[lit-ideas] Re: Thursday book review -- long
- From: "Phil Enns" <phil.enns@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2006 12:21:50 -0400
Thanks to Paul Stone for the review of David Gilmour's _Back on
Tuesday_. Like Paul, my first exposure to Gilmour was through 'Gilmour:
On the Arts', a program I watched regularly. Also like Paul, I didn't
watch the show because I agreed with Gilmour but because he made
thinking about the arts more interesting. Unlike Paul, I haven't read
anything by Gilmour.
I enjoyed reading Paul's discussion of Gilmour's style because I see him
regularly in our neighbourhood. I don't know if he lives here but I see
him wandering around at all times of the day. And I mean wandering
around. He is a tall man with dishevelled hair, no concern for fashion
and rarely seems to be going any particular place. He also seems
terribly fragile, as if saying 'boo' would be a traumatic experience. I
have had two or three waiting-in-a-line-for-coffee conversations with
him and he is quite pleasant. This is in contrast to Daniel Richler,
another Canadian literary figure who I see occasionally, who tries
terribly hard to be a 'personality' and so ends up being an insufferable
jerk. Richler literally bumped into me once and glared at me. I
suppose I was at fault for not sensing an approaching 'personality'.
I mention these two writers because Gilmour doesn't seem in person to be
the same as his television, or perhaps literary, persona while Richler
is very much the same. A question for those who know such things: To
what degree do writers fit the character of their literary works?
Again, thanks to Paul and I think I might have a go at some of Gilmour's
books.
Sincerely,
Phil Enns
Toronto, ON
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
Other related posts:
