Wednesday, October 15, 2003
ALCS 2003
The Red Sox lost yesterday. Will they win their "must-win game" this afternoon (Game 6)? The game starts in a few minutes. Work? Really, how can I?
Tuesday, October 14, 2003
Game 5
The Red Sox and Yankees are now tied in their best-of-seven Americal League Championship Series. They have each won two games a piece. Now it's come down to who can win two games.
It's hard not to just spout "Go SOX!" every time I'm here writing, but that's how I feel (Pedro's behavior notwithstanding). I just want to feel that winning feeling. Like when New England won the Super Bowl, or when BU won the NCAA (hockey).
The game today is at 4PM. I'm at work, and all I can think about is the game.
It's hard not to just spout "Go SOX!" every time I'm here writing, but that's how I feel (Pedro's behavior notwithstanding). I just want to feel that winning feeling. Like when New England won the Super Bowl, or when BU won the NCAA (hockey).
The game today is at 4PM. I'm at work, and all I can think about is the game.
Sunday, October 12, 2003
Tweet
An old friend of mine, Ninju Bohra, called me this afternoon. He grew up in Chicaco, and wondered how I was holding up with the Red Sox. Not well, especially after yesterday's loss, and now tonight's rain-out.
Saturday, October 11, 2003
Tweet
Jenn and I tried to get World Series tickets last night. We were unsuccessful.
The Red Sox will pit Pedro Martínez against Roger Clemens this afternoon, in what should be a pivotal Game 3. The atmosphere in Greater Boston and in New England has been filled with anticipation. And so has my humble home.
The Red Sox will pit Pedro Martínez against Roger Clemens this afternoon, in what should be a pivotal Game 3. The atmosphere in Greater Boston and in New England has been filled with anticipation. And so has my humble home.
Tuesday, October 7, 2003
Sox v. A's
The Red Sox won! The Red Sox WON! We're into the American League Championships against the New York Yankees. Red Sox WON!
Sunday, October 5, 2003
Sox v. A's
In a bizarre two game home-stand, the Red Sox have won two games to tie the Oakland A's in the Americal League Divisional Series. Each team has now won two games each, and the fifth and deciding game will be tomorrow night, 8PM EDT.
It's a heady atmosphere here in Red Sox nation, a state of mind that I haven't visited in quite some time. The Sox were down two games going into Saturday evening's game, and things looked bleak. My prayer for the Sox on Saturday: don't get swept. After the win Saturday night, my prayer for Sunday was get the win and tie the series. The Sox did just that, their big bats coming alive at just the right moments.
Now the teams are flying to Oakland, California for the deciding game. And I'm praying for victory. The New York Yankees are awaiting the winner. I hope we can be those winners.
It's a heady atmosphere here in Red Sox nation, a state of mind that I haven't visited in quite some time. The Sox were down two games going into Saturday evening's game, and things looked bleak. My prayer for the Sox on Saturday: don't get swept. After the win Saturday night, my prayer for Sunday was get the win and tie the series. The Sox did just that, their big bats coming alive at just the right moments.
Now the teams are flying to Oakland, California for the deciding game. And I'm praying for victory. The New York Yankees are awaiting the winner. I hope we can be those winners.
Friday, October 3, 2003
On Writing
Last weekend, I read Stephen King's book On Writing. It was marvelous.
I read Stephen King books in the 1980s. I read all his classics: Carrie, Salems' Lot, Cujo, The Stand, The Shining, Different Seasons. They were a thrill to read. It was hard to believe that such huge books could be read so fast. However, when I graduated from high school, I stopped reading King. I moved on, I suppose. In a memorable line from a foreword/introduction to one of his books, he stated that his books are the equivalent of a cheeseburger and fries. I eventually found other sumptuous meals.
Just a few weeks ago, a colleague at work said he read Hearts of Atlantis by King. On a lark, I bought a copy of that book, plus On Writing, which I have always been curious about.
On Writing contains a surprisingly moving and inspirational memoir about his life growing up. Sketches and images of his life are drawn quickly, many of which made me laugh out loud. He recounts the precious moment when he first wrote a story (at the age of six), to when the paperback rights were sold for Carrie, which marked the start of his success.
From there, he moves into the work of writing. His words carry authority, but he keeps things light. He relates writing and story telling to archaeology: you're digging up a fossil, which represents the story. Your success in capturing the story depends on how you lift it up out of the ground. Your tools are words, the English language, and grammar. The story is already there. You have to write write write, and eventually it will come out. (Dennis Lehane, who wrote Mystic River, echoed this concept in a recent on-line chat.)
The final part on On Writing deals with the horrible accident that nearly killed Stephen King in 1999. In a gripping narrative, I found myself in his spell. The moment of impact. The panic of emergency care. The pain of surgery. The road to recovery. The return to writing.
Stephen King was awarded the 2003 National Book Foundation's award for "distinguished contribution". Harold Bloom, a professor at Yale and author of The Western Canon wrote that this was a mistake, and proceeded to a scathing critique of King's work. Bloom's theme: "commercial success is not literary success".
I agree with Mr. Bloom somewhat. Just because a book is a commercial success doesn't mean that it's literary. Last month I finished Empire Falls by Richard Russo, and it was far more "literary" than any Stephen King book I have ever read. If a Stephen King book is a cheeseburger at a local diner, then Empire Falls is the best three-course dinner in the finest restaurant you can think of.
But I also disagree with Mr. Bloom's point that "King ... is an immensely inadequate writer." I disagree wholeheartedly. Maybe Mr. King doesn't belong in the same pantheon as "the great writers" (whomever they may be; Bloom suggests four: Pynchon, Roth, DeLillo, and McCarthy). But he belongs in the ball park. King is a more than an adequate writer. On Writing proves that.
I read Stephen King books in the 1980s. I read all his classics: Carrie, Salems' Lot, Cujo, The Stand, The Shining, Different Seasons. They were a thrill to read. It was hard to believe that such huge books could be read so fast. However, when I graduated from high school, I stopped reading King. I moved on, I suppose. In a memorable line from a foreword/introduction to one of his books, he stated that his books are the equivalent of a cheeseburger and fries. I eventually found other sumptuous meals.
Just a few weeks ago, a colleague at work said he read Hearts of Atlantis by King. On a lark, I bought a copy of that book, plus On Writing, which I have always been curious about.
On Writing contains a surprisingly moving and inspirational memoir about his life growing up. Sketches and images of his life are drawn quickly, many of which made me laugh out loud. He recounts the precious moment when he first wrote a story (at the age of six), to when the paperback rights were sold for Carrie, which marked the start of his success.
From there, he moves into the work of writing. His words carry authority, but he keeps things light. He relates writing and story telling to archaeology: you're digging up a fossil, which represents the story. Your success in capturing the story depends on how you lift it up out of the ground. Your tools are words, the English language, and grammar. The story is already there. You have to write write write, and eventually it will come out. (Dennis Lehane, who wrote Mystic River, echoed this concept in a recent on-line chat.)
The final part on On Writing deals with the horrible accident that nearly killed Stephen King in 1999. In a gripping narrative, I found myself in his spell. The moment of impact. The panic of emergency care. The pain of surgery. The road to recovery. The return to writing.
Stephen King was awarded the 2003 National Book Foundation's award for "distinguished contribution". Harold Bloom, a professor at Yale and author of The Western Canon wrote that this was a mistake, and proceeded to a scathing critique of King's work. Bloom's theme: "commercial success is not literary success".
I agree with Mr. Bloom somewhat. Just because a book is a commercial success doesn't mean that it's literary. Last month I finished Empire Falls by Richard Russo, and it was far more "literary" than any Stephen King book I have ever read. If a Stephen King book is a cheeseburger at a local diner, then Empire Falls is the best three-course dinner in the finest restaurant you can think of.
But I also disagree with Mr. Bloom's point that "King ... is an immensely inadequate writer." I disagree wholeheartedly. Maybe Mr. King doesn't belong in the same pantheon as "the great writers" (whomever they may be; Bloom suggests four: Pynchon, Roth, DeLillo, and McCarthy). But he belongs in the ball park. King is a more than an adequate writer. On Writing proves that.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
