Not a lot of thinking anywhere.../I'm a Subscriber!

Not a lot of thinking anywhere...
I was reading the Guardian's blog, and it would appear Jordan's book is actually outselling the whole booker shortlist. To complement the article, and I suppose drive home the point, they include a picture of Jordan beside Samuel Beckett. Something as absurd as much of the fiction written by Backett (although maybe Jordan's fiction is quite absurd too. I'm prepared to believe it - I'm just not prepared to read it).
I don't want to get high and mighty, but I don't think Beckett's on the Booker shortlist (but would love the headline: Beckett Bags Booker!). So, apart from being shorthand for "Literary writing," I'm not entirely sure what the photograph is doing. Why didn't they show a picture of one, some or all of the nominated writers? Perhaps, as the title suggests, because no one would know who they were.
"The Death of the Reader" - a sombre thought. No one cares for artistic writing anymore.
Possibly true.
It's all about shallow, wallowing-in-ignorance, celebrity culture.
Probably true.
The 'icon' replacing real art.
It's disturbing, I'd agree.
Making easy-to-recognise images for us all to try and form our own selves in.
Oh dear.
And there's two serious symptoms of it today: Jordan outselling the whole Booker shortlist, and the use of Beckett as a shorthand, easy-to-recognise, 'icon' of 'serious' writing.
Yikes!


--- ---

I'm a Subscriber!
And, in the interests of fulfilling my goal for this blog (considered thoughts, informed opinions), I have two subscriptions to help me on my way. I plan for another day to discuss the issue of media and opinion. Very few of my opinions are 'new' on the subject, so one must spend time to give the subject it's proper due (Media Critic Tailors Arguments To Subject Shocker! Read Pages 3,5,6,7-13 and 38).
My lovely wife gave me a subscription to Prospect magazine for our anniversary. I then went online and subscribed to the Economist. This, I feel gives me informed debate from two sides - the 'Liberal' of Prospect, with the 'Right' of the Economist. Although, the Economist seems to me only 'Right' because it believes in the market. On other considerations, I say they are the closest to neutral (objective?) that I've found in the International media. Maybe I'll change my mind. If I do, you'll read about it here, unless you're not bothered, in which case you'll never read about it at all.
So, any day now I will write a proper post, that's a post and not a promise to write a post. Think about it, I know I will.