Shock Totem review, things, reading

There’s a nice review for Mr. Shivers over at Shock Totem:

I will say that this is one of the strongest debuts I have read in some time. Bennett’s prose and use of language is fantastic. Poetic and downright lyrical, at times. I loved the details regarding the etiquette of hobo society and the starving beast that was America in the thirties. I was riveted the entire time, could not read fast enough, which is something I don’t often get to say.

The climax, while somewhat expected, was deftly handled and a good fit for the story. I suspect if Steinbeck had penned The Stand, it would have shared the same gritty feel as this novel. No higher praise than simply declaring Mr. Shivers a wonderful read.

If you are curious, yes, I still find it weird to read reviews of old work. It’s nice, but weird – it’s a dislocated feeling. (At the same time, I do wonder how much my blog readers need to see these things – the older the work, I assume, the less interest those already familiar with me will have in hearing thoughts on it. Would this be correct?)

Am doing things right now. Lots of things. Will tell you about things when things can be told about.

In the meantime, this is a great little essay about how sometimes self-interest and the public good dovetail, and when that happens you should put your shoulder to it and push as hard as you can:

Some have (on the listserv I belong to) argued that increasing literacy is social policy and not the province of business. I would argue (and I did) that in publishing in particular, you don’t have to separate the two. Our business is predicated on education – if fewer people are educated, then the market shrinks by definition. The more people who can read, the more books will be sold. Ignoring that, or saying that it’s not a concern of the business, is short-sighted. And we’re in this for the long game.