Monday commentary: Sorry Hahn, “˜Seabiscuit’ just can’t compete with the classics
By Christina Jenkins
April 18, 2004 9:00 p.m.
Atlas Shrugged,” one of the best-known college cult books
there ever was, is a bit lonely these days. I saw a copy outside of
the bookstore last week for the first time since fall quarter and
got to wondering if the cult book phenomenon on college campuses is
now limited to “The Da Vinci Code.”
The energy that “Atlas” generated in the early 1960s
had an intellectual romance about it that the Harry Potter series
can’t compete with. So, when dozens of cities launched
campaigns several years ago to stir up a similar kind of enthusiasm
in their own communities, I was optimistic.
Chicago’s public library made it famous by stacking its
shelves with 2,000 extra copies of “To Kill a
Mockingbird” and managing to convince the city to read them.
Chicago’s selection in 2001, which coincided with a high
school in Oklahoma banning “Mockingbird,” made
headlines and inspired copycat programs across the country.
In Chicago, it worked. People on the subway would spontaneously
talk to strangers about Atticus Finch. Or, conversation was sparked
in organized groups, sponsored by both independent bookstores and
large chains. The idea that a single, secular book could transcend
race in a city like Chicago suggested it could be done anywhere
else.
So when Los Angeles decided to join the “One Book, One
City” trend in 2002, I actually felt a twinge of true
affection for a place that might be more famous for its pornos than
its paperbacks.
It started off well, anyway. Mayor James Hahn picked
“Fahrenheit 451,” typed by Ray Bradbury in the basement
of Powell library. Hahn called it one of his favorite books, and
remarked that by reading “great literary works” through
this campaign, Los Angeles might develop “a community
that’s unmatched by any in this great nation.”
And then, this year, he picked “Seabiscuit: An American
Legend.”
Unlike Chicago, which uses the quality of writing as its first
criterion for book selection and which ultimately trusts the
library to make the final decision, Los Angeles leaves it up to
Hahn alone.
So what was he thinking?
“He liked the story of the underdog horse that became a
winner. It was really an inspiring story,” says a library
spokesman.
The dubious association of the non-fiction
“Seabiscuit” with “great literary works”
notwithstanding, “One Book, One City L.A.” isn’t
working quite right. No one’s talking about it on public
transit. The only copy in Powell is still sitting on the shelf.
City libraries are offering discussion groups, but they’re
screening the movie as well. According to Amazon.com, Seabiscuit is
more popular in Sacramento and San Francisco than in the
southland.
The problem in Los Angeles is that the city has taken a
hands-off approach to building a thoughtful, literate community. As
far as encouraging any meaningful debate, the 10-point list of
discussion questions posted to the library’s Web site
(actually just a link to Random House online) doesn’t cut it.
Hahn’s selection last year, “The House on Mango
Street,” had the potential to get people talking about the
meaning of community, but there wasn’t even a buzz. Even the
media isn’t taking this seriously anymore: The Los Angeles
Times informed its readers last month with a 99-word, byline-less
blurb.
But for all its faults, at least it’s something. Sure,
talking about “The Da Vinci Code” and Harry Potter just
isn’t the same as Boo Radley. And yes, it’s easy to
make “only in L.A.” remarks about the mayor choosing a
book-turned-movie. But then again, “Mockingbird” won
three Oscars and it was a pretty good pick.
Literacy has to be taken seriously, even outside of the ivory
tower, and if we’re not going to have an “Atlas”
to care about, connecting with the city outside of Hollywood might
be a good alternative. Even if Hahn just wants to read about
horses.
E-mail [email protected] if you know John
Galt.
