Generally, I think The New York Times is on the ball. I even think it apologizes way too often for stuff it shouldn't. But lately, the weekly essay column
"Modern Love" has been bugging me. What's wrong with these
morons who write gracefully about their romantically-charged marital dilemmas, hoping good writing will cover up the fact that they are idiots who forgot to ask their fiances whether they wanted children before they got married?
It's clear that I'm no relationship expert, but, hello?
And who is
this person? Who? Well, I'll tell you who she is. Her name is a Suki Kim, and she was a 2006 Guggenheim fellow in fiction. Her book, "The Interpreter," was printed by a reputable publishing house. And she lived with a guy in London when she was 21, whom she supposedly loved, and yet couldn't stand. Her relationship was apparently
"One Long Lesson in How to Break Up." (You could read her whole "Modern Love" essay, but TimesSelect, an evil invention I'm sure, won't let you so I'll just have to give you excerpts.)
"LOVEMAKING was no better. Inevitably, I would stop in the middle by putting a hand on his shoulder or his chest, and he would slow down with a sigh, and then silently we would both turn to the wall, often with him embracing me from behind. Soon we slept in separate rooms.
We were like an aged couple who had been through it all, retreating to our single beds with compassion, except that we were 21 and had known each other for barely a year....We were not having sex, and yet we were not interested in having sex with anyone else. The longer this continued, the more fiercely we insisted on being with each other because we were young and believed that there must have been a greater meaning to our incompatibility."
And it even goes on:
"At night we cooked omelets and spaghetti and washed them down with wine. We must have tried sex and failed again, because on one of our last nights, he said, ''When I'm with you, I feel incredibly alive, and yet always terrible.''
Oh, please. You weren't young and in love. You were dating a psychotic masochist. Why does the Times print this inane blather written by clearly neurotic and unbalanced people? It's an outrage.
P.S. To be fair, even though It's an Outrage. clearly isn't about fairness, I have not read Kim's novel. It is probably good, seeing as it has won awards and there are a lot of books out there that haven't.