« Where We've Been, What's Going On Now, What's Happening Next | Main | Inflicting My Child Upon You, Volume #25,338 »
October 26, 2004
James and Ted's Excellent Literary Adventures
Hey, look at that: James Lileks has got a new book out: Interior Desecrations: Hideous Homes from the Horrible '70s. It's a follow-up to his Gallery of Regrettable Food, except this time, instead of mocking 50s food, he's mocking 70s interior decorating. And rightly so, I'd say.
James and I go back a ways, to the time when I was a humor editor at AOL and I called him to beg him to write a weekly column for me, and he did (thus marking the first and probably last time that he and Ted Rall worked for the same editor). He helped make me look good; therefore I'm inclined to recommend him to others. I haven't seen the book yet, but I've seen the dry runs off of Lileks.com, and they're the patented Lileks midwestern-hipster snark, so I can't imagine this one not being damn funny. I'll be picking it up the next trip to the bookstore.
As long as I'm making a tangential reference to Ted Rall, I should also note that he has a new book out as well: Generalissimo El Busho: Essays and Cartoons on the Bush Years. Sadly for me, this book meant that Ted was on a book tour while I was in New York, so our paths did not cross in Gotham. But I allow that shilling his book may have been moderately more important than seeing me at the moment. This is actually Ted's second book of the year; his previous one, Wake Up, You're Liberal!: How We Can Take America Back from the Right makes the argument that most conservatives are actually closer to liberals than they suspect, in terms of values, but that they've been more or less brainwashed to see an "us vs. them" worldview versus the libs. I imagine hearing this from Ted Rall would be enough to make conservatives explode in rage, which is of course only proving his point. Anyway, it's a fascinating book, and not just because of my cameo appearance on page 53 (in which Ted references my theory of the "original sin" of both the Republicans and the Democrats, which you can see via Amazon here).
There, I think I've done enough ecumenical book pimping for the day.
Posted by john at October 26, 2004 10:48 AM
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.scalzi.com/mt2/mt-tb.cgi/2884
Comments
John Scalzi | October 26, 2004 01:11 PM
Old Man's War? Yeah, the author's a real hack. Also, I hear he smokes crack and sodomizes cats.
Thomas Nixon | October 26, 2004 01:17 PM
"Interior Desecrations" is currently ranked #44 on Amazon. Sheesh! I'd love to have a book ranked at 440.
Tom Nixon
John Scalzi | October 26, 2004 01:29 PM
Well, it's being plugged on Instapundit.com too. So it may be do to that plug more than this one.
Bob Sassone | October 26, 2004 01:38 PM
Hey, isn't that a typo on the cover? Isn't it the "Gallery of Regrettable Food," not Foods?! Is it just a mock-up of the cover or is that the final version?
John Scalzi | October 26, 2004 01:42 PM
My word, Bob. I do believe you're correct. I don't know if it's the final artwork or not.
Paul | October 26, 2004 11:45 PM
As much as I'd like to read that, I'm not giving Amazon.com my credit card number and personal billing information just to read an excerpt from somebody else's book that references you. Amazon.com can go blow. That's a porn website trick.
-Paul
Michael | October 27, 2004 10:49 AM
Paul and others,
I was able to view said page by simply supplying a valid email address.
Post a comment.
Comments are moderated to stop spam; if your comment goes into moderation, it may take a couple of hours to be released. Please read this for my comment moderation policies.Preview will not show paragraph breaks. Trust me, they're there.
The proprietor generally responds to commenters in kind. If you're polite, he'll be polite. If you're a jackass, he'll be a jackass. If you are ignorant, he may correct you.
When in doubt, read the comment thread rules.
Andrew Cory | October 26, 2004 12:58 PM
I’ve heard there’s this book coming out soon: “old man’s war”. Ever heard of it/care to comment on it?