Collections

Thinking about Americana and why it didn't work for me, I realized it belongs to a class of book that almost never works for me. The non-fiction compilation nearly always disappoints. Sometimes the book seems to be a nearly random collection of essays, as in the case of John McPhee's Irons in the Fire. In other cases, such as the popular and ever-expanding (up to nine titles now) Best American series, the books have thematic coherence, but uneven quality.

I am reading another one of McPhee's compilations called Uncommon Carriers. It is a series of essays about people who work in the transportation system whether by truck, train, ship or plane. The stories are well written, with McPhee's excellent combination of simple clear style with a expert reporter's way of getting the most interesting and descriptive information from his subjects. I like the stories, but I don't like how the stories switch without any transition. Is there something larger McPhee wants to tell us? Are there interesting connections or an interesting lack of connection? These are the sorts of things that frustrate me about collections. They purport to tell a larger story when they really tell lots of individual stories.

Another one of my issues is that I don't read this books correctly. They are not designed to be read from cover to cover. Instead, like the magazines from whence their pieces arise, they are meant to be picked up, flipped through and to offer the chance of the serendipitous find. When I pick up a book, I a slowly building urge to finish sets in. If I read the book quickly, it is no bother, but the longer ti takes the more it grows in strength and I can become absurdly anxious. When I see a partially read book beside me, I wonder just when I am going to get that thing finished. I really should just subscribe to the New Yorker and the Atlantic. Half the pieces in any compilation come from those two magazines anyway.