees the 90s -- the period between "the end of history" and 9/11's "end of irony" -- as "an interwar decade," and looks at six of the best novels the period produced and two that came right after.

those novels are by thomas pynchon, philip roth, toni morrison, tim o'brien, joan didion, jeffrey eugenides, jonathan lethem and don delillo, all hefty books well worth the study.

i know cohen only slightly, from speaking by phone for two stories on updike, here and here, and i like his gen-x perspective. updike himself doesnt much figure in the new book, but he offers this delicious epitaph from "rabbit at rest": " 'i miss it,' he said. 'the cold war. it gave you a reason to get up in the morning.'"

so i'm enjoying cohen's tightly and clearly written "after the end of history: american fiction in the 1990s" -- and not just because it's the kind of study i might have written had i stayed in the academy.

John Updike vs. Witches of Eastwick

FOR a not terribly good book, "the witches of eastwick" has had quite an afterlife. not only did it become a popular, if faintly cheesy, movie involving cher, and a briefly lived stage show, but it's now set to become a television series. no, not a miniseries -- but a show that could run for years and years.

why? i'm still a bit confused about the whole thing. but HERE is my new piece on the book's unlikely journey.

for the story, i spoke to a producer on the show named maggie friedman, who pointed out that "men and women and sex" are important ingredients to making the book -- and her show -- work.

and i discussed the original novel's impact and sexual politics -- is it feminist? misogynist? an indictment of the counterculture -- with scholars quentin miller and sam cohen. the latter has a new book coming soon called "after the end of history: american fiction in the 1990s."

what do people make of the program of "eastwick?" i'm eager to hear from viewers. the show kicks of wednesday.

John Updike Redux

There's so much to say about the prolific john updike that i've filed a second story... and still didnt have room to get into topics like his take on male sexuality, his very funny Bech books, or his very fine art and book criticism. (his new yorker review of "my name is red" turned me on to turkish writer orhan pamuk, for instance.)

this piece came out of something i noticed over the years: when interviewing writers -- especially younger ones, experimentalists, literary science-fiction types, or west coast partisans -- i could often set my watch by how long it took them to knock udpike. it was a way of saying, "i dont do that stodgy, patriarchal realist stuff."

some of this, i imagine, is the usual generational warfare, as bret easton ellis suggests in my piece: eliot and his generation of modernists tore into the entire romantic tradition just as punk rockers initially  dismissed almost the entire school of '60s songcrafted that preceded them. but there's more to it than that.

anyway, hope readers enjoy the piece and i welcome comments. i must admit that in college, where i was a thomas pynchon devotee, i had some sympathy for the anti-updike argument.

Photo credit: Flictr user 19

John Updike and Hollywood

It's been a very hard year or so for major writers -- we lost norman mailer near the end of 07, david foster wallace last year and now, last week, john updike. (and my boyhood hero kurt vonnegut a little further back.)

 

here is the first of two stories of mine on updike -- it ran in the new hollywood site the wrap. my editor there is the fiendishly talented maria russo, who i wrote for at the LA Times.

the story tries to answer the question, why weren't there more movies, and perhaps more good movies, from the work such a prolific, long-lived and lyrical writer? 

any other hunches?

Photo credit: Flickr user 15