tuesday night n+1 internet literary drama between two hamsters

Marco Roth of n+1 magazine emailed me tonight about this interview.

I will paste our correspondence below and respond.

The parts in bold and in brackets are my responses, which were added after I pasted the original emails (links were also added later).

from Marco Roth
to Tao Lin
date May 8, 2007 7:39 PM
subject your bookslut interview
mailed-by gmail.com

Dear Tao,
Contrary to what you may believe, I am not one of your fictional characters. You know very well that we've never spoken on the phone and you know you never pitched us a piece about statutory rape. In the real world, we call this "lying." [You are right. We did not speak on the phone and I did not pitch n+1 a piece about statutory rape.] I can't say I understand your motives for doing it, but would be grateful to you if you apologized to me publicly. As for what you say about n+1, it's too vague to be called lying, but slander might be more appropriate. What evidence do you have about where our money goes? [I said, "N+1 claims to be political but they don't care, as far as I can tell, about where their money goes." I said "as far as I can tell," which means by what I know by reading your magazine, looking at your website, looking at what your editors have published and where they have published and what they have written and said in interviews, things like that.] What do you mean by that? As for "associating with corporations," well, don't we all? Do you mean that Kunkel is published by Random House and that I've written for the New York Times Corporation and take Rupert Murdoch's money when I write for the TLS? [I think that is some of it. I was 'building up' to my last thing, I think, which is that McSweeney's is political in action, based on what I know, while n+1 is political in words, based on what I know. I said, "McSweeney's doesn't talk about politics but by generating millions of dollars in cash and spending the cash independently, and supporting independent bookstores, and donating large piles of cash to charities and to funding their own non-profit organizations, they are very political, I think. They are political in action while n+1 is political in writing small essays at the front of their magazine."] What could this possibly have to do with our politics? Do you have any evidence that the things I write for Murdoch publications show slavish devotion to the Fox News line? And how do you square this with the book contract that launched the McSweeney's mighty empire or Eggers working at Esquire? [I'm talking about now. I don't understand why a person who seriously wants to "improve" the world would try to discredit someone by their past actions. If Eggers was just being published right now, his memoir, and he began to talk shit about an almost completely independent organization that donates entire books' proceeds (or profits) to charity, creates non-profit organizations, and almost never talks shit about anyone else, and then someone asked me in an interview what I thought about that I might say the same thing I did about n+1. And I think Eggers would maybe say something like, "I'm going to publish this memoir with a corporation, then with the money I get I'm going to start a giant independent publishing thing and use that to make money to fund charities, non-profit organizatons, and other things that I think are good, and that actually exist, in concrete reality. And then I would say, "Nice strategy. Clever." Or something.] I admit that I'm probably taking you too seriously here. But this kind of deadpan irony or post-ironic outright "untruthiness" doesn't do you any favors, and it doesn't do us any favors either. [I don't understand this sentence. What favors? Who are these favors coming from? Who are we fighting against?] n+1, too, is real and a real actor in the world. Please furnish us with hard evidence to back up what you say, or retract these statements too [I think my evidence is that McSweeney's doesn't talk shit about anyone. They have created giant non-profit 826 program, donated giant money to charity, and through The Believer and McSweeney's "changed" a lot of money from "money controlled by corporations" into "money controlled by independent organizations" (independent organizations meaning themselves, the independent bookstores they let get McSweeney's earlier, the independent bookstores, I think, they let get Egger's novel exclusively at first, etc.); and that n+1 talks shit about McSweeney's and hasn't done those things I just listed about McSweeney's]. There's no threat or sanction here, only a request from one person to another to deal honestly with those who deal honestly with you. Of course you may not care about other people's realities at all, and then we have a problem.
yours,
Marco

from Tao Lin
to Marco Roth
date May 8, 2007 8:56 PM
subject Re: your bookslut interview
mailed-by gmail.com

okay. i will respond publicly soon. i was defending mcsweeney's. i don't like when people attack harmless things.


from Tao Lin
to Marco Roth
date May 8, 2007 9:02 PM
subject Re: your bookslut interview
mailed-by gmail.com

can print your email and respond to all of it on my blog?

from Marco Roth
to Tao Lin
date May 8, 2007 9:02 PM
subject Re: your bookslut interview
mailed-by gmail.com

Dear Tao,
So it's ok to attack the people who attack harmless things? [I didn't attack you. I stated observations. I did not say, "It is good to be political in action and not words." I did not use the words "Good," "Bad," "Evil," or "Better." I said that I think McSweeney's is this way, and n+1 is this way. Depending on your philosophy of life that can be good or bad, but I did not state a philosophy of life for those observations I made.] Does a Jain murder a man who steps on an ant? Or is this a personal code? I'm sure McSweeney's can take of care itself. And, let's clarify what you mean by "attack." There's a difference between critique and "attack." What we wrote about McSweeney's and the Believer was a fairly argued critique. You can dispute the arguments we make with counter-arguments, but it's a bit ridiculous to take the whole thing personally. To go to the political level here: turning simple criticism or disagreement into an "existential threat" is precisely the sort of thing the Republicans are so good at doing. Do we all take dictation from Karl Rove now? Is the best response to your opponents arguments an ad-hominem attack or lie or distortion? [I said, "I don't like when n+1 attacks things, especially when they attack McSweeney's. N+1 claims to be political but they don't care, as far as I can tell, about where their money goes. Cash money. They go through all mainstream media outlets, or something. They associate with corporations. McSweeney's doesn't talk about politics but by generating millions of dollars in cash and spending the cash independently, and supporting independent bookstores, and donating large piles of cash to charities and to funding their own non-profit organizations, they are very political, I think. They are political in action while n+1 is political in writing small essays at the front of their magazine."]
Just saw you sent another message, but this is not of course an attack and I hope you don't take it as such.
--Marco


from Marco Roth
to Tao Lin
date May 8, 2007 9:04 PM
subject Re: your bookslut interview
mailed-by gmail.com

The question is: do you intend to apologize? [I apologize. But I also do not understand the effect of an "apology" in concrete reality. (So typing that was meaningless for me.) It's the same as "respect" I think. It's like saying, "I want respect." Or, "I want frj39[9." Because it is an abstraction, and abstractions do not exist in concret reality, and abstract words effect much less agreement on the definitions of them between people than concrete words, which makes them less useful in concrete reality. But I apologize, because I said I would, and because now people can think more about what an "apology" is. Maybe the concrete and specific form of asking for an apology would be asking "Can you tell me you won't do that anymore" or "Can you tell me you feel bad at what you did" or something. But just saying "I'm sorry" doesn't convey concrete or specific informaion. (I'm lecturing myself now also because I know I've wanted people to "apologize" before.)] If so, you're welcome to make whatever use of my email you like, as you have in the past without my permission.

from Tao Lin
to Marco Roth
date May 8, 2007 9:09 PM
subject Re: your bookslut interview
mailed-by gmail.com

i will respond soon. i'm not trying to attack anyone. i said mcsweeney's doesn't talk about politics but is political in what they do, in concrete reality, while n+1 talks about politics but, as much as i know, is not political in what they do. that isn't an attack, it's an observation. can i post these emails for context? i don't want to fight, just have discussion.

from Marco Roth
to Tao Lin
date May 8, 2007 9:22 PM
subject Re: your bookslut interview
mailed-by gmail.com

Dear Tao,
THe observation about practice versus writing about politics is a fair grounds for discussion. The thing that I'd like to know is whether you'd like to apologize for lying in the interview. You haven't mentioned that yet. But, no, not a "fight" at all.

from Tao Lin
to Marco Roth
date May 8, 2007 9:23 PM
subject Re: your bookslut interview
mailed-by gmail.com

yes, i will apologize. i'll say it wasn't true.

from Marco Roth
to Tao Lin
date May 8, 2007 9:29 PM
subject Re: your bookslut interview
mailed-by gmail.com

Great. Thank you.

from Marco Roth
to Tao Lin
date May 8, 2007 9:38 PM
subject Re: your bookslut interview
mailed-by gmail.com

Oh, and whatever you decide to do with emails, if they involve publication, I hope you'll suppress the address. thx, Marco

from Tao Lin
to Marco Roth
date May 8, 2007 9:40 PM
subject Re: your bookslut interview
mailed-by gmail.com

i have suppressed the addess. thank you.

Marco Roth is a species of domesticated white-tailed hamster common in the Southwest. He is an editor of n+1 magazine and lives in New York City.

Tao Lin is a gerbil-hamster hybrid species first bred in the 1980's by lonely scientists in Japan. He has been published in Elimae and Juked.