What do you think?
Rate this book
B & Me: A True Story of Literary Arousal
A funny, frisky, often outrageous book about love, literature, and modern life—and a wink of the eye to U and I, Nicholson Baker’s classic book about John Updike—by an award-winning author called “wonderfully bright” by The New York Times Book Review.
Nearly twenty-five years ago, Nicholson Baker published U and I, the fretful and handwringing—but also groundbreaking—tale of his literary relationship with John Updike. U and I inspired a whole sub-genre of engaging, entertaining writing about reading, but what no story of this type has ever done is tell its tale from the moment of conception, that moment when you realize that there is writer out there in the world that you must read—so you read them. B & Me is that story, the story of J. C. Hallman discovering and reading Nicholson Baker, and discovering himself in the process.
Our relationship to books in the digital age, the role of art in an increasingly commodified world, the power great writing has to change us, these are at the core of Hallman’s investigation of Baker—questions he’s grappled with, values he’s come to doubt. But in reading Baker’s work, Hallman discovers the key to overcoming the malaise that had been plaguing him, through the books themselves and what he finds and contemplates in his attempts to understand them and their enigmatic author: sex, book jackets, an old bed and breakfast, love, Monica Lewinsky, Paris, marriage, more sex, the logistics of libraries. In the spirit of Geoff Dyer’s Out of Sheer Rage and Elif Batuman’s The Possessed, B & Me is literary self-archaeology: a funny, irreverent, brilliant, incisive story of one reader’s desperate quest to restore passion to literature, and all the things he learns along the way.
Nearly twenty-five years ago, Nicholson Baker published U and I, the fretful and handwringing—but also groundbreaking—tale of his literary relationship with John Updike. U and I inspired a whole sub-genre of engaging, entertaining writing about reading, but what no story of this type has ever done is tell its tale from the moment of conception, that moment when you realize that there is writer out there in the world that you must read—so you read them. B & Me is that story, the story of J. C. Hallman discovering and reading Nicholson Baker, and discovering himself in the process.
Our relationship to books in the digital age, the role of art in an increasingly commodified world, the power great writing has to change us, these are at the core of Hallman’s investigation of Baker—questions he’s grappled with, values he’s come to doubt. But in reading Baker’s work, Hallman discovers the key to overcoming the malaise that had been plaguing him, through the books themselves and what he finds and contemplates in his attempts to understand them and their enigmatic author: sex, book jackets, an old bed and breakfast, love, Monica Lewinsky, Paris, marriage, more sex, the logistics of libraries. In the spirit of Geoff Dyer’s Out of Sheer Rage and Elif Batuman’s The Possessed, B & Me is literary self-archaeology: a funny, irreverent, brilliant, incisive story of one reader’s desperate quest to restore passion to literature, and all the things he learns along the way.
288 pages, Hardcover
First published March 10, 2015
3 people are currently reading
321 people want to read
About the author
J.C. Hallman
11 books70 followersI'm the author of seven books, most recently SAY ANARCHA: A Young Woman, a Devious Surgeon, and the Harrowing Birth of Modern Women's Health.
I enjoy talking to readers, for book clubs and 1:1s. Find me at https://www.skolay.com/writers/jc-hal...
I enjoy talking to readers, for book clubs and 1:1s. Find me at https://www.skolay.com/writers/jc-hal...
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 16 of 16 reviews
April 27, 2015
Read this only if you are interested in the authors cringe-worthy oversharing about his sex life or if you find strained overreaching to show tenuous connections between Nicholson Baker and William and/or Henry James fascinating. Yes, I get that Hallman studied the James bros but that doesn't necessarily mean they had undo influence on Baker. This results in what seems like an attempt to shoehorn them in for the sake of showing off his knowledge. There is also much hand-wringing about the state of Literature along with the world going to hell in a hand basket as a result of modernity and technology. While I don't necessarily agree with him, Franzen is much more articulate on this subject. I picked this book up (actually downloaded on my kindle ha!) because U and I by Nicholson Baker is charming and clever- this book not so much.
March 14, 2015
I am completely at a loss as to how to review this book. This is a book about a man dissecting the writings of Nicholas Baker. He reflects on the writings real and inferred meanings. He laments his actions in life as he is discovering. He quips about the meaninglessness and righteousness of reviewing a writer’s book, all the while doing that very thing.
“Everything you write should be a test of whether you should be a writer.”
I have to begin by saying I didn’t even know who Nicholas Baker is, that he was a real person and that his writings are there for anyone to discover. I feel as if this could have been written by a great many people discovering great literature. Without more than the author’s dissection of Baker’s work, I am unable to say whether his writing inspired this plunge into dissection, or if the author chose Baker at random due to popularity. A good preface would be to mention that a reading of Nicholas Baker is a prerequisite. Since I didn’t and I won’t be reading Baker anytime soon. I can only tell you that the writing in this book is very thought provoking, if not a bit off the deep end of musing.
While the writer is discovering Nicholas Baker, he is going through his own life. His relationship and it’s ticks. He travels to France and sprinkles in what an American living in France might discover, or what he has discovered, anyways. There are so many elaborately elaborate descriptions in this book. The descriptions are not of the landscape or visions of the author, no, these descriptions are of the feelings and introspection of a man who really needs to reflect on the meanings of things most people didn’t consider. The author goes to great lengths to analyze his thoughts on the subjects in the stories by Baker and their mimicry to the author who penned them.
I think this book is a bit of an acquired taste though. I won’t be surprised if it is not well received by the masses. Because reviewing is made into an art. The author’s critique of another author’s writing may not be taken well. In my opinion this book is an experience for thoughts and a tribute to great writing. Any author who could make a discussion of books by one author, into a book, and make it this thought provoking has my undivided attention.
“Everything you write should be a test of whether you should be a writer.”
I have to begin by saying I didn’t even know who Nicholas Baker is, that he was a real person and that his writings are there for anyone to discover. I feel as if this could have been written by a great many people discovering great literature. Without more than the author’s dissection of Baker’s work, I am unable to say whether his writing inspired this plunge into dissection, or if the author chose Baker at random due to popularity. A good preface would be to mention that a reading of Nicholas Baker is a prerequisite. Since I didn’t and I won’t be reading Baker anytime soon. I can only tell you that the writing in this book is very thought provoking, if not a bit off the deep end of musing.
While the writer is discovering Nicholas Baker, he is going through his own life. His relationship and it’s ticks. He travels to France and sprinkles in what an American living in France might discover, or what he has discovered, anyways. There are so many elaborately elaborate descriptions in this book. The descriptions are not of the landscape or visions of the author, no, these descriptions are of the feelings and introspection of a man who really needs to reflect on the meanings of things most people didn’t consider. The author goes to great lengths to analyze his thoughts on the subjects in the stories by Baker and their mimicry to the author who penned them.
I think this book is a bit of an acquired taste though. I won’t be surprised if it is not well received by the masses. Because reviewing is made into an art. The author’s critique of another author’s writing may not be taken well. In my opinion this book is an experience for thoughts and a tribute to great writing. Any author who could make a discussion of books by one author, into a book, and make it this thought provoking has my undivided attention.
Read
March 10, 2015"B & Me is a great love letter to literature itself; it is a reminder that the writer’s job is to push further with each generation, to help reorient our moral compass, and take back criticism from the critics and give it back to the people." - Jason Christian, Oklahoma State University
This book was reviewed in the March 2015 issue of World Literature Today. Read the full review by visiting our website: http://bit.ly/1F5svkW
This book was reviewed in the March 2015 issue of World Literature Today. Read the full review by visiting our website: http://bit.ly/1F5svkW
April 19, 2015
I vacillated on my eventual star rating while reading this, from: this is pretty interesting (3 or 4 stars), to: that argument was baseless and the book is tedious (remove a star), to: okay I guess he has some interesting points (add the star back), to: this author is a self-aggrandizing blowhard but why am I still reading (1 star is deserved and 2 are generous).
Hallman derides Baker for his method of "memory criticism" and "closed-book examination" in U & I (in which Baker consults only his own memory of Updike's books instead of the actual books), but Hallman does something quite similar here (he calls his method "creative criticism"). When he conceives this project and makes his book proposal, and when he begins the actual writing, he has read NOTHING by Nicholson Baker. Then, as he describes his reading of Baker's books, he often gets Baker wrong, misunderstands him, concocts straw-man arguments with him, or applies half-baked theories to his writing. He thinks his desire to read Baker's books and his picking up Baker-gossip from the surrounding culture counts as much as reading them. (But he's rather dim and ill-informed about his subject if he wasn't even aware of the Human Smoke controversies years after they transpired). I wasn't favorably impressed with the thinking of the Hallman on display here. (No, I will not fall into the trap myself; I have only read this single Hallman book).
Though Hallman never mentions David Shields I was reminded of David Shields's sort of self-focused meta-literary criticism. Shields too often gives the impression that he'd rather listen to himself expound/see his words published than seriously read and study prose carefully.
Hallman's descriptions of the details of his life with his girlfriend, including intimate sexual acts, toilet habits, and various quotidian inanities, often hit wrong notes for me, falling awkwardly on the page. Unseemly, tedious, self-aggrandizing. Baker takes risks with this sort of subject matter but he also managed to have a bizarre work of literary porn, House of Holes, taken seriously. I laughed while reading that Baker; Hallman often left me embarrassed (for him and the girlfriend).
Lastly, Hallman's not very kind to people, especially other writers. He tries to bring down not only Updike and Baker but James Salter and Martin Amis. Man, they are all better writers than you and probably better human beings! An example: Having been invited to lunch by Baker himself, and witnessing Baker's discomfort at being unable to recall a woman's name when she sends a friendly hello (according to Hallman Baker "dissolved" and made only the tiniest of gestures toward her, then turned away) - Hallman then asserts to the reader that he sees inside Baker's soul and knows that Baker loathes himself. And that this relatively minor "mental stammer" was
Hallman derides Baker for his method of "memory criticism" and "closed-book examination" in U & I (in which Baker consults only his own memory of Updike's books instead of the actual books), but Hallman does something quite similar here (he calls his method "creative criticism"). When he conceives this project and makes his book proposal, and when he begins the actual writing, he has read NOTHING by Nicholson Baker. Then, as he describes his reading of Baker's books, he often gets Baker wrong, misunderstands him, concocts straw-man arguments with him, or applies half-baked theories to his writing. He thinks his desire to read Baker's books and his picking up Baker-gossip from the surrounding culture counts as much as reading them. (But he's rather dim and ill-informed about his subject if he wasn't even aware of the Human Smoke controversies years after they transpired). I wasn't favorably impressed with the thinking of the Hallman on display here. (No, I will not fall into the trap myself; I have only read this single Hallman book).
Though Hallman never mentions David Shields I was reminded of David Shields's sort of self-focused meta-literary criticism. Shields too often gives the impression that he'd rather listen to himself expound/see his words published than seriously read and study prose carefully.
Hallman's descriptions of the details of his life with his girlfriend, including intimate sexual acts, toilet habits, and various quotidian inanities, often hit wrong notes for me, falling awkwardly on the page. Unseemly, tedious, self-aggrandizing. Baker takes risks with this sort of subject matter but he also managed to have a bizarre work of literary porn, House of Holes, taken seriously. I laughed while reading that Baker; Hallman often left me embarrassed (for him and the girlfriend).
Lastly, Hallman's not very kind to people, especially other writers. He tries to bring down not only Updike and Baker but James Salter and Martin Amis. Man, they are all better writers than you and probably better human beings! An example: Having been invited to lunch by Baker himself, and witnessing Baker's discomfort at being unable to recall a woman's name when she sends a friendly hello (according to Hallman Baker "dissolved" and made only the tiniest of gestures toward her, then turned away) - Hallman then asserts to the reader that he sees inside Baker's soul and knows that Baker loathes himself. And that this relatively minor "mental stammer" was
the absolute worst thing [..] that Baker, accused by turns of perversion and violent designs, was capable of doing to another person. That moment was a backward measure of Baker's goodness.What a ridiculous thing to say. He knows nothing about Baker and Hallman's own tone-deafness and lack of goodwill were the real things on display. And this remark shocked me for it's crassness:
I told Baker that while I'd been in Maine I'd thought about driving around to look for Stephen King. King had lived in Maine for years, and my plan, I said, was to finish the job of the careless driver who had once struck King on a country road but failed to kill him.That's a despicable thing to say and not funny at all. Read Geoff Dyer on not-reading Lawrence instead.
January 21, 2016
a long essay(s) on the power and meaning of reading and the interconnections of a real human reader with a real human writer, or two or three, or all the writers a reader has ever read, for that matter. so besides nicholson baker, and the james bros., and john updike, and hallman hisownself, and amis, and emerson and joyce and miller and even dick the dick cheney. i think, perhaps, hallman is trying to connect with you, the reader too, though TOO MUCH INFORMATION sometimes, hah, but that is what reading n baker is like too,
i loved the flap copy "In the spirit of Geoff Dyer's "Out of Sheer Rage" and Elif Batuman's "The Possessed", "B and Me" is literary self-archaeology,...."
that is exactly what this book is, and if digging through the trash and stench of someone's reading life, and life life, is not to taste, if you never have a rush and glow in the 813.54's , perhaps stay out of this book, but if...
i loved the flap copy "In the spirit of Geoff Dyer's "Out of Sheer Rage" and Elif Batuman's "The Possessed", "B and Me" is literary self-archaeology,...."
that is exactly what this book is, and if digging through the trash and stench of someone's reading life, and life life, is not to taste, if you never have a rush and glow in the 813.54's , perhaps stay out of this book, but if...
March 26, 2015
I Review J. C. Hallman's B & Me: A True Story of Literary Arousal
Hallman finds these agreements, these literary echoes of himself, in Baker’s Paul Chowder, an anthologist like Hallman, and Baker’s thoughts on libraries and book dumping echoed Hallman’s. More importantly, though, Hallman and Baker each write with unabashed enthusiasm and wit about living with a deep relationship with books.
Go to my blog and then to the San Francisco Chronicle:
Have Words--Will Write 'Em
--Joe
May 26, 2015
A curious and highly entertaining book. Hallman dismisses most critics while writing an appreciate and positive critique of Nicholsen Baker. Hallman concincingly argues that Baker belongs in the modern panthenon of writers and deplores the reviews that have dismissed some of his books including Fermata and House of Holes. Hallman also introduces readers to another side of Baker including his anti-war activity and his rescue of tons of historic newspapers destined for destruciton. Readers will recall Baker's attempt, chronicled in the New Yorker some years ago, to rescue library card catalogs that faced digital replacement. The title -- B & Me -- was suggested by Baker's book about John Updike called U and I: A True Story.
September 17, 2021
Read this only if you are interested in the authors cringe-worthy oversharing about his sex life or if you find strained overreaching to show tenuous connections between Nicholson Baker and William and/or Henry James fascinating. Yes, I get that Hallman studied the James bros but that doesn't necessarily mean they had undo influence on Baker. This results in what seems like an attempt to shoehorn them in for the sake of showing off his knowledge. There is also much hand-wringing about the state of Literature along with the world going to hell in a hand basket as a result of modernity and technology. While I don't necessarily agree with him, Franzen is much more articulate on this subject. I picked this book up (actually downloaded on my kindle ha!) because U and I by Nicholson Baker is charming and clever- this book not so much.
December 8, 2017
This one is for the hardcore literature, book-reading type persons. Mr. Hallman is extremely intelligent and insightful. This is at least the second book (also Killing Yourself to Life) I've read that incorporates personal relationships with a novel of searching. It covers influence and reading, time organization and sex, couples reading and pornography, plagiarism and sub-conscience, the hobbies and fantasies of writers, et al. It's one I will definitely revisit, as there are loads of heady crumbs that I'm sure will be visible after a revisit. Fun and profane.
December 14, 2023
Just the treat for Nicholson Baker fans. An homage to Baker in part inspired by his book on his relationship with the works of John Updike. Humorous at times and quite revealing of the author and his subject as well.
November 13, 2017
I’ll be honest, I only read about 40 pages if this, but it was painful.
July 5, 2015
This book was a good reminder to read and read Baker for me. I really enjoyed U and I and it's hard not to compare B & Me to it, of course. Maybe I was just expecting the wrong thing from this book - I thought it would give me more insight into Baker (which, to be fair, it does, just less than I had hoped). Instead it was way more about Hallman, which is pretty similar to U and I - just not what I wanted.
November 29, 2015
There should be a "Did NOT want to keep reading this book" selection. I felt the format of JC's writing all over the place and found it annoying. I'll put this one aside and probably will try it again later.
March 29, 2015
I am really torn about this book. It is well written and the subject (modern literature through the lens of the works of Nicholson Baker) is fantastic; however, the author takes some odd side tracks that do not really work in the scope of the book.
July 24, 2015
If you've read at least The Mezzanine, U and I, and another one of his books and like Nicholson Baker you should read this book. It wasn't perfect but it was obvious that this book was going to be written sometime.
Read
May 10, 2017I really enjoy the idea of the intertextual critique of one author's body of work as written by another author, but honestly most of what this book taught me is that: I'd probably like Nicholson Baker, I certainly would like Catherine, and I would really dislike meeting Hallman. For someone who levies a good portion of his "jokes" in this book by making fun of others' appearances, you'd think Hallman /must/ be incredibly attractive. Back cover of this novel says: nope. Also, he seems to try really hard to convince readers that he's having really revolutionarily amazing sex and let's be honest here...he probably isn't. Also that weird, gross, comment about him, a professor, anticipating going home and masterbating to his female students made me pretty certain I'll be choosing solely female professors from now on.
Literary critique was fun, though!
Literary critique was fun, though!
Displaying 1 - 16 of 16 reviews