"Stupak vs. Amis/Hitchens, The Unbelievably True Story"

Ann Sterzinger to thread.

I thought "Polish Bob" overplayed his hand a bit, the confrontations weren't nearly as ballistic as he leads you to anticipate.

that guy is an asshole.

"Wonderful anecdote"

are you crazy? that guy is a dick and most definatly a liar to boot (if we count gross exaggeration as lying). so he can remember "the word for word question, thanks to [his] ability to speak with perfect fluency while drunk" (it seems incredibly convoluted) and yet he can't remember any responses? anyway, what's supposed to be funny about that confrontation? the guy accuses him of getting torn apart in recent reviews and, what? Amis seems to accept this and claims that it has, indeed, caused him some sleepless nights? Amis seems about as gracious as one could be in the circumstances, especially if the guy was as drunk as he claims to be. everyone else in the room probably just thought he was the obligatory annoying arseholefor that particular reading.

I thought the anecdote was a hoot, especially the bit with Hitchens. If it was a scene in Kingsley Amis' "Lucky Jim," we'd all love it.

Was "Polish Bob" a jerk? Absolutely. But Amis is a big boy with lots of cash and a good literary reputation to insulate him. And his dust-up with Julian Barnes was more stressful, I imagine, than having a jilted fan ask him a rude question.

"I was really drunk, but my dancing was so awesome ..."

all three of them are assholes.

lauren otm

Hoo, much as I'd love to go off half-cocked I gots nothing to say till I actually have time to read the whole thing... my best bedmate had a run-in with Shtick Hitchens a while back and wrote it up for the Reader.

If I saw it in Kingsley Amis, I would not love it. Count me out.

I have not yet read it anyway: I must.

I am reading Yellow Dog. I think it's probably Amis's worst, and that is no mean charge, against an artist so badly, recurrently flawed.

I have now looked at the thing. I agree that the writer comes across badly, full of himself. And weirdly, Amis comes across well in the latter bit, though this may not have been the writer's intention. But it remains true that MA's last book is a hound, and that he deserves to be hounded for it, when he presumes to speak for literature and value. His defences are very weak. He can't, I think, face the fact that the book is dire.

it makes me kind of happy that you don't like amis.

i'm not sure that's the case, he likes the good stuff.

but when amis is bad... oh boy.

mystruggle amis didn't do well, no. saying 'i bet you're an unpublished writer aren't you?' is a weak comeback, i don't give a shit if the guy does or doesn't have a book deal. i think without hitchens it would be a pretty tacky anecdote, but with hitch, it's good. it would have been better if he'd allowed hitch's and mart's responses in.