SteadyBlogging on Twitter (SteadyTweets?)

Wednesday, November 12, 2008

Fw: UChicago News for Alumni and Friends


Lots of interesting news out of the UofC: David Booth, Studs Terkel, Nate Silver, Raghuram Rajan, and of course Barack.  Just uncovered the Sept/Oct issue of the Chicago magazine, which has a photo of Barack, with the headline: "How UofC is Barack Obama?":

More on that forthcoming..


If you're having trouble viewing this email, you may see it online.

November 11, 2008

Top Stories

Testament of Booth

David Booth, MBA'71, and his family have given $300 million to the GSB. Recognizing the largest gift in University history, the GSB is now the Booth School of Business.

Sergey Kozmin

Historic election's local angle

For the University community, the 2008 presidential election was up close and personal. Read about U of C reactions.

Project Bamboo's latest shoots

The new multi-institutional project, based at Chicago, works to answer a big question: How can we advance arts and humanities research by developing shared technologies?


Chicago in the News


From the Editors

We invite members of the University of Chicago community to share your thoughts about former Law School lecturer Barack Obama's election as the 44th president of the United States, whether stories of your election-day experiences or thoughts about the election's impact, locally and globally.

Discuss the Election Results >>

CONNECT

Wednesday, Nov. 19

Harper Lecture

Christine Stansell and Deborah Nelson
No Hard Feelings: Legacies of Feminism & the Role of Emotion in American Public Life

6 p.m.
San Francisco


Wednesday, Dec. 3

Business Forecast 2009

In the first of an eight-city series, Chicago business faculty and alumni offer insights on the economic year ahead

11:30 a.m.
Chicago

View all events >>


PERSPECTIVE

Studs in 2008

In His Own Words

During Alumni Weekend 2004, legendary Chicago journalist Studs Terkel, PhB'32, JD'34, held forth in a conversation with WFMT's critic-at-large Andrew Patner, X'81.

Listen in >>
Read alumni appreciations >>


The University of Chicago Alumni & Friends | Make a gift | U of C Magazine

Update your contact info

Email Uchicago-magazine@uchicago.edu with any questions or comments.


Tuesday, November 11, 2008

draft: Thaler & Sunstein WSJ Op-Ed, "Disclosure Is the Best Kind Of Credit Regulation"


OPINION | AUGUST 13, 2008
Disclosure Is the Best Kind Of Credit Regulation
By RICHARD H. THALER and CASS R. SUNSTEIN

This appeared in the WSJ Op-Ed section three months ago (mid Aug). The authors are Richard Thaler and Cass
Sunstein.  Both are very highly regarded academic researchers, and both have ties to Barack Obama's economic thinking and policy.  

Thaler, an econ prof at the Univ of Chicago, is one of the founders of the field of behavioral economics, and is sometimes mentioned as a possible Nobel Prize winner (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Thaler).  Sunstein was for many years a law prof at the UofC--and hence a colleague (in fact a mentor to) Obama during Barack's tenure as a lecturer in the UofC law school.  Thaler and Sunstein recently published a semi-popular exposition of their work ("Nudge: Improving Decisions about Health, Wealth, and Happiness").  Unfort for the UofC, Sunstein recently moved to Harvard (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cass_R._Sunstein).  

Both Thaler and Sunstein have advised and influenced Obama on economics, thanks to Obama's time at the UofC, and even more so since Obama's primary economics advisor is Austan Goolsbee--an econ prof at the UofC who works with both Thaler and Sustein. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Austan_Goolsbee)

An excerpt from the op-ed:

The Federal Reserve Board recently issued proposed amendments to
Regulation Z, which governs Truth in Lending. According to the Fed,
the amendments "are intended to improve the effectiveness of the
disclosures consumers receive in connection with credit card accounts
and other revolving credit plans by ensuring that information is
provided in a timely manner and in a form that is readily
understandable."

The Fed's interest in this problem should be applauded, especially in
light of the consumer credit crisis. Improved transparency, rather
than draconian regulation, is the best response to the current
situation. However, the Fed can substantially improve its proposal by
requiring credit issuers to disclose relevant information
electronically in a standardized, machine-readable format. In one
simple stroke, new disclosure requirements would dramatically improve
the current situation.

More on this to come..

Monday, November 10, 2008

Fw: Michael Lewis book on financial crisis


Got this in an e-mail today...

This book deal was announced on Friday:
******
NON-FICTION: BUSINESS/INVESTING/FINANCE
MONEYBALL and THE BLIND SIDE author Michael Lewis's untitled behind-the-scenes story of a few men and women who foresaw the current economic disaster, tried to prevent it, but were overruled by the financial institutions with whom they worked, to Star Lawrence at Norton, in a major deal, by Al Zuckerman at Writers House (NA).


No doubt this will be a big book--esp since, instead of focusing on the villains, Lewis is going to look for heroes in all this mess.  Smart.

Friday, November 07, 2008

Obama's Sec of Treasury & "Transition Economic Advisory Board"

I've been spending some time the last couple days trying to catch up on what Obama's economic thinking is, and trying to get a better sense of what his administration's economic policies will be.  

Luckily, I'd saved the August 24 issue of the NYT Magazine, b/c the cover story was David Leonhardt's essay on "Obamanomics":

(Interestingly, it's currently the first Google hit for "obamnomics", with 2nd hit being the Amazon page for this book:

I'm still working through Leonhardt's essay.  My plan is to write up and post a short summary within the next week.  

In the meantime, I've also been following the beginnings of the transition.  Esp interesting, given the everything that's happened over the past year, and a fortiori over the past 2 months, is the speculation about who will be Obama's Secretary of Treasury.  Here are the names I've heard floated since Wednesday morning, in rough order of likelihood:
  • Larry Summers: Harvard economist, Sec Treasury under Clinton from 1999 to 2001 (he succeeded Robert Rubin, who he worked under while Rubin was Sec Treas from '95 to '99).  If and when he gets the job, I'll have to go into some details on his fascinating bio: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawrence_H._Summers
  • Tim Geithner: currently head of the NY Fed; interestingly, has spent his entire career in public service--including a stint under Summers and Rubin '99-'01.  From what I've read the past few years, he is well-respected on Wall Street, and he had been trying to draw the potential problems that derivatives (and specifically credit derivatives) could pose to the stability of the financial system--exactly what's playing out these days. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timothy_F._Geithner
  • Paul Volcker: most famously chairman of the Fed from 1979 to 1987.  Something of a legend: "Volcker's Fed is widely credited with ending the United Statesstagflation crisis of the 1970s by limiting the growth of the money supply, abandoning the previous policy of targeting interest rates. Inflation, which peaked at 13.5% in 1981, was successfully lowered to 3.2% by 1983."  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Volcker
There are two other names I also heard (Jon Corzine and Larry Fink), but those seem unlikely.

We very well could get an annoucement from Barack within the next few days..or even this afternoon.  Obama is in a meeting with his economic advisory team this morning, and then will have a press conference this afternoon (all in Chicago, which is interesting in and of itself..the world has been pretty much focused on Chicago since approximately 11pm EST Tuesday night..until Mr Obama goes to Washington, tomorrow I believe).

I was looking, unsuccessfully, for a list of who would be in that meeting this morning.  Another example of the power of social networks--I posted that to my facebook status, and got a reply within minutes:

Take a look at the list of who's on the "Transition Economic Advisory Board."   My initial thoughts:

  • a pretty damn accomplished, affluent and economically astute collection of people
  • some serious finance people: certainly Rubin, Volcker, Ferguson, Summers, Buffett; prob more who I am not that familiar with (like Daley and Donaldson)
  • quite a few Clinton era folk: Reich, Rubin and Summers of course, and also Tyson (I got to meet her briefly when she returned to Berkeley a couple years ago..I got the sense she'd returned to the US from London in part to get back on the political scene)
  • good to see Rubin and Reich are both on there: the internal Clinton Administration/Democratic debate of the '90s, which Obama seeks to synthesize (not something I was really aware of until reading Leonhardt's article)
  • more CEOs than I realized go onto something like this..
  • also didn't realize politicians get included; find those choices somewhat odd--Bonior, Granholm, Villaraigosa?  With the first two, seems like the auto industry will have a couple voices at the table..

Thursday, November 06, 2008

Grand New Party? David Brooks on Ross Douthat and Reihan Salam


So what does the Republican party do now?  David Brooks has been calling this for months (years?)--the implosion of the (his?) party.  I heard him discussing this on the radio yesterday.  He compared what he sees now with Britain's Conservative Party post-Thatcher--an ongoing reconstruction that has taken 15 years.  

(I don't know the history well--looks like the Conservatives held on to power til 1997 (Thatcher was PM til 1990, John Major '90-'97), when they were defeated by Labor in a landslide.  Labor continues to rule, with Gordon Brown having succeeded Tony Blair.)

Brooks published a column in June titled "The Sam's Club Agenda" (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/27/opinion/27brooks.html), presciently focused on this topic, and specifically on two young conservative writers: Ross Douthat and Reihan Salam.  Since then, their names keep popping up--I suppose b/c I use the "blue" sort media outlets that feature Brooks--the NYT, the Atlantic, NPR.  

Here is what Brooks had to say about Douthat and Salam:

"This pair has just come out with a book called 'Grand New Party: How Republicans Can Win the Working Class and Save the American Dream.'

There have been other outstanding books on how the G.O.P. can rediscover its soul (like 'Comeback' by David Frum), but if I could put one book on the desk of every Republican officeholder, 'Grand New Party' would be it. You can discount my praise because of my friendship with the authors, but this is the best single roadmap of where the party should and is likely to head.

Several years ago, Tim Pawlenty, the Minnesota governor, said the Republicans should be the party of Sam's Club, not the country club. This line is the animating spirit of 'Grand New Party.' Douthat and Salam argue that the Republicans rode to the majority because of support from the Reagan Democrats, and if the party has a future, it will be because it understands the dreams and tribulations of working-class Americans."


My understanding is that they recommend a greater attention to the economic plight of America's working class, with much much less attention on the conservative cultural agenda.  E.g., I just heard Salam on NPR arguing for a federalist ("local democracy") approach to abortion.

A random thought: this tack could be interpreted as taking seriously Thomas Frank's "What's the Matter with Kansas?" and the thinking behind Barack's one gaffe of the the campaign (the "they cling" comment in SF).

Here is the Amazon page of their book:

These guys have been writing a lot lately:



Wednesday, October 22, 2008

Q&A: What is LIBOR anyways?

If you've been reading the papers over the past month, you have most likely read about LIBOR--and probably even seen a graph of it year-to-date. That's because it's the indicator that "credit markets are frozen"--you've probably read or heard that phrase more often that you thought you ever would. (See for instance this article from

So what in the heck does all this mean?

I could just redirect you to the wikipedia article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LIBOR), which begins as follow:

"The London Interbank Offered Rate (or LIBOR, pronounced /ˈlaɪbɔr/) is a daily reference rate based on the interest rates at which banks offer to lend unsecured funds to other banks in the London wholesale money market (or interbank market)."

But let's break it down. First off, note that LIBOR is an acronym--London InterBank Offered Rate. Let's break that down letter by letter:

R for Rate: LIBOR is an interest rate, just like a mortgage rate or an interest rate on a CD you've got with a bank. With a mortgage rate, you've borrowed money, and you're paying that interest rate on the principal to whoever holds the mortgage (as we've learned over the past few months, that could in fact be holders of mortgage-backed securities all over the world, but let's not get into that now). With a CD, you've actually loaned your money to the bank, and they're paying you the interest rate on the amount you've invested (lent).

So who are the borrowers and lenders when it comes to LIBOR? It's an InterBank rate--it's an interest rate for interbank lending, i.e., for loans between banks. Why do banks lend to each other? Let's not get into that right now either.

What do we have left? An L and an O: L for London is something of an historical artifact--that the rate is set by the London wholesale money markets, i.e., the interbank lending market in London, b/c the British Banker's Association took the initiative to do so in 1984, and it subsequently became the benchmark rate for all kinds of finance-related stuff all over the world.

O for Offered means, as the wikipedia quote says, a measure of the rate at which banks *offer* to lend to the other banks. There is also LIBID, which is a bid rate instead of an offer rate--a measure of the rate at which banks are accepting deposits from other banks.

Why is it so important? LIBOR is a measure of banks' "cost of capital"--how much it costs them to raise funds to do business, or conversely how much they can earn on their excess cash. And it's also a measure of how much they trust that their fellow banks (their counterparties) will be able to repay these loans--when LIBOR spikes, as it has over the past month, it means that banks are very reluctant to lend to each other. It's clear why that is these days--banks are worried that any given bank that they lend to may not be around to repay the loan when it comes due (cf. Lehman, Bear, etc.)

That raises another point--how long are these loans for (more precisely, what is their maturity). There are actually multiple LIBOR rates--the most common ones are overnight, 1 month, 3 month, 6 month and 1 year. Currently bank are very reluctant to lend beyond the overnight maturity--they're worried about what could happen in the next month, the next 3 months, etc.

I'll close with one more reason why LIBOR is important, which is a bit more wonky. A striking feature of the Black-Scholes option pricing formula (that's for another day--see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black-Scholes) is that the interest rate that appears in it is the "risk-free rate," which is the rate at which the market participant can borrow and lend with no risk (of default). Sometimes this is assumed to be the US Treasury rate, but often banks who trade in derivatives markets use LIBOR as a proxy for the risk-free rate (see for example Section 4.1 of Hull, http://www.amazon.com/Options-Futures-Other-Derivatives-5th/dp/0130090565).

Hence, with LIBOR so crazy and volatile, trading desks have difficulty pricing and hedging their derivatives books..

Finally, here is the BBA's website, which has much more on LIBOR, including historical data: http://www.bba.org.uk/public/libor/

Friday, October 17, 2008

A couple newspaper notes: NYT/WSJ

I've saved a large number of newspaper articles over the past few months with the intention of blogging them, but very few have made it up. Esp with the finance-related ones, by the time I get around to going through the pile(s) of pulled-out pages I've stashed here and there around the apartment, the articles are too dated.

That said, I do still have a handful that I will get up..e.g., the good number references to Robert Moses that I've seen in the NYT over the past few months.

But for now wanted to do a short note with a couple observations about reading the paper (which is consuming a large proportion of my time these days, both in an absolute and relative sense (relative in the sense that it's "crowding out" book-reading..hence why I still have hundreds of pages left in "The Power Broker" and in "Death & Life of Great American Cities", even though I started both of them back at the beginning of the summer of Sam).

The two observations:

1) I am truly lamenting the demise of the stand-alone Metro and Sports sections in the print NYT. We had a system: Anj would take the front page, maybe Arts, maybe Business, which I'd catch up with in the following day. I'd start my day with the Sports and Metro--short and relatively non-heavy reading. And to tell the truth, I was spending more time with Metro over the past few months that Sports. A couple of the story lines that caught my attention over the summer:

(a) Brooklyn crime reports (e.g., the elevator assault in Crown Heights, the cabbie shot in the eye in Clinton Hill, the 9-year old shot and killed in the Weeksville Houses:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/11/nyregion/11taxi.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/07/nyregion/07arrest.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/19/nyregion/19assaults.html )

(b) Transit-related coverage, ranging from newsy stuff like the proposed MTA fare hike, to features like the one on the Franklin Avenue shuttle, to stuff in between, like the article about "In Decade of Unlimited Rides, MetroCard Has Transformed How City Travels"--which included a distribution!
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/24/nyregion/24shuttle.html
http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/02/29/all-about-the-mta-fare-increase/
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/16/nyregion/16metrocard.html

As of Oct 6, the Times folded Metro into the A section (and renamed it New York), and Sports into Business. So although the Metro stories are there, they're buried deep within the A section, and I don't get my hands on them til the following day...

2) Over the past couple weeks we're once again getting not only the print NYT delivered, but also the print WSJ. We were barely keeping up with the NYT (esp since I have a hard time recycling w/o at least flipping through)..now we've got a veritable avalanche of paper. I doubt we'll keep the WSJ beyond a short trial period, but it has been useful, as I've sorted out what, for me, is worth reading out of the Journal: choose one or two relevant articles out of Money & Investing; skip most of the front page section, but take a look at the op-ed pages; see if anything interesting in the Personal Journal; I skip Marketplace altogether.

Ironically I've found the op-ed pages to be what I spend the most time on, and even though it's often not stuff I agree with, they've often got stuff worth reading. E.g., right now I've got a healthy pile of pulled pages containing: "A Short Banking History of the US"; Gary Becker saying "We're Not Headed for a Depression"; a couple by their write Crovitz, one on VAR ("The 1% Panic") and one on JP Morgan ("He was more effective than Bernanke and Paulson combined"); a conservative economist writing on "Krugman Helped Us Understand Trade"; just yesterday, Karl Rove claiming "Obama Hasn't Closed the Sale", and their writer Daniel Henninger on "McCain's Katrina"; and today, William Poole on "Treasury Has No Authority to Coerce the Banks":

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122360636585322023.html
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122333679431409639.html

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122385689217827341.html
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122264844037784117.html
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122394373157731081.html
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122411909182439021.html
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122411036847938241.html
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122420321632343101.html


As you can see..way too much to keep up with..


Finally, one joint WSJ/NYT note: one reason I used to like getting the print WSJ was to read breakingviews on a daily basis, which used to get carried on the back page of the Money & Investing. But the WSJ dropped them in favor of their in-house "heard on the street", which is decent; but I still prefer breakingviews--which got picked up by the NYT, page 2 of Business!

Tuesday, October 07, 2008

Grossman followup: S&P in 1970s

One more note regarding Grossman's talk: he closed by saying it's embarrassing to hear commentators say that what's happening in the markets is unprecedented. As a case in point, he referred to the drop in the S&P in the mid-70s. He could find the exact numbers during his talk, but seems like he may have been referring to the period from Jan 1973 to Oct 1974, when the S&P dropped from a peak ~120 to a trough of 62: a drop of nearly 50%. Another remarkable fact: it didn't reach 120 again til July 1980. That was near the start of an unprecedented nearly 3-decade bull market in US equities.

Play around with http://finance.google.com/finance?q=INDEXSP:.INX ; but instead of looking at 1d or 1w, take a longer historical view.

Sanford Grossman / Deleveraging society

Last night got to listen to Sanford Grossman (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanford_J._Grossman)
speak on the current financial/economic situation. It wasn't anything
groundbreaking, if you've been reading the paper over the last 12
months, but nevertheless, it was good to hear it distilled into a
couple main themes. Namely, his distillation is that what's happening
is (1) deleveraging everywhere, and (2) the return of risk premia.


His concluding thought was that while deleveraging
is happening at the level of financial institutions and individuals,
"the last shoe to drop" is the leveraged US economy itself--we've been
relying on foreign investors buying our debt, in order to finance our
current account deficit (trade deficit + fiscal deficit)..I googled
"current account deficit deleveraging" for a writeup--first hit was
this article from last week which summarizes it pretty well:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-paul/deleveraging-society_b_130628.html

(Incidentally, 2nd hit was this "naked capitalism" post from late July,
which I think I'd actually skimmed at the time (maybe Krops pointed it
out to me?)...the rather worrisome title there is "Has deleveraging
even begun?"..I'm not sure whether he was trying to make the same point
as Grossman, but seems of a piece: http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2008/07/has-deleveraging-even-begun-not-for.html )

Grossman's point: while the Fed/Treasury can bailout overleveraged
financial institutions or homeowners, as they get squeezed in this
"systematic deleveraging" (a phrase I saw in another article this
morning), it can't grow the economy, which is what's necessary to
deleverage our whole society. That will take a real readjustment of
our savings & consumptions patters, reallocations of capital and
labor--the sign of the latter being high unemployment.

Wednesday, September 17, 2008

Alec Baldwin & "30 Rock"

Read this profile of Alec Baldwin in a recent New Yorker, which led me to this--it's brilliant:



Fw: Review-a-Day: Infinite Jest (96 Edition)

Amid all the chaos in the world of finance this week, I've still found myself thinking about David Foster Wallace quite a bit this week. I posted some links a couple days ago, which hopefully I'll incorporate into more of a post. In the meantime, this just landed in my inbox. It's not actually a review of "Infinite Jest", but rather a short account of DFW's literary career:

----- Forwarded Message ----
From: Powells.com Review-a-Day <reviews@email.powells.com>
To: Me
Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2008 2:05:41 AM
Subject: Review-a-Day: Infinite Jest (96 Edition)

Powells.com - Review-a-Day: Infinite Jest (96 Edition)
Powell's Books 800.878.7323 Wish List Your Account Help
Used Books Textbooks Technical Kids Rare DVDs
Browse Sections Bestsellers New Arrivals Sale eBooks Gift Cards
add reviews@email.powells.com to your address book
Review-a-Day Wednesday, September 17, 2008
Los Angeles Times

Books Discussed in This Review

Infinite Jest (96 Edition)
by David Foster Wallace
Infinite Jest (96 Edition)

List Price $18.95
Your Price $10.00
(Used, Trade Paper)
Add to Cart
Add to Wish List



Your Price $
(, )
Add to Cart
Add to Wish List



Your Price $
(, )
Add to Cart
Add to Wish List



Your Price $
(, )
Add to Cart
Add to Wish List


More reviews from Los Angeles Times
Infinite Jest (96 Edition)
by David Foster Wallace

David Foster Wallace: Idealistic skeptic
A Review by David L. Ulin

Post a comment about this review on the Powells.com blog

I didn't know David Foster Wallace all that well. We met a couple of times, and once, I interviewed him onstage at the Writers Guild Theater in Beverly Hills. I asked him on a few occasions if he'd review for the paper, but he said he'd had a bad experience and had sworn off reviewing for good. We shared a literary agent.

In the lead-up to the 2004 presidential election, we spent an hour or so on the phone one afternoon discussing politics, which he followed with the rabid fascination of someone who, despite all better judgment, believed the process mattered, that somehow, somewhere, there was a candidate who might see us through.

I never got a chance to discuss the current presidential race with Wallace; no one did. That's our loss, for Wallace, who reportedly hanged himself Friday night at age 46, was an astute observer, sharp and clear-eyed, idealistic and skeptical all at once.

His 2000 Rolling Stone profile of John McCain -- reissued in June as the slim, stand-alone volume McCain's Promise: Aboard the Straight Talk Express With John McCain and a Whole Bunch of Actual Reporters, Thinking About Hope -- offers a vivid example of this perspective. Wallace sees the campaign mechanism for what it is while still recognizing something fundamentally different, real even, about the candidate, who eight years ago was in some sense the Barack Obama of his time. Here we have a hallmark of Wallace's writing, his unwillingness to take anything at face value, the penetrating focus of his thought.

An auspicious debut

Wallace emerged out of nowhere with the publication of his first novel, The Broom of the System, in 1987. He was 25, a graduate of Amherst and the master of fine arts program at the University of Arizona, and along with a handful of other then-emerging writers (William T. Vollmann, Jonathan Franzen), he helped transform American fiction in a fundamental way.

The 1980s, after all, was the era of "Dirty Realism," of small-bore, naturalistic stories in the style of Raymond Carver and Richard Ford. For such writers, literature was essentially domestic, but Wallace blew that approach away. Exuberant, picaresque, cynical but also heartfelt, The Broom of the System hit the literary circulation system like a 450-page burst of amphetamine.

It wasn't a perfect book; like much of Wallace's early fiction, it wore its inspirations -- especially that of Thomas Pynchon -- on its sleeve.

But what The Broom of the System did was to offer up a set of possibilities, to remind us that the novel could be expansive, that it was possible to push the boundaries, to create a larger social landscape in fiction, that it wasn't wrong to be ambitious, to use literature to get at the unknowable heart of the world.

This was a promise Wallace would bring to fruition with the 1996 novel Infinite Jest, which at 1,079 pages, including 100 pages of footnotes, was a clear bid to create that mythical monster, the Great American Novel, albeit entirely on his own terms. That he may or may not have believed in such a monster only added to the achievement; this was a writer who clearly saw through the elusiveness, the futility, of his own striving and yet continued to strive all the same.

In the wake of Infinite Jest, the book's gimmicks -- the footnotes and acronyms, the arch tone and irony -- drew the most attention, not least because they were quickly popularized by writers such as Dave Eggers and Steve Almond, who adopted them as an aesthetic stance.

But in fact, it was Wallace's odd sense of double vision that most defined his sensibility. He was a humanist who could not help but see both sides of the story, who imagined himself into the gray middle areas of his writing.

This is the key to his McCain piece, or, for that matter, his best-known work of nonfiction, the novella-length A Supposedly Fun Thing I'll Never Do Again, originally published in Harper's as "Shipping Out. "

Here, Wallace spent a week on a cruise ship, critiquing the infantilization of the journey, the way that, on board, every wish or demand was instantly fulfilled. Yet even as he pinpointed every idiotic detail, he found himself drawn in.

The power of the piece lies in its explication of that process, although that has less to do with Wallace lowering his defenses than amping up his empathy. However contrived or phony the experience, he felt the longing of his fellow passengers, their need to step outside their own complacency, the complacency of daily life.

The irony, of course, is that the cruise was all about complacency, but for Wallace, irony was not enough. His 1993 essay "E Unibus Pluram" makes that idea explicit, taking on the irony-izing effect of television on American culture, while rejecting irony as a literary force.

That's an idea to which he would return in his writing, piercing the absurdities of contemporary culture yet also seeking something deeper, the core connection to which literature aspires. This is the ambiguity, the complexity, that transfigures his best writing, although clearly, these were issues he could not resolve.

Thoughtful advice

In 2005, Wallace gave a commencement address at Kenyon College in Ohio that has been widely circulated in classrooms and on the Internet. In that speech, he told the graduating seniors: "[I]t is extremely difficult to stay alert and attentive, instead of getting hypnotized by the constant monologue inside your own head." Up until this week, I would have said that those were words to live by, but in Wallace's case, perhaps, the opposite was true.

Rather than a repudiation, this just makes his work seem all the more urgent, especially the promise that "learning how to think really means learning how to exercise some control over how and what you think. It means being conscious and aware enough to choose what you pay attention to and to choose how you construct meaning from experience. Because if you cannot exercise this kind of choice in adult life, you will be totally hosed. "

David L. Ulin is book editor of The Times.

Read more about this book

Three Decades of Quality Writing and Criticism

The National Book Critics Circle, founded in 1974, is a non-profit organization consisting of more than 850 active book reviewers who are interested in honoring quality writing and communicating with one another about common concerns. To learn about how to join, click here.


Copyright 2008 Powells.com, 2720 NW 29th Avenue, Portland, OR 97210

Tuesday, September 16, 2008

David Foster Wallace - links

I'll have to compose a proper essay of some sort..but for now, some links that will go into that:

(if you don't know why:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/14/books/14wallace.html)

his book on infinity:
http://www.amazon.com/Everything-More-Compact-Infinity-Discoveries/dp/0393326292

his book on hip hop:
http://www.amazon.com/McCains-Promise-Straight-Reporters-Thinking/dp/0316040533/

his book about McCain:
http://www.amazon.com/McCains-Promise-Straight-Reporters-Thinking/dp/0316040533/

An essay about him that includes the passage from "Infinite Jest" that has stuck w/ me for more than a decade:
http://everything2.com/title/David%2520Foster%2520Wallace

"It now lately sometimes seemed like a kind of black miracle to me that people could actually care deeply about a subject or pursuit, and could go on caring this way for years on end. Could dedicate their entire lives to it. It seemed admirable and at the same time pathetic. We are all dying to give our lives away to something, maybe. God or Satan, politics or grammar, topology or philately - the object seemed incidental to this will to give on self away, utterly. To games or needles, to some other person. Something pathetic about it. A flight-from in the form of a plunging-into. Flight from exactly what?"

Monday, September 15, 2008

On Wall St

That is where I am right now, sitting on the steps at the corner of Wall and Nassau, across from the imposing NYSE.

Glad that lunch got scheduled for today down here, as it got me to come through here today, on this singular day in the history of Wall St.

Though (and this too reminds me of Grant's "Trouble with Prosperity"), the epicenter of today's events aren't literally on Wall St, but across in WFC and in midtown.

Overheard a guy sitting next to me on the steps, remark to his friend, no doubt in the context of a conversation about current events, that things have changed--case in point, that there are many more tourists here on the actual Street than there are workers.

But this is why New York. To be here, where its happening, as its happening. Or where it happened. Last Thursday, seeing the two towers of light from our rooftop, and spontaneously taking the 4-5 into lower Manhattan, to walk around the WTC site, to walk underneath those towers of light.

At the tip of the island at the center of the world. Or at least it was, for the 20th century.

Now that I belatedly have mobile email, look for some mobile blogging such ad this. I think being away from a full desktop & browser might be good for actually writing.
Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile

Thursday, September 04, 2008

new Lauryn Hill?

Up late, watching the US Open (Nadal v Mardy Fish, men's quarters) and on the web.

At some point while in SF, I came across the "group blog" Pop+Politics. And now that I look at the site, I vaguely remember how--I must have read or heard something about the founder.

I hadn't visited the website in a while, but have been still getting their e-mail newsletter/updates..and today happened to scroll through it and saw this reference to a new Lauryn track. It's one of those YouTube non-videos:



Monday, September 01, 2008

A few NYT articles about Velib

Following up on my previous post about Velib, here are a few NYT articles that I've saved with the intention to post:

(1) An Travel section article from Oct '07, soon after the system's debut:
TRAVEL | October 14, 2007
Journeys | Paris: Finding Liberte on Two Wheels
By ERIC RAYMAN
Paris’s self-service bicycle docking stations make it easy even for fresh-off-the-plane Americans to explore the city in a way that you can’t by foot, by Métro or by taxi.

(2) A news article that ran this summer, about the success of the first year of Velib:
INTERNATIONAL / EUROPE | July 13, 2008
A New Fashion Catches On in Paris: Cheap Bicycle Rentals
By STEVEN ERLANGER
A year after the introduction of the sturdy gray bicycles known as Vélib’s, other major cities, including American ones, are exploring similar projects.

(3) Another one that also ran in July, about how Paris is considering a similar program w/ electric cars!
INTERNATIONAL / EUROPE | July 29, 2008
After Bike-Sharing Success, Paris Considers Electric Cars
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
The new car-sharing program, expected to begin in late 2009 or early 2010, would bring a fleet of 4,000 electric cars and would be run by the city of Paris.

I will have to write up an account of our own (overwhelmingly positive) experience with Velib...perhaps I'll put it off until I finally upload our photos from that trip, since we've got a good number of Velib photos among those.

Fw: T.A. StreetBeat: "NYC Considers Paris Style Bike-Sharing"


About a year ago I joined NYC "Transportation Alternatives" (T.A.)--a group that promotes exactly that.  We got a nice T-shirt and the very useful NYC bike map out of the deal, and I also get their e-mail newsletter. 

I've been planning a post about Paris's Velib bike-rental system, which we sampled during our trip there in late May, and about how NYC and SF could use such systems (we did see a station of the DC system in Dupont Circle when we were there a few weeks ago).  

I'll eventually draft such a post; in the meantime, here's an entry from a recent T.A. newsletter with some encouraging news on that front:

NYC Considers Paris Style Bike-Sharing

Bike Share in Action

In Paris, Vélib and other public transportation options connect seamlessly to expand and improve the city's larger transit network

On July 9th, the NYC DOT issued a Request for Expressions of Interest (RFEI) to bring a bike share program to New York City. The announcement came days before the one-year anniversary of Paris' Vélib bike share program, and amidst a bike-share craze spreading through cities as far reaching as Washington D.C., Chicago, Montreal and Barcelona. What all of these urban centers have in common is the realization that public-use bicycles can help municipalities reduce auto-use and switch many trips to more efficient modes.

When implemented correctly, bike share holds enormous potential to add a low-cost, sustainable and healthy transportation option, expand the reach and flexibility of the existing public transportation system, discourage the use of single occupancy vehicles, free up space on overcrowded subways and buses and enable a network of bicycle transit in a dense urban environment, all of which go hand-in-glove with Mayor Bloomberg's PlaNYC.

In fact, New York City is perfect for bike share because it has a rapidly expanding on-street bike network, the density and mixed land use necessary to generate sufficient ridership and relatively flat terrain. As the City collects expressions of interest from bike share operators around the world, Transportation Alternatives, along with the newly formed NYC Bike Share Coalition, will be working hard to advocate for bike share characteristics that have best predicted success in cities around the world:

  • 1 bike per 200-400 residents
  • A dense network of stations (1 every 1000 feet or a 5-10 minute walk)
  • Connectivity to where people need to go
  • Connectivity to other modes of public transportation
  • Strong anti-theft technology
  • Strong Mayoral leadership and inter-agency cooperation in planning and implementation
Please contact bike@transalt.org if you are interested in supporting T.A.'s advocacy efforts to bring a world-class bike share to NYC. And check out the Streetfilm about Vélib, arguably the world's most successful bike share program to date.




Sunday, August 31, 2008

Two from the Sunday NYT Business section

Two articles from last Sunday's Business section which are worth reading:

First:
BUSINESS / YOUR MONEY | August 24, 2008
Economic View: Finding the Mess Behind the Mess
By TYLER COWEN
The fundamental problem in the American economy is that, for years, people treated rising asset prices as a substitute for personal savings.

This one repeats a lot of themes you may already be tired of reading about, regarding the current economic/financial mess we find ourselves in. But it brings to the fore an underlying reason for this mess--the tagline above, about how Americans have used rising asset prices (stocks and then houses) as a substitute for savings. In fact, let me quote the first part of this article at length:

A BURSTING real estate bubble set off the Japanese recession of the 1990s, which deepened as ailing banks languished. It took Japan’s economy more than a decade to resume steady, noticeable growth.

Will this happen to the United States? Probably not, but we may face a protracted process of recovery, stretching longer than the two or so years usually required to climb out of recession.

Behind every financial crisis there is usually a crisis in the real economy, based in some underlying structural deficiency. Even if the financial crisis is bottoming out, sooner or later the real crisis must be faced.

The fundamental problem in the American economy is that, for years, people treated rising asset prices as a substitute for personal savings. The thinking went something like this: As long as your home’s value rose every year, you didn’t have to set aside so much from your paycheck. If your stocks went up, too, so much the better; don’t forget that the Dow Jones industrial average stood in the 800 range in 1982 and seemed to rise almost nonstop for many years.

Of course, asset prices haven’t been rising much lately, so many people will need more savings for their retirement or for possible emergencies.

The need to save more sharpens a number of interrelated secondary problems. First, America is aging. More people than ever are entering the years when they stop saving and start spending their nest eggs. That means the transition to higher-than-expected savings may be drawn out and painful.

The second problem is that the American economy is enduring a credit crisis, with many banks trying to raise more capital and make fewer loans. Savings are good for the economy when they lead to investment, but there is no guarantee that financial institutions will be allocating capital efficiently.

The third problem is that lower consumer spending will require the American economy to make some shifts. That may mean fewer Starbucks and fewer new homes but more tractor production for export to foreign markets. In the long run, shifting some consumption to investment is probably beneficial to the economy; in the short run it means job losses and costly readjustments.

In addition, there are still excess homes on the market, and housing prices need to fall further. Of course, such price declines can make banks less solvent and thus worsen the credit crisis. And politicians would like to moderate this fall in prices, again prolonging the adjustment process.

And also a paragraph near the end:

Emerging from the current slowdown isn’t just a matter of political will or smart central banking. If the recipe for success requires smooth adjustment into new growth sectors, more savings from disposable income, cleaning up the housing mess, well-functioning energy markets, and more effective financial intermediation — all in the right combinations and in the right sequences — neither the government nor the Federal Reserve can control this process. The Fed can add regulatory and monetary clarity, but there isn’t any magic bullet. Beware of anyone who tells you there is.

The Japanese failed to break out of their recession quickly because they didn’t promptly close down or clean up their problem banks. So far, the Fed and other regulators show no signs of making this mistake; they have been vigilant in resolving crises as they occur. But that’s not enough to guarantee a successful transition. The American economy will be tested for its deftness — and the test will be difficult precisely because there isn’t a single enemy on which to focus.



Note that the essay begins with allusions to Japan's experience in the 1990s: a long, protracted recession which followed a real estate bubble. That is a comparison that a lot of people are making these days. It's unlikely that the US will also go through a "lost decade" of economic stagnation..but it's not impossible.

In fact, the second article I wanted to point out indicates we've got a ways to go, by looking at Merced, CA as a sort of "canary in the coal mine" for the rest of the nation's housing market:

BUSINESS | August 24, 2008
In the Central Valley, the Ruins of the Housing Bust
By DAVID STREITFELD
The experience of Merced, Calif., suggests that recovery from the national real estate debacle will be painful and protracted.

If you don't have the time, patience, or inclination to read that lengthy article, take a look at least at the accompanying graphics.