A five-year feud between local writers Leah McLaren and Ryan Bigge had its long overdue denouement in the Book pages of the Sunday Star, which published Bigge’s review of McLaren’s novel: “The Continuity Girl illuminates the limitations of my thesaurus. Uber-lousy? Fifth-rate? Super-bad? None of above. There exists no English word that adequately describes the residuum, offal and drek that slosh through the pages of this novel. Even the German word SaumassigeSchreibmaschiene, which roughly translates into ‘putrid garbage typewriter prose,’ fails to convey the stench of this slushpile.” (An unedited version of the review appears on The Bigge Idea blog.) Leah’s problem with Ryan dates back to her 2001 Globe and Mail column that labeled him a “lurper”, a class of fellas whose craving for attention was fulfilled by complaining about their lack of it. The term didn’t stick – although it was really just a trial run for McLaren going to the U.K. in order to publicly condemn all the men over there for being repressed homosexuals, resulting in the very negative attention she derided lurpers for. “Her fishwrap is ostensibly harmless, but this brand extension disguised as a novel is where it ends: the joke isn’t funny anymore, especially at $18.95 plus tax,” writes Bigge. “McLaren is a provocative pool toy that is kept inflated only by the warm air of the chattering classes.” Concurrently, the review in the Globe by a fellow practitioner of chicklit lavished the book with blandishments like “clever, poignant and insightful”. Leah McLaren can be leered at next Thursday (Feb. 23) at 12:30 p.m. at the Metro Reference Library (789 Yonge St.).
PREVIOUSLY: Fatigue in the first person
9 responses so far ↓
Lena // February 13, 2006 at 2:47 pm |
Wow, and I thought I hated her!
Lena // February 14, 2006 at 9:35 am |
Oh, and she’s being interviewed by Shelagh Rogers this morning.
Remember, Andrew Pyper mentored her. I blame him, in part, for encouraging her to find her ‘voice’.
J Byner // February 14, 2006 at 1:32 pm |
Golly, what a bunch of hacks. With all the fuss you’d think somebody actually cared what these two post-moder gas-bags have to say! Mercy!
Bob // February 14, 2006 at 2:22 pm |
Why would the Star commission someone with a known chip on his shoulder to review a book? This was as shoddily written and uninformative as the Globe’s own review was vapid and frothy. Both papers dropped the ball on this one, if ye ask me.
Ben Mulroney // February 14, 2006 at 3:34 pm |
This is like comparing writing with making sandwiches or was it comparing German typewriters with the Globe and Mail. Either way Mclaren is garbage and Bigge is a dumpster diver.
Beaver Streetnik // February 14, 2006 at 8:14 pm |
Never heard of any of these people. Doesn’t sound like I’m missing much.
zhouel // February 15, 2006 at 11:03 am |
My response to this is pretty much here.
james // February 16, 2006 at 6:12 pm |
The ‘book’ sounds ‘vaporish.’
belinda // February 19, 2006 at 4:19 pm |
McLaren, I am afraid, gets what she deserves. I have had dealings with her over the years and to describe her as snide, rude, often insulting, superior, snotty, vain, petulant and imperious would be an understatement. Ryan Bigge isn’t the first person for whom she’s used her column to settle a personal score, and he won’t be the last. What he did in his review of her book is what she has done countless times to people she deems as having crossed her, using her column more often than not to exact her revenge. She is a piece of work.
You must be logged in to post a comment.