Year: 2005

  • The Next Big Killer?

    Forgive me if I’ve been thinking about this a bit, but the reason I haven’t been blogging for the past 9 days is that I’ve been flattened by a flu-like malady. Believe me, next year, I’m getting the shot. I don’t care how many old ladies I have to trample.

    But it doesn’t seem so bad after reading up a bit on what could be in store for us. Now Forbes, the business magazine that bills itself as the Capitalist Tool, doesn’t seem to be high on the list of fear-mongering yellow journals. But this article is pretty damn scary.

    According to Michael Osterholm, the University of Minnesota epidemiologist, the avian flu now running around Asia could mutate into a virus that can be transmitted human to human, instead of only bird to human, as it seems to be now. If that happens, millions will die before any vaccine could be developed or distributed. Here’s more on that.

    So, what can we do in the meantime…other than pray? Well, we could mobilize on research and vaccine creation. But, as Vice President Cheney so aptly pointed out when the regular flu vaccine shortage came to light, “There’s no money in that.”

    If you’re wondering what this potential flu pandemic will be worth, though, the insurance companies have done some figuring for you. Here is that info, in case you want to start short selling your insurance stocks.

  • Freelancers' Blues

    We’re not sure how other editors operate, so much. From anecdotal evidence, it seems that most editors are less curious than they are controlling. They will pass up a great story idea because the writer is not quite right. An editor put in the position of explaining why he is not interested in a piece will frequently say, “This is not quite right for us.” Pressed on the issue, he will say, “Well, there is a certain ineffable quality to our magazine, and this doesn’t have that.”

    This is a dodge, of course. A wise editor separates subject from writer. Is the subject of interest to my readers? (Corollary—the reader doesn’t much care who the writer is, as long as it’s a good and interesting story. Sure, we all have our favorite writers, but it’s not like we won’t read a good piece if we don’t recognize the byline.) Secondarily, editors have to be honest about whether they like the style and skill of the writer. This is where editors turn into despicable and evasive people who will not be honest with the writer, and will probably go to hell when they die. (Hell, by the way, will be an Ikea on an eternal Saturday morning.)

    Writing is, on a microscopic level, a mathematical thing—it is either correct or it is not. But taken as a whole, a piece of writing is a highly subjective thing, open to worlds of interpretation and impression. There are world-class writers that we respect and admire, but whom we simply cannot read because of a weird style-aversion. At our own modest little bush-league level, we’re sure we have the same effect on other people (indeed, we have a bloated rejection file to prove it), and so we like to believe that there is always more to learn, more to do, to become better at the craft of writing (and editing).

    So anyway, a good editor with intentions of going to heaven at the end of his career, will tell a writer precisely why a suggested or submitted piece “is not quite right for us.” This, of course, takes a little bit of time and effort, but that is the job of the editor. Often, editors revert to an automatic position of “thanks but no thanks” for the simple reason that they have far too many great stories and far too few pages. They should say that. Or they may have run a similar story recently, or seen it in one of their competitor’s publications. They should say that. Or perhaps the editors have a strong sense that the story will not be of interest to their readers. They should say that. We don’t have a lot of patience for editors who cannot be more specific about their rejections. It is the job of the editor to instill that “ineffable quality” she seeks in everything she publishes—and believe us, she does this, quite often with an iron fist and none of the niceties. (The way they talk in their rejections makes you think that they expect to receive copy that is ready to publish without any tampering at all, and this is a cutting lie.) So an editor is ultimately trying to be nice when she says “not quite right for us.” A writer frequently wants to know: Is it me? Or is it the subject? This may seem needy on the writer’s part, but if the writer is a serious professional, it is useful to know. If it is the writer’s style or voice or lack of experience, then he can devote his valuable time to other magazines that might be a better fit. A writer does not like to hear the excuse from the editor that “I have 600 emails from other writers, it’s nothing personal.” Writing IS personal, if you take it seriously. Each writer must find a way to deal with rejection (there is a lot more of that than the other), but when we happen to go freelancing, we prefer no reply at all to a disingenuous one.

    (We have to say right now that we are far from blameless in any of this. We hope we are judged by our good intentions and our general professional sunniness. We honestly try, at all times, to use our powers for good. Two areas where we need improvement: Snappier replies and yet more sympathy for the bitter freelancer. If you get a form-letter rejection from The Rake, it is likely that you have done something to make us angry. Otherwise, we are late in replying because we are carefully composing a thoughtful response to your idea or submission, or it somehow slipped through the cracks. We don’t mind gentle reminders—but be warned that this is not normal.)

    It is certainly true that everyone today fancies himself or herself a writer, and if you work at a publication with any broad appeal at all, you will be inundated with hundreds of queries, pitches, and stories. We—and here, I am referring to me—have been singled out for public shaming here at the office because our email inbox accounts for almost a quarter of all available server memory. By far the vast majority of these unsolicited submissions are personal essays, stories, and anecdotes—precisely the kind of thing that doesn’t get published so much anymore by anyone. We tell people that, just about as diplomatically, honestly, and quickly as we can.

  • Dead Schmed

    Pete Hautman did it! In November, our favorite local mystery writer won the 2004 National Book Award. One of the nation’s highest literary honors, it was awarded for Godless, Hautman’s twelfth novel. (It is his fifth Young Adult title.) He tells us that he is now paid $2,000 a word. We think he is joking. We pray he is joking. With writer and poet Mary Logue, Hautman lives in Golden Valley in the winter, and near Lake Pepin in the summer. Pete has three brothers, all of whom are legendary wildlife painters immortalized (sort of) in the movie Fargo. He went to the same St. Louis Park elementary school as Al Franken and Joel and Ethan Coen. Coincidence?

    We are thrilled to present this wintry ghost tale from one of Minnesota’s literary treasures.—The Editors

    ***

    I smelled something burning. My imagination? It smelled like a cheap cigar. I tried to ignore it, to wipe it out by concentrating ever more fiercely on my computer screen.

    Struggling to meet the deadline for Brooked for Murder, the fourth novel in my fly-fishing-detective series, I had arrived at the point in the book where the plot had become so unlikely that it took a drink—several drinks—for me to proceed. So I was sitting in front of my computer drinking Scotch. I was drunk. But I was not smoking. The odor of burning tobacco persisted. I blinked. A faint haze seemed to have settled between my eyes and the screen. Something was definitely burning. I turned in my chair, not sure what to expect, and found my grandfather Smed perched on an invisible chair a few feet behind me.

    “Pete!” My name exploded from his lips in a yellow-tinged cloud.

    I sat with my chin hanging down over my Adam’s apple as the blur of combusted tobacco hit my sinuses, closing my nasal passages as effectively as a pair of vise grips.

    During his lifetime Smed had smoked a type of short, black, powerful cheroot that he’d had to order by mail because no reputable tobacco merchant would stock them for him. He would chew the mouth-end into a flat, black, tarry mess, occasionally trimming it back with a child’s blunt-ended scissors to allow smoke to pass through. Apparently, death had not inspired him to change brands.


    I willed the hallucination to disappear. Smed puffed away contentedly, his blind eye drifting.

    “What are you doing here?” I managed to ask.

    “Came to tell you a couple things, Pete. Things you should know.”

    My throat made a noise, the squeak of wet air being forced through a sphincter.

    Smed elevated his snow white eyebrows; one eye followed his brow up, the other remained fixed on me.

    “You think maybe I shoulda called first? I used to live here, y’know. Died here, too.”

    It was true. I had inherited my grandparents’ home, and was now living in it.

    “I got to tell you, Pete, Dink hates what you did with the living room. You didn’t like her wallpaper?”

    Dink was my grandmother’s name. She had been a small woman.

    “It was falling off the wall,” I said. I didn’t mention that it was butt-ugly as well—beige flowers on dirty pink, lighter where the pictures had hung.
    “Makes no difference to me. Just thought I’d pass it on. Women, can’t live with ’em when they’re alive, can’t live with ’em after, either. I’ve been twenty-five years dead and she still worries about my damn liver.” He puffed energetically for a few seconds, obscuring his features in a smoky haze. “Listen, Pete, some people think it won’t matter what you did with your life. That’s what I thought. I was wrong. Came to tell you that, Pete.”

    “This isn’t about wallpaper?”

    “It’s about your books,” he said. “Know how many books you’re going to write?”

    I shook my head.

    “Well, it’s not my place to tell you. But let me give you something to bite down on. You ready for this, Pete?”

    I wasn’t, but my head moved slowly up and down.

    “The day you die, not one of your books will be in print.”

    I swallowed, not sure I’d heard him correctly. Not sure I’d heard him at all. Not even sure he was even there.

    He held me impaled with his good eye while the other made a random exploration of the space above my head. You would think that, having shuffled off his mortal coil and all, Smed would manifest himself with two good eyes, but apparently it doesn’t work that way. Another logic might suggest that he would look exactly as he did when he passed on, but this did not hold to be true, either. When Smed had died he’d been a scrawny, wasted creature with several days’ growth of beard and a grotesquely swollen belly. Smed’s ghost, however, was cut from Smed’s image circa 1965 when he had been decidedly old, but not yet sick.

    I waited for him to give me the “but.” I mean, you just don’t drop a bomb like that on somebody without some reassuring follow-up. Something like, “But they’ll all be available on CD-ROM.” Or perhaps the suggestion that after my death my work would be revived as had that of Jim Thompson or Vincent Van Gogh—that, at least, would have taken the sting out of it. The ghost, however, was not delivering. He drew his scissors from the front pocket of his white short-sleeved shirt, clipped off the masticated butt of his cigar, let it drop to my office floor. I followed it with my eyes.

    When I looked up, he was gone. All that remained was the gummy black cigar butt, the news that my dead grandmother hated my new wallpaper, the pronouncement that I would die an unknown hack, and a roomful of ectoplasmic cigar smoke.

    ***

  • Lauren Greenfield's Girl Culture

    It’s never been a better time to be born a girl, and it’s never been quite so difficult to grow up female. Barbie may say, “we girls can do anything,” but what too many girls do is starve or cut themselves, have sex before they are ready to handle the consequences, or simply grow up a little too precociously, thanks to a culture that loves the female body a little too aggressively. Lauren Greenfield spent five years documenting American girlhood, capturing moments for a resulting exhibit of fifty-eight photographs (also published as a book) that are shocking and troubling, joyful and beautiful—sometimes all at once. (Read more on page 24 in our Straight Talk interview.) 165 13th Ave. NE, Minneapolis; 612-824-5500

  • Back to the Drawing Board at M.I. Hummel

    If you can’t see the image above, scroll down to the PDF and click on that sucker!

  • Jane Frees-Kluth

    It’s quite possible that you’ve used one of Jane Frees-Kluth’s public artworks, which live among us in parks, on streets, outside public buildings. Some people sip from her drinking fountain at a housing development in Richfield; others enjoy her colorful, fishlike whirligigs dancing in the fountain at the Hennepin County Government Center. This year she installed “Sibling Rivalry,” a bench featuring two figures in a tug-of-war, on the University Avenue spot where Minneapolis and St. Paul meet. Frees-Kluth insists that any commentary on the tale of our two cities was unintentional. “It was totally serendipitous. I was installing it and someone came out of the Day’s Inn restaurant and told me there used to be a marker there that said it was the joining place of the two cities,” she says.

    On a desert isle, of course, she would be both the creator and the audience for her work—but she chose to bring art-making tools that could also be employed for survival purposes and even rescue attempts. Luckily for us, she realized she was asking for too much when it came to “a foundry and a crew of native men.”

    1. With a hatchet, I could build my palm house, Swiss Family Robinson-style, and crack coconuts, make wood sculptures and furniture, cut my hair, and practice hatchet-throwing for self-defense.

    2. I could write, draw, and sketch millions of ideas, but I’d need pencils and paper. If you would be so kind as to throw in a bottle, I could send out a message.

    3. A magnifying glass to ignite a fire for light, warmth, and cooking. I’d also use it to sketch tiny bugs, do portraits of grains of sand, and burn patterns into fallen wood.

    4. With a 3D rendering machine, I could create a community of sculptures based on people from my life. I’d put question and comment cards in their hands and pull one every now and then to carry on “conversations.” It would give the illusion that I wasn’t so alone.

    5. Mylar, a zip sealer, and a large tank of helium. The hope that someone might see my giant homemade balloons and come rescue me would keep me inspired to create the most amazing balloons. I would have a sense of purpose. I would send letters in them.

  • Lauren Greenfield

    Starting in the mid-nineties, Lauren Greenfield embarked on a project to photograph a broad spectrum of modern American girlhood. She documented girls in states of deep imagination: a four-year-old playing princess, an anoxeric teen who only saw fat. She captured girls getting ready for the big dance, toiling at the fat farm, and primping at the strip club. These images were compiled in the book Girl Culture, published in 2002, and a selection of them is now a traveling exhibit, opening at the Minnesota Center for Photography on January 15 (see page 26).

    THE RAKE: Several of these photos were taken in Edina. What brought you to the Twin Cities?
    In 1998 I was working on a photo essay for the New York Times Magazine about being thirteen. [The Times nominated the project for a Pulitzer Prize.] My mission was to find out what it was like to be thirteen in Edina, Minnesota. In a way, the choice of the place was a little bit random. They were looking for a city that could show the influence of consumerism on kids, but without it being New York or Los Angeles. They wanted something that was more representative of America.

    One of your subjects is a young girl who wants to be a stripper. The kids you met in Edina seem pretty healthy by comparison.
    But they looked very precocious. They looked older than they were. That’s a result of direct marketing to kids. In the case of some of those girls, there’s an innocence, but also they are dressing, talking, and behaving in a way to get a reaction from the outside world. My first book, Fast Forward, is about how kids grow up quickly and how they are influenced by the media—specifically by the culture of materialism. This isn’t just some phenomenon happening to Hollywood kids, or “those crazy people in California.” The way that kids are in Beverly Hills is not that different from how they are in Edina. Kids in Edina are buying the same clothes as kids on the coasts. Kids in Edina were having their first outing to Starbucks with each other, without parents, or going to dinner at TGI Fridays. That kind of youth culture, where some of the signposts are chain stores or restaurants, is shared by kids all over the country.

    What kind of pressures do you see affecting girls?
    My passion for this project came from my own memories of growing up. I felt the pressures to have designer clothes, I was always on a diet, that kind of thing. But I think the bar has been raised for girls. Not only do they have to look good in jeans, but their stomach is showing because the jeans are low-riding and the top is a crop top, and so it’s not just about the clothes, but about the body. I think thirteen-year-olds have always been worried about clothes and fitting in, but it seems much more intense, and starts at a much younger age.

    You have a four-year-old son. Do you think it’s easier to be a boy than a girl?
    I think the pressures are slightly less for boys. They are encouraged more toward self-expression and creativity, while girls learn that their appearance makes a big difference. So they start putting some of their creative energy there. But I think that instead of things getting better for girls, they are getting worse for boys. Eating disorders are increasing for boysÑso is steroid abuse and plastic surgery.

    Have you revisited any of the subjects of your photos?
    I was doing a lecture in Florida, and Erin, who is the anorexic in the book, came to it. Then she was interviewed by the Orlando Sentinal about how her life was affected by being in the book. She said that it actually helped her recovery. Anorexics don’t know how to use their voices, she said, so they use their bodies instead. Being in the book gave her a voice. I’ve reconnected with several other girls from the book. And I think for the most part it’s just a moment in their life, and they forget about it and move on to boyfriends and school and everything else. It’s just a blip on the screen. But sometimes there’s a connection from the moment our paths cross, and we find each other again in different ways afterward.

  • Soundtrack to Mary

    I know who I am. I’m not looking for anything or anyone to define me. So why am I such a complete sucker for personality tests: the MMPI, Rorschach blots, Cosmopolitan’s “Hot Lover Quiz”? Recently, someone sent me a Web link to a particularly in-depth Jungian personality questionnaire. Naturally, I forwarded it to three people I respect and love, thinking we’d all take it and then share our results. As is common with these types of tests, after you’ve been “diagnosed” and “labeled,” they offer you a wide sampling of your fellow personality types. I looked at my friends’ results, clicked on their like-minded types, and was impressed to see what company they kept—all brainiacs and world leaders like Einstein, Mark Twain, Harriet Tubman, and Beethoven, for crap’s sake. When I clicked on my type, the first celebrities to pop up as my “personality matches” were John Goodman, Ice-T, Wilt Chamberlain, and Madonna. Suddenly, I felt a little fluffy. None of my “personality twins” had won a Pulitzer or written a great book. Their likenesses do not appear on currency. They were sitcom actors, nymphomaniacs, and one semi-successful cop hater from the late eighties. By contrast, the matches for one friend were so obscure that I couldn’t identify any of them by photo, which seemed to make them all the more important. Oh, and did I mention that each personality type had a cute archetypal name, e.g. “The Peacemaker,” “The Caregiver,” “The Explorer”? Then I saw mine. “The Diva.” Ouch. For the love of Celine Dion’s nail technician, please tell me this is a mistake. My friends are Gandhi and I’m Patti LaBelle. So the lesson here is that my self-perception is more than a little off. Maybe it’s time to embrace my inner pompous hack. I guess in my own deluded head, I will continue to think of myself as a sort of rockin’ Madeleine Albright. Truth be told, I would rather enjoy a cocktail with Lady Marmalade than, say, Golda Meir.

  • Rasa Sayang

    Out on Winnetka Avenue in Golden Valley, north of the spanking-new D’Amico, you run into a place where the bulbs in the street lights have burned out and no one seems to notice, because this is the quiet old suburbs. And that’s where you will find some mighty fine Malaysian food, even though the sign at Rasa Sayang also says “Chinese Food.” This being the quiet old suburbs, some people here just aren’t ready to eat something called a hot pot, which arrives with the Sterno ablaze, cooking your vegetables in a dark, spicy, deeply complex sauce. Sure, Malaysian cuisine has a Chinese influence, but it borrows from Thai and Indian, too, and thus does not resemble anything you know as chow mein. By offering up some of the best golden curries and butter-fried rotis in town, it makes the suburb of Golden Valley seem exceedingly well named. 28 Winnetka Ave. N., Golden Valley, 763-525-9876

  • Tonic of Uptown

    Uptown has more than its share of restaurants where you can ensconce yourself in swanky, towering booths, eat overpriced steak, pasta, and chocolaty desserts, and revel in the company of other beautiful people. But when you take menu items from restaurants around the Twin Cities, add a sparkler here and hybrid vegetable there, and then serve them under cool blue lighting, what do you get? Tonic of Uptown! While the rooftop patio at this uber-restaurant-cum-nightclub was all the rave this summer, it’s quite possible to stay warm throughout winter among the well-dressed honeys dancing upstairs. If dancing’s not your thing, we’ll bet that the early-bird special is. Choose from three salads, entrees, and desserts for twenty bucks (OK, $19.95). Add a wine pairing with each course for $10 more. Who says you can’t show your grandma what you’re doing in the city? 1400 W. Lake St., Minneapolis; 612-824-8898