So first, anyone who hasn't should read this brilliant blog post by Shannon Hale about book evaluation v. self evaluation.

(Hale's blog is one of my favorites about books, and that particular post brilliantly articulates a bunch of things I've been trying to think about, but I kept finding my brain unequal to the task, and it's such a relief when someone says things you've been trying to think, which is also one of the things I enjoy so much about Hale's books.)

I've written many hundreds of book reviews for Booklist Magazine, and I've also reviewed books elsewhere. I stand by most of those reviews, but Hale's blog post made me think about the times I've been dead wrong.

All reviewers are sometimes wrong, of course--but in the spirit of Hale's post, I thought I'd post a couple re-evaluations.


1. Hale points out in her blog post that contemporary reviewers often place way too much emphasis on whether they "like" a book--as if the only thing a book can do is be likable. (One often hears, for instance, that Catcher in the Rye is a bad book because Holden isn't likable. Teenagers may have a hard time liking Holden, because the things that annoy other people about us are the things that annoy us about other people, but this isn't an indication that the book is bad; it is an indication that the book is good.) Roger Ebert taught me that the question is not whether the thing was fun; the question is whether the thing accomplished what it wanted to accomplish, and whether that thing was worth accomplishing.

Anyway, I have totally made this mistake in my reviewing career. The example that stands out most is Chuck Palahniuk. I don't think Chuck Palahniuk's books are finally very good, but I totally missed what is good (or at least seductive) about them, because I find his stories (except for Fight Club and to an extent Invisible Monsters) so disgustingly gratuitous. I was so overwhelmed with not-liking-it that I did not give his books their due. Instead, I should have acknowledged that they accomplish the thing they set out to accomplish, although I still believe that thing is not worth accomplishing.

2. Sometimes, you react negatively to something for stupid personal reasons that you don't have enough self-awareness to recognize. There are many examples of this in my life, but the one that stands out is TTYL by Lauren Myracle. I reviewed that book tepidly when it came out, because I felt like it was gimmicky and didn't really sound like kids IMing.

But in fact it did sound like kids IMing, which we know because a gajillion young people love that book and its sequels. And in fact, so do I--years later, I still find myself thinking about TTYL and the girls in it--the ways drama comes from within and without, and the weird mix of fragility and strength in teen friendships.

The reason I felt like it didn't sound like actual teenagers IMing is because it didn't sound like me IMing, and I was not yet accustomed to the idea that my way of experiencing the internet might be dated. I fancied myself such an expert in online communication that I felt I could be very high and mighty about emoticons.

Okay. That was embarrassing, but also kinda cathartic. Anyone else want to share book re-evaluations?

Here's to the transformative role books can play in our lives--even (perhaps especially) the ones we initially think we don't like.





(Except The Fountainhead. It just sucks.)

Yesterday was my 32nd birthday. Getting old is one of those things--like marriage and childbirth and standing in line at the grocery store--that happens to everyone but feels particularly significant when it is happening to you, which makes the triteness of the feelings involved sort of maddening. So, yeah, for the last week, even though I know birthdays are meaningless constructions and etc., I was feeling all those totally cliche feelings associated with not-being-as-young-as-you-used-to-be, and worrying that the best of it was behind me, and that I had failed some really important test, and yeah. You know. Or if you don't, you will.

But then, my actual birthday was amazingly fantastic. First, I got up and watched Liverpool FC's 2005 come-from-behind victory against AC Milan.

Then I read for a long time. (I finished this book, which was excellent and is an obvious hint.)

Then Sarah and I went to see Inglorious Basterds, which I liked a lot.

Then I got a pretty amazing birthday present: Tickets to see Inter Milan play Udinese IN ITALY in October. (Those are Italian soccer teams.)

Then Hank and the nerdfighters made me this, which was amazingly nice of them and made me cry and everything. (Also: ZE FRANK WISHED ME A HAPPY BIRTHDAY.)



Thank you nerdfighters, and thank you Hank, and thank you Internet--for making my birthday so nice, and also for reminding me what awesome looks like.

Okay, so here's how this works. First, play the video. Then, click on the answer you think is right, and it will lead you to a series of more questions and answers about my books. (That is, unless you have somehow turned off youtube annotations, in which case it won't work at all. But it should work.)

Truth or Fail is an internet video gameshow that Hank and I have created. If you like this episode, you can check out many more at Truth or Fail Headquarters.

There's a story on the New York Times web site today about the Brooklyn Public Library's response to book challenges. The story mentions my book Looking for Alaska in passing:

"The 11 written objections to Brooklyn’s collection include complaints about “Beloved,” by Toni Morrison (sexual content), and “Looking for Alaska,” by John Green (obscenity and denigration of religion)."

First, let me just say what a pleasure it is to appear in the same sentence as Nobel laureate Toni Morrison. Anyway, the coolest thing about the story is that the Times reprints the complaint letters and the library's responses.

Everyone who has to deal with challenges should take the time to page through those documents, because I think the library's response is pitch perfect. They don't try to argue that Alaska isn't obscene (although it isn't) or that it doesn't denigrate religion (although it doesn't*); instead they just point out that lots of people feel the book has literary value and that libraries aren't in the business of being parents. Amen.

Also, this complaint letter about Beloved is totally worth reading because it begins, "It said stuff about [word blacked out] cows," and it is fun to imagine what that word might be.



*This of course I find particularly galling, obviously. But it's not the library's job to defend the religious cred of the book, or to defend it against charges of obscenity. That's my job.

(I remain interested in the question of whether and how made up people become real.)

S-s-s-something from the comments:

K writes, "Does Paige have to do with The Sequel? Or the book you are writing with David Levithan? Even if she doesn't, can we have more information on those projects? It doesn't seem like you talk about what you are doing with them like you talked about what went into Paper Towns."

K, thanks for reminding me that before this blog was about boring publishing crap, and before it was about inexplicable dj biographies, it was about books. Specifically, my books. Here's a rundown on what I'm writing these days:

1. I wrote a book with David Levithan that comes out in April of next year called Will Grayson, Will Grayson. David and I have been working on WGWG since early 2005, right around the time that my first book came out.

I feel a smidge uncomfortable talking about the book without David since he wrote half of it, but basically: I wrote the odd-numbered chapters and he wrote the even-numbered chapters, and the book is about two different guys who are both named Will Grayson whose lives intertwine for a brief moment in the middle of the book.

2. Over the last few months, I've also written a long sci-fi-ish story called "This Is Not Tom," which is available free on the Internet provided that you are really, really, really good at solving riddles. A lot of readers have asked me if I will publish TINT as a book. I will not. For one thing, it doesn't belong to me, really--my brother and Alexander Basalyga make the riddles, and many of the ideas in the story are taken from a series of eccentric emails I received from a young woman. Also, TINT was intended to be free.

TINT fans: The last six chapters will be posted in six consecutive weeks beginning August 15th. (You can join the fan community at thisisnotforums.com.)

3. I've also been working on two new books--one is indeed called The Sequel. But it generally takes me 2-3 years to finish a book. When I started talking about Paper Towns during Brotherhood 2.0, I'd already been working on it for more than a year. I haven't been working on The Sequel (or the other thing) quite as long yet, so I still feel totally unqualified to discuss it, since I have no idea what happens and why and etc.

4. Paige Railstone has nothing to do with The Sequel. More on her later.

Also, I'm starting to work on revisions of the Paper Towns screenplay.

So that's the writing news from around here, K. What are y'all working on?

Paige Railstone (July 31st 1987 - ) is a popular underground dj and budding singer-songwriter who currently resides full-time in hotels around the world. (When asked by a reporter recently if she was American, Railstone said, “Sometimes. Sometimes I am Canadian, sometimes European, sometimes African, sometimes Asian. In this world, it is not enough to be who you are. You must also be where you are.”)


Childhood

Railstone was born and raised in a small agrarian community in rural South Dakota. Her father, Daniel Railstone, worked as a tax preparer until his death in 1994, when Paige was seven. Paige’s mother, Rhonda, continues to live in South Dakota with her second husband, Paul, a loan officer. Paige has one sibling, Joseph, who was born in 1983 and has long worked as Railstone’s manager and handler.

Paige Railstone rarely consents to interviews (and when she does, her answers are notoriously vague), but when asked if her childhood was happy, Railstone has answered, “All happy families are alike, but every unhappy family is unhappy in its own way.”


DJ Career

Railstone was home-schooled with Joey until she was 14. On September 13, 2001, they ran away together, hitchhiking to New York City. After several days of homelessness, they found bunks in a semi-converted warehouse they shared with several dozen other young castabouts and runaways in Brooklyn. The warehouse was managed by a shady conglomerate of Estonian immigrants. Joey worked for a brief time for an Estonian-run moving company and Paige started spinning records at warehouse house parties. Little is known about Railstone’s development as a dj at this time, but by January of 2002, the Railstones were in Tallinn, Estonia, and Paige was establishing herself as a major dj in the underground Estonian club scene.

The details of the Railstones’ move to Tallinn are still unclear, although there are persistent rumors that Joey, known for partying, had gotten into debt with some kind of unsavory characters. It is known that they were accompanied on the trip from New York to Tallinn by Andrus Hillar, an Estonian talent manager who continues to book gigs for DJ Railstone.

Railstone’s postgenre dj selections and instinctual understanding of crowd behavior made her a natural at dj. She soon became known for mashing up lyric-driven songs with the thumping bass and drums then popular in the eastern European club scene. The Railstone siblings were soon traveling to other former Soviet republics, and then to Budapest and finally Berlin, where Railstone famously spun for 12 hours in a warehouse in Prenzlauer Berg. Several more famous djs had time slots after Railstone, but all of them ceded their time to her.

Years later, Railstone would be asked when she felt she had made it. “I don’t feel like that. But after the show in Prenzlauer Berg, when I was 17, we went back to the hotel that morning and I slept for like three years and then we got up and it was pretty late in the afternoon, and Andrus took us to this Asian restaurant to get some noodles and on the walk there, I saw a sticker on a lamppost that said, “DJ RAILSTONE SAVES LIVES,” which seemed, you know, promising.”


Recent Notoriety

Because Railstone rarely played big clubs and was always hyperprotective of her privacy (so much so that she usually refuses to allow her face to be visible in the dj booth), Railstone managed to make a living as a dj while remaining almost entirely unknown—that is, until a series of tracks she’d put together called Off the Railstone found its way onto file-sharing servers in mid-2009.

Off the Railstone, a collection of mash-ups Railstone is said to have dashed off in a hotel room in Bratislava during two weeks of nonstop work, spread virally through the Internet, forcing Paige out of obscurity. On her 22nd birthday, Railstone and several dedicated fans launched a web site and several facebook fan pages. Railstone also maintains a twitter account. She is currently taking a break from touring, although she often spins at parties and clubs unannounced. What Railstone has called her “post-locational disposition” makes it hard for fans to keep track of her, although she updates her tumblr photogblog periodically with clues as to her current location.

In early August of 2009, Railstone made an announcement on her official twitter. “Working on my own stuff (she said vaguely).”


Facts about Paige Railstone

She is 5’ 7” and has dark brown hair and blue eyes.

She initially became popular when she was 17, in 2003.

Despite being an internet music phenomenon, she has never had a Top 40 hit.

She sometimes plays rock, sometimes country, sometimes alternative, and sometimes hip hop.

She is sometimes funny, but not a comedian.

Paige has piercings in her nose, lip, and ears. She also has two tattoos.

Paige is not married, but she is widely rumored to be dating art rocker and vlogger Alan Lastufka.

Paige does not play sports.

She is not religious.

She is right-handed.

Although she does not perform in public as a musician, she is believed to play the guitar, the keyboard, and the piano.

Paige has never been on a television show or in a movie.

Paige appeals widely to teenagers.

Paige is the younger of two children.

She wears make-up.

Paige is multi-talented.

Paige's political affiliations are irrelevant.

Paige is not a lead singer. (Not YET, at least.)

Paige is not graceful.

Paige is said to be straightedge—she does not smoke, drink, or do drugs.


If you have other questions about Paige Railstone, leave them in comments.


Links

Paige Railstone's web site

Paige Railstone's twitter

Paige Railsone's official Facebook fan page

A fan-created Facebook fan page

Paige Railstone's photoblog