Emily Douglas

At the end of last year, my good friend, the voracious bookworm @shorterstory, published her “Year in Books.” As devoted readers know, I was astonished by how much good reading she managed to pack into 365 days. I decided then and there to document my own year in books—but not primarily to rack up a score! For the past few years I’d been reading in a scattered, almost half-hearted way: I read all the time, but seldom had a book keep me up at night, or that I was desperate to take out on the subway. My reading was undirected: I read whatever books I was given as presents, books I spotted on friends’ bookshelves, whatever caught my eye at book grab.

So in 2012 I joined the Brooklyn Public Library and became acquainted with the miracle of books on hold; I shopped more purposely at second-hand stores (thanks to my friend Logan, I went to the Book Barn for the first time!), and I started a list of books to read. I’m nowhere near the length of Ester’s list, but that doesn’t matter: I’ve gotten completely lost in reading again, in a way I remember from childhood.

So, forthwith, my Year In Books!

Jeffrey Eugenides, The Marriage Plot

Ugh. What a book. Eugenides is an incredibly gifted stylist, and this book was appropriately absorbing to read. But the characters were caricatures of themselves and the intellectual grappling ultimately felt empty (and not only because the only significant female character had absolutely zero to offer in that arena). And it was really anti-feminist. That’s an aesthetic as well as intellectual category in my book. A bad start to 2012!

Mindy Kaling, Is Everyone Hanging Out Without Me?

So fun! Funnier and more assured and revealing that Bossypants, which is also great. My only quibble: Kaling is clearly not a fellow sufferer of FOMO, as title suggests. Which is fine—her obvious confidence and lack of self-apology is really a joy to be exposed to (buy this book for tweens in your life. And for you). But it was slightly inaccurate packaging!

Sigrid Nuñez, The Last of Her Kind [second time]

I love this troubling, unsettling, gorgeously written novel so much. Re-reading it made me realize that what I often dislike about novels is how conventional and typecast the characters are. Another problem: writers with a shallow understanding of characters’ psyche. Nuñez’s characters are nothing like that, and she renders them with extraordinary depth and fidelity.

Jodi Kantor, The Obamas

Good and very readable! Kantor is basically telling you the story of Obama’s first term through the lens of his wife, marriage, and family, so you get a second layer on all the policy and politics. Political non-fiction for women? Well, kind of, I guess, but in a way that’s a valid form in its own right—not just the facts, ma’am, but some background on how the emotional and psychosocial cauldron out of which decisions and headlines arose. Applauded! 

Sara Dubow, Ourselves Unborn: A History of the Fetus in Modern America

Terrifically fascinating history by a fluent writer. Any book that positions the fetus at the center of inquiry is going to raise problems for feminists, some of which I wrote about more in my review, for the Women’s Review of Books. But the legal, medical, and social history is gripping.

Chad Harbach, The Art of Fielding

I’d lump this near Eugenides: main female character even weaker than in The Marriage Plot, but in this case the book is partially redeemed by an absorbing story with a sweetness and good-naturedness among the male characters.

Edith Wharton, Age of Innocence

Loved. What a master! So many lines that made me laugh out loud. Takeaway: Turn-of-the-century New Yorkers were just as superficial and possibly much more so than we are now. Looking forward to more Wharton in 2013.

Alison Bechdel, Are You My Mother?

For part of 2012 I was hoping I’d get the chance to review this book. It didn’t work out, or hasn’t yet, but I have lots of thoughts about it. For now, suffice to say, when I mention it to people they start waving their arms and exclaiming, either because they love it so much or because it’s driven them so crazy. I think I might be in the driven crazy camp. Someday I hope to write about it at more length!

Michele Kort and Audrey Bilger, eds., Here Come the Brides

An anthology of personal essays by lesbians and queer women on marrying, or not. One of the essays is mine! Fodder for mulling if you are thinking of entering into a lesbian marriage yourself, or are straight and want to think anew about your hetero privilege!

Sarah Schulman, Gentrification of the Mind

Lots to think about here, especially if you’re a New Yorker, transplanted or native. More of my thoughts in this review I did for the LA Review of Books.

Anne Lamott, Some Assembly Required

I liked this (see more on my Anne Lamott thoughts below). Didn’t quite rivet me, but I did re-read parts of it on and off for months after first reading—so maybe it was riveting! 

Cheryl Strayed, Wild

I didn’t love this as much as everyone else did. The skillfulness of the writing left some to be desired, and I never felt like I could quite, quite, get inside Strayed’s head, despite all the disclosures about her past. Why did she make all those bad decisions? Why don’t I recognize my bad decisions and existential doubt in hers? Hmm.

Janet Malcolm, The Journalist and the Murderer

Okay, I admit it: I had trouble keeping the characters straight for the entire duration of this book. I did! That may have blunted the impact of this book on me. I think that over the years Malcolm’s basic arguments about journalism and representation of the Other have seeped into my consciousness, so I didn’t find it really deeply compelling until the very end, when she kind of sums it all up and puts her cards on the table (I’ve also read a lot of Malcolm and totally love her but also find her ethically problematic). But glad I read it!

Vivian Gornick, Fierce Attachments

Frustrating but good.

Allegra Goodman, Kaaterskill Falls [second time]

Lovely writer. Both gentle with and hard on her characters. A story that I often think back on! 

Terry Castle, The Professor: A Sentimental Education

Wow, what a writer. I loved being in her mind for awhile. But it ultimately left me cold. There’s something bloodless about Castle’s writing here, which is probably intentional (and masterfully done).

Karen Thompson Walker, The Age of Miracles

An interesting conceit—Earth goes off its 24-hour sun rotation, and days and nights stretch longer and longer and longer—that I often find myself thinking about as we start grappling more seriously with climate change. (And it’s extraordinary when you are really forced to think about how deeply embedded that diurnal cycle is.) But I wasn’t wild about any of the characters.

Jeanette Winterson, Why Be Happy When You Can Be Normal

Excellent as everyone says!

T Cooper, Some of the Parts

Liked it! The writing wasn’t always up to the job, but I loved the weird, offbeat, odd characters. Again, a novel populated with not the usual suspects—a real treat.

Jessica Valenti, Why Have Kids?

Provocative and interesting, a humane take on the many choices women who are, and aren’t, mothers make. Occasioned this very thoughtful review.

Anne Tyler, Digging to America [fourth or fifth time]

I love this book so much. Tyler is such an astute observer. And she loves her characters. I’ve read a lot of her over the years, and it sometimes feels as though she’s reprising familiar themes, but this novel is so fresh and so alive.

Cheryl Strayed, Tiny Beautiful Things

Now here’s the Strayed book of 2012 that I liked! The wonderful writing that Wild lacked, plus some serious emotional insightfulness.

…and finishing 2012 with the following open on my bedside shelf:

Francisco Goldman, Say Her Name

Utterly ravished and astonished; completely absorbed. The writing is out of this world. Every metaphor, every sentence! And the ideas are enthralling. Easily my fiction favorite of the year, possibly overall favorite too.

Andrew Solomon, Far From the Tree

So far, great. Intimidating to pick up but very absorbing. Smart social criticism, some lovely and generous ways of parsing philosophical quandaries, plus lots to learn.

Anne Lamott, Hope, Thanks, Wow

Need to let this one settle more—like yoga, I don’t think it can be analyzed with my usual tools. I rediscovered Anne Lamott in 2012—I was basically in love with her in my early twenties, and devoured everything I could find by her—but couldn’t dig into the spirituality stuff that she’s published more recently. But this year I started following her on Twitter, and she’s so funny, warm, and great! And politically sharp! So far, though there are some class assumptions in Hope, Thanks, Wow that frustrate, I’m enjoying it.

Unfinished in 2012:

Vivian Gornick, The Situation and the Story

I started this when I thought I might be writing the Are You My Mother? review. I put it down when that didn’t come together, but I’ve really enjoyed this book, and look forward to reading more. Gornick’s insights about “the persona” were going to be very valuable! I had the chance to meet Gornick at a seminar for our interns this year—we talked about Bechdel’s memoir—and that was really cool.

Amor Towles, Rules of Civility

Unconvincing characters. 

Michelle Alexander, The New Jim Crow

Gave this to my father for Christmas, started reading it while still at home, and then had to leave one chapter in. Already absolutely fascinating, so much I should know but don’t. I thought having read a bunch of op-eds by Alexander I already grasped the main underpinnings of her argument…boy was I wrong.

Alexandra Fuller, Cocktail Hour Under the Tree of Forgetfulness

I loved Fuller’s previous memoir, Don’t Let’s Go to the Dogs Tonight. My guess about what happened here is that Fuller gave her mother, who figures prominently and none to positively in the first memoir, a chance to vindicate herself in this go-round. It’s a shame—the mother character in Don’t Let’s Go is so much deeper, if more difficult, and ultimately more sympathetic. But do read Don’t Let’s Go.

Linda Hirshmann, Victory: The Triumphant Gay Revolution

Widely praised, but somehow, I couldn’t really get into it. I wasn’t wild about Hirshmann’s rhetorical devices, and the history didn’t really come alive for me. Maybe I’ll try again. 

Hilary Mantel, Bringing Up the Bodies

Due back to the library before I could finish. I will try again in 2013! But this time I’ll start with Wolf Hall.

There are others I’m forgetting. But this year in reading has been really fun. Thank you, wonderful authors, and thank you friends for all your suggestions! If you have suggestions for 2013 reads, leave me a note!

I got back from San Francisco last week (it was a better return than the last time, when leaving that city full of blossoms to come back to New York prompted anxiety dreams on the plane home). Aside from spending quality time catching up with my SF friends and family, hiking on Mount Tam, eating in the Mission, and paying a visit to my brother’s bilingual kindergarten class (every bit as adorable as it sounds), I also, oh right, went to ONA12, the Online News Association’s annual conference.

As I’m getting my notes from the conference together I thought it would be useful if I pulled out some of my key takeaways. Here they are! (Before I start: I’m not sure I agree with, or buy, all of what I have below—but it’s all food for thought.)

1. From Matt Thompson and Justin Ellis’s presentation “Journey to the Business Side” (very worth attending, if you ever get the chance): Editorial innovation is outpacing business-side innovation in digital media.  But publishers should look to their editorial strengths to find value for businesses. “Your editorial side is your business side.” How can publishers parlay their editorial edge into something that will solve a problem for business partners?
2. From a session on “Design Is How It Works,” with David Wright of NPR: Your competitive set is not just publishers: it also includes technology companies that may display your content better than you do. People have expectations of how online services work and will expect a similar performance from your site. Craft an amazing experience for people and they will pay for it—instead of trying to pull value out of every user (by slapping ad units everywhere they can fit).
3. Also from David Wright: Everyone in the news organization needs to share responsibility for managing risk and being creative. Just let that one settle for awhile…
4. I went to a couple of career-oriented panels and was really feeling some of the advice. Which included:
1. Sometimes you have to let your life happen, and your career follow, instead of the other way around;
2. Find the place that is going to let you play and let you become a leader, not just do your part of the ladder well;
3. If you have a steady job, know what you want from that job;
4. Be okay with always being out of date. Know enough to speak fluently and intelligently; you don’t have to be an expert in everything.
5. Mentorship goes both ways: find younger mentors that can show you how young people work and consume the news
5. If you ever have a chance to participate in a presentation by ProPublica’s Jennifer LaFleur on data journalism, do it. Not only is it incredibly practical, it’s inspiring and sheds light on how a lot of really extraordinary journalism projects have come together. She relayed so much of value, but here’s one small thing I loved: Use a standard naming convention for files!  No more “Final.doc” “Final FINAL.doc” “SuperMasterFinal…”  I’ve been fighting this battle with my writers ever since I’ve been editing…thank you for making me feel less crazy, Jennifer!
6. From a session on “The Tablet Touch”: readers are more attuned to and more willing to use complex functionality in a tablet than they are on a webpage. Content is the star in tablets—there is/should be less cluttering up the experience—so readers are more patient and willing to experiment.
7. From Amy Webb’s Tech Trends for 2012 (and I really wish we had spent more time on this one): Video is a 2012 tech trend—ad revenue is high, so everyone’s trying it out—but it’s also a tough nut to crack. Amy thinks  “content is not a video strategy,” and that ultimately the publisher that figures out how to distribute and display video and offer more second-screen experiences, integrated into the first screen, will win. She thinks HuffPostLive is leading in this regard: not because of their content, but because of their delivery system. Exactly what your video strategy should be if you’re not going to build a hub like HuffPostLive was not something I could get out of Amy when I talked to her after the session. But if we figure it out this year, I’ll let you know!

Last thing—Neiman Lab “print-tweeted” the conference; the result is well worth checking out.

I read this:

“It’s not our job to litigate it in the paper,” Mr. Sifton said. “We need to state what each side says.”

Mr. Bronner agreed. “Both sides have become very angry and very suspicious about the other,” he said. “The purpose of this story was to step back and look at both sides, to lay it out.” While he agreed that there was “no known evidence of in-person voter fraud,” and that could have been included in this story, “I don’t think that’s the core issue here.”

And thought (not to flatter myself) basically this:

This is a pretty remarkable response. I don’t have a problem with giving both sides some air time, but by far the main focus of the voter access battle is stringent photo ID laws — and the only real justification for stringent photo ID laws is that it stops in-person voter fraud. (That is, the kind of fraud where people show up in person at a polling place and pretend to be someone they aren’t. Even in theory, photo ID laws can’t stop any other kind of fraud.) This means that the existence of in-person voter fraud is exactly the core issue.

Not only did the Guardian create an awesome visualization of LGBT rights by state in the US, they also explained how they did it!

Gathering data for a project like this is a challenge because of how much variation exists between states and whether the precedent originated as a definition in the constitution, as an amendment to it, or was determined by the courts. Using employment as an example, state definitions vary to include some combination of public and/or private sector jobs and whether sexual orientation and/or gender identity was included. To complicate matters further, local laws and federal regulations also extend additional or partial rights.

For clarity, I narrowed the complexity to look at rights offered statewide…

Using a quick graphical sketching tool named Processing I created this crude sketch to see if a circle could be used to show regions and if a visual pattern emerged. The rough sketch using five of the seven final seven categories seemed to show that this could work - or it seemed that way if you squinted a bit. A second iteration of this seemed to capture my attention and show that a visual design without a map could be feasible.

I’ll admit, when I first saw this visualization, I thought it was useful for research purposes but wouldn’t go viral, because it’s not immediately grasp-able on first glance. But it appears I’m wrong! Lots of people seemed to find it not only useful but powerful—and I wonder if that’s at least in part because there is a grasp-able editorial message in there after all: if you look at it for more than a second, you realize that the Northeast is the most protective of gay rights. In other words, this visualization not only enables readers to access basic information relatively unmediated, and go straight to whatever information they most care about, it also packs a punch.  It also solves the map problem, in which a limited number of pieces of information can pertain to each state. 

Because the Guardian is kicking ass here in the States, I think it’s only fair to observe that they carved up the US in a way that I don’t think most Americans would—what American considers Maryland the Northeast?

(This will be the first in an ongoing series on how people read content in the age of omnivorous, multiplatform consumption.)

I’ve noticed that I have a thing about reading New Yorker pieces online. I don’t want to do it if they’re going to appear in print. I get the print magazine late relative to the rest of the country—apparently, much of Brooklyn does—and basically always want to hold out, and always do. I have a fetishistic relationship with the New Yorker’s print magazine. I really, really, really like to touch and hold and look at it. I crave reading in particular fonts (a compulsion that was even more intense in childhood; I think it was a variant on synesthesia) and the New Yorker’s font is one I crave.

Anyway, the point of this is that today, I noticed what looked like a really funny New Yorker piece slinging around Twitter, and I wanted to read it! Then, as per usual, I stopped myself. It’s Wednesday, I told myself, my New Yorker might be in my mailbox! It was! But then—the piece wasn’t in there! Some other piece was the Shouts & Murmurs! How disappointing!

All this is to say: I think the New Yorker should make it really obvious when a piece is in the print (/tablet) edition. When I first started web editing, I felt it was very important not to distinguish print content from web content, that it was all one magazine and those distinctions were artificial and damaging. I feel differently now. I’m happy to read Close Read on newyorker.com and I’m happy to read Judith Thurman’s piece on Alison Bechdel in print. I just want to know which is which!