imani

Archive for 2008

Avoiding the “sea of nonsense”

In Authors, Excerpts, Literature, literary journals on October 27, 2008 at 9:56 am

INTERVIEWER
Most people know you’re a novelist, but you spend a lot of your time writing nonfiction. What led you to start writing essays?

ROBINSON
To change my own mind. I try to create a new vocabulary or terrain for myself, so that I open out – I always think of the Dutch claiming land from the sea – or open up something that would have been closed to me before. That’s the point and the pleasure of it. I continuously scrutinize my own thinking. I write something and think, How do I know that that’s true? If I wrote what I thought I knew from the outset, then I wouldn’t be learning anything new.

In this culture, essays are often written for the sake of writing the essay. Someone finds a quibble of potential interest and quibbles about it. This doesn’t mean the writer isn’t capable of doing something of greater interest, but we generate a lot of prose that’s not vital. The best essays come from the moment in which people really need to work something out.
[…]

INTERVIEWER
How did you decide to write about Sellafield nuclear plant in Mother Country?

ROBINSON
I didn’t really expect to write Mother Country – heaven knows. I was living in England, and it was all over the newspaper and all over television. I was surprised of course because it’s a terrible thing. Sellafield extracts plutonioum-239 and other salable isotopes of transuranic elements, very sloppily, and sends vast quantities of radioactive waste from the process into the sea. It’s a real disaster. They’ve been doing this since 1956. It’s amazing that people could have been up to this particular kind of mischief for fifty-two years, but they have.

When I came home from England, I didn’t even unpack my bags. I just sat down and wrote the article and sent it to my agent. And I said, You don’t have to deal with this if you don’t want to. But she sent it to Harper’s and they published it almost immediately. Then another publisher called and asked if I would write a book about it.
[…]

[I]f I had not written that book, I would not have been able to live with myself. I would have felt that I was doing what we are all doing, which dooms the world.

INTERVIEWER
Which is what?

ROBINSON
Pretend we don’t know what we’re really up to. We know that plastic bags are killing animals in Africa at a terrific rate, but everybody still uses these things as if they just float away. We know that these new lightbulbs cut down on electricity, but where do they come from? China? Hungary? They have to be dealt with as toxic waste because they have mercury in them. So who’s being exposed to these chemicals when they’re manufactured and what are the environmental consequences in China or Hungary? What is the tradeoff in terms of shipping them long distances to save a little bit of electricity?

I’m also partial to the Sellafield book because I think it exposes the ways in which we’re racist. We assume that Europeans are white and therefore more rational than other populations and to find something weird and unaccountable and inhuman we must go to a darker continent.
[…]

INTERVIEWER
Mother Country appeared during the more than twenty-year gap between Housekeeping and Gilead. Why did it take you so long to return to writing fiction?

ROBINSON
It was largely a consequence of the experience of writing Mother Country that I began what amounted to an effort to reeducate myself. After all those years of school, I felt there was little I knew that I could trust, and I did not want my books to be one more tributary to the sea of nonsense that really is what most conventional wisdom amounts to. I am not so naïve as to imagine that I have escaped that fate except in isolated cases and small particulars. But the research and criticism I have done have helped me to be of my own mind in some degree, and that was a feeling I had to achieve before I could enjoy writing fiction.

From “The Art of Fiction” No. 198 interview with Marilynne Robinson in The Paris Review No. 186, Fall 2008.

Here is Rachel Cohen’s review of Robinson’s latest, Home, in the most recent Bookforum.

Peeking back into literary conversation

In Books, General, Literature, literary journals on October 26, 2008 at 9:08 pm

I took some time to catch up with my favourite literary magazine ventures online. Open Letters Monthly turned out to be the most rewarding site as I accompanied the reading with a lot of mental exclamations like, What a fun idea that was! or What the hell? I totally wanted to review that book and Oh, I now find this interesting thanks to the Evil Telly (granted I saw the shows on the internet because who has time for tv these days?).

The Vampire Fan(g) Guide by Sharon Fulton immediately caught my eye in the October issue because I am one of those who find such creatures very compelling, sometimes to my deep, soul numbing distress, sexy, evil, what have you; and am always on the lookout for authors who can mine something fresh from the cliches. Fulton doesn’t cover much in the last category but her piece is useful because she gives specifics on books about which I’ve heard a lot of empty praise (eg. Bloodsucking Fiends by Christopher Moore) and about which I can never see mocked too much (the Twilight series by everyone’s favourite Mormon writer). For more nutritious brain food try Lianne Habineck’s meditation on Hamlet from a neuroscience perspective suitable for Shakespeare’s time period. (One of the few essays that applies neuroscience without making me yearn to poke out my eyeballs.) I can’t remember if I read Donoghue’s examination of the only play in which Shakespeare decided to bother with the Tudors — I don’t think I did (yet)– but you should because Donoghue is consistently funny and smart with a touch of acid.

Also, Tudors! Usually, I yawn at anything having to do with the lot. For mediocre film directors and writers Henry VIII and his beheading hobbyhorse is third only to Shakespeare and Austen in source material. (Oh, that I could unsee that movie with Scarlett Johansson and Natalie Portman. When is Johansson going to act in anything as good as Lost in Translation and that Vermeer flick again? Yeesh.) I can’t explain how The Tudors cheap soap opera antics and gratuitous heterosexual sex scenes — homosexuals don’t have sex in Tudor England, they only touch each other’s cheeks tenderly and lie in bed shirtless — managed to get past my guard. Natalie Dormer’s Anne Boleyn may have something to do with it but the biggest draw is the writers’ cavalier handling of historical fact. (It’s very heady if you aren’t a history professor — if you are I suggest keeping a cell phone with 911 on speed dial nearby.)

Anyway, such productions tend to heighten my curiousity about the pertinent historical figures or time periods so Steve Donoghue’s ongoing essay series “Year with the Tudors” could not come at a better time. In each new instalment he covers fiction or non-fiction books that cover seminal figures and for September he chose Bloody Mary. She gets a sympethetic biography in Linda Porter’s The First Queen of England: The Myth of “Bloody Mary”, further inspection with Donoghue’s Q&A with the author, and inclusion in a fun quiz question: Why are cover art designers so fond of her’s and other Tudor women’s bosom? The world may never know.

The other coolest of cool September offerings is OLM’s survey of “the bestseller’s list” (I don’t know which one) as contributor’s tackle everything from Nora Roberts to James Patterson. Not that that’s much of a range. As a tepid Nora Roberts fan I found John Cotter’s review amusing — I could not have thought of an odder book-reviewer pairing — although I am disappointed he didn’t mention Roberts’ fondness for incomplete sentences. (She does them for emotional impact, gravitas or because she feels like it and it never, ever works.) Donoghue asseses Evanovich’s never ending Stephanie Plum series and comes out with an opinion many of the series’ fans would not disagree with at this stage. Fulton is more receptive to what fans may find appealing in Catherine Coulter’s ongoing action/romance books about FBI agents. It’s quite novel to find such books reviewed in literary venues and while I may have wished the books had a more receptive audience, seeing a title like “The Last Patriot” on OLM made my month. Seriously. I’d like the non-fiction list done next, please! I’d like to experience gimmicky Gladwell tomes, self-help bibles and bogus financial advice books second hand.

I’ve barely skimmed August but Dan Green writes a fan letter to James Wood’s How Fiction Works, Donoghue tells us all about Henry VII — the feller who came off as an honourable goody two shoes in Shakespeare’s Richard III –  and Laura Tanenbaum carefully dissects two books of the “Young People Today!” variety in Scolds in the Agora.

Was there room in my heart for other outfits? Certainly. Estella’s Revenge can be depended on for articles by book lovers about their obsessions and idiosyncrasies. In the October issue Jodie writes about her yen for big books, Chris Bucner introduces us to some comic book lines beyond the hot properties making their way to film, and the reviews section covers a gratifying mix of books for those who read high and low.

I’ll get to my print subscriptions at some point. The LRB pile looks less daunting, my grudge against Bookforum lessens and my fall Paris Review is finally here. Plus, the founding editor of a new-to-me offering sent me a PDF copy of the latest issue which promises to be a mix of the literary and fantastical. Sounds like it should fit me perfectly, doesn’t it?

Edit: Oh poop. I forgot about Strange Horizons. I forbid anyone to tell me about any new literary sites/magazines for the next decade.

Catching up

In Books, Fiction, Literature on October 16, 2008 at 11:12 am

What have I been reading lately? As the end of my MA studies drew near and my thesis showed no signs of shrinking (or finishing itself) one could observe (lamentable) trends. I withdrew from almost all literary conversation — I did not blog or read any that weren’t in my RSS reader and lost desire for all lit mags, except one. The Paris Review managed to retain my affections partly because it’s a quarterly (so I felt I could read it at leisure), partly because I regard it as a curio among my lit mag/journal interests, and partly because it’s not very demanding in comparison to them (sorry PR staff). I always have reasonable excuses when the poetry befuddles me. (Btw, where the heck is my Fall issue? I miss being befuddled.)

As for books that jumped around a bit. My fantasy interested regressed. I reread The Hobbit and the entire Harry Potter series (like Jennysbooks is doing now). That was my third time with Tolkien’s first tale. The first time I was a tween and I left it with confused memories of the novel and the Rankin & Bass animated adaptation. The second time I closed it quite disgusted with Tolkien’s “children’s author” tone — a stylistic choice he later regretted. IIt’s an overly cute, somewhat artificial, self-conscious tone used by the world’s Enid Blytons. It works well enough for the right age group and then immediately loses favour. Even before I was ten I remember being exasperated with her style. For gratification I counted how many stories in a particular collection she ended with a question mark, mocking her silently.

This third time I made peace with that peeve and was able to appreciate Tolkien’s humour and the story’s rolicking air. I am now now even more worried about its fate as a film: it is fundamentally different from The Lord of the Rings but I fear that the trilogy’s success will convince those in charge that The Hobbit film must be made in its image. The “two movie” plan is very much the doubtful “epic” approach I feared they’d take. We shall see.

J.K. Rowling isn’t that skilfull of a writer, is she? I’ve mentioned many times that when I read the first two Harry Potter books I could not fathom what made it so popular with adults. (I came to the series through the fourth.) Now I think that their length and complexity are better suited to her strengths than a sprawling 700+ pages excursion. (Her best is the third in which she combines meatier content without needing endless words.) As the books got longer she had to do more dialogue…and she’s not very good at it. She overuses adverbs and seems limited to describing her characters as saying something “slowly” whenever they’re not running away from anyone. The plot heaves and gets kind of soap opera-y ie complications happen for the sake of it. She often fails at making her characters convincingly complex. Harry Potter’s teen angst phase came off as PSA-caricature to me but England does purportedly have a youth problem these days.

All the same…I did re-read the entire series, a compliment I have not bestowed on technically better writers whose books I’ve long since bartered. (Granted, I only own three of the HP series.) Rowlings quirky world creations and sympathetic characters combined with the pleasure of communal reading — it is wonderful to know one is enjoying a book with so many others and have endless opportunities to discuss it with them — are very potent. She could be an excellent author with a good editor. It is a bit grievous, though, to know that there are authors whose stories are both captivating and accomplished and yet are not half so spectacularly successful.

I like my mini-quests. My current one is to read all of Diana Wynne Jone’s backlist. Before this year I had read Howl’s Moving Castle, Conrad’s Fate, Power of Three and The Merlin Conspiracy. Since August I completed Chrestomanci Volumes I & II, The Dalemark Quartet and The Pinhoe Egg. I owned Charmed Life, the first in the Chrestomanci Vol. I, for a long time but was repeatedly put off by the first paragraph. I believe it’s one of her earlier novels, published in the 70s, and it stumbled with very abrupt, ugly sentences that did not promise the wry, elegant, tongue-in-cheek Diana I knew well.

Cat Chant admired his elder sister Gwendolen. She was a witch. He admired her and he clung to her. Great changes came about in their lives and left him no one else to cling to.

Mayhaps I’m overreacting but they read so serviceable, plain, without art or promise. The kind of book you get in grade on when you’re learning to read. Compare it to say, the opening in The Merlin Conspiracy, a favourite.

I have been with the Court all my life, travelling with the King’s Progress.

It’s even shorter than the first example but it scans well. It gives a tantalising bit of information while making you want to know more. That the narrator is writing this down also hints his/her situation is changing which also snags my curiousity. It works, you know? Jones also write it nearly 30 years later so of course she has a better handle of how to get things going. In any case, I did manage to get over Charmed Life’s awkward start, thanks to the quest and the knowledge that the Chrestomanci series is Jones’ most popular, and became one of her many readers to fall head over heels for Christopher Chant and his flamboyant dress robes.

One of the real charms Jones’ books holds for me is how her various urban and rural settings are not modeled too far from real life. In other stories you may have the familiar setting with the fantastical world intruding or its an extreme version of reality (like in Harry Potter with the Firebolts and wizard cards and such — which I adore btw). She explores and pokes at the strange British class system and, to a lesser extent, civil service. Her Conrad’s Fate struck me as being awfully similar to Robert Altman’s Gosford Park (don’t guffaw!) in it humorous, sharp study of an upper class home’s ecosystem, from the master and mistress down to the shoe shine boy. It’s not done to make any point in particular. And…although the magic *is* necessary to the plot , there is so little effort to jazz it up that I’d recommend it to non-fantasy fans who are Anglophiles and like mysteries.

I do not love all of her books equally. The reasons escape me but I found The Magicians of Caprona less than satisfactory. I’ve noticed DWJ’s preference for male over female heroines, the latter oft regulated to the prominent sidekick role. (Unfortunately, when she does have a book with a prominent female heroine, like the third book in The Dalemark Quartet, I pretty much can’t stand it and long for all my favourite boys from the previous two.) She does have an excellent grasp of what sets a young female reading going and that made up some of my favourite moments. In The Lives of Christopher Chant there’s a young goddess named Millie who is starved for reading material. Christopher, on the advice of a male friend with experience in the ladies’ reading tastes, buys her a series that I’m sure is modelled on Enid Blyton’s The Naughtiest Girl books. Mille immediately becomes quite desperate to have girl crushes, tea time, Midnight Feasts, become a prefect and so on which mirrored my reaction exactly, except that I also wanted to wake up at ungodly hours to swim in a lake. (I still remember the illustration of the girls running towards it.) In Pinhoe’s Egg there’s a similar moment when two girls despair for a horse, plan to buy riding gear and speak knowingly of gymkhanas after taking in one of those girl + pony books. But this one felt contrived, as if DWJ was trying to recapture a moment better done before.

I’m now in the middle of Hexwood which happily has a prominent heroine (who I like) and seems to be a mix of both fantasy and science fiction, which is always nice, as long as Jones is the author. I shan’t make any promises but I also read, among others, John Banville’s Doctor Copernicus and, in order to remain a critblog in Dan Green’s standings, I shall offer you more critical fare on both that and Mill on the Floss, of course. I read a strange mid-20th century Japanese novel entitled The Sailor Who Fell from Grace with the Sea by Mishima Yukio. It was such a hothouse novel and stamped with Freud’s seal of approval…lots of phallic poles, edifices, ship masts, womanly flowers opening up and what have you…and so riddled with imagery…I still don’t know what to make of it. (Japanese writers rule.)

Re-opening soon

In Books, Fiction, General, Literature on October 14, 2008 at 9:41 am

I am ready to return into literature’s welcoming bosom. As a sign that I made the right decision, the gods saw fit to give The Mill on The Floss the kind of soul wrenching end that left me sobbing. I haven’t done that since Andre Dubus’ “Rose” (a short story) which was years ago. Every one fusses about Middlemarch but perhaps one ought to take a closer look at my new favourite? I am now convinced that Eliot deserves to be immortalised in marble — I hope there’s a statue I can visit somewhere.


Middlemarch is her best so I’ll get to it some time but…is it another Fallen Woman story? My heart can’t take any more of those at present. I may swerve into Silas Marner instead. That’s another one of her books that I started to read in my younger days but never finished.

Glad I could help!

In Authors, Books on August 4, 2008 at 11:02 am

It’s a civic holiday in glorious Ontario, Canada. (My roommates and I have no idea what we’re supposed to be celebrating, except summer weather and Tim Horton’s ice caps, maybe.) Therefore I should give my magnificent brain a rest but when I see a fellow human in need I cannot turn my head aside. I cannot deny our shared humanity (as much as I may like to).

Rushdie is threatening legal action over some of Evans’s wilder allegations, which of course places him in a difficult situation. Two decades back, he was being held up as an icon of free speech beset by censorship, theocratic totalitarianism and mob violence. He’s clearly aware of the potential ironies: “I am not in the business of suppressing books,” he declares. “I just want the stuff taken out of which he knows to be untrue.”

“Untrue”; a tricky word. On Her Majesty’s Service purports to be a non-fiction book, and must be judged on that basis. But Rushdie’s whole career has been based on the artful renegotiation of the distinction between fact and fiction, history and fantasy. The magic realism of Midnight’s Children; the alternate history of The Ground Beneath Her Feet; the postmodern self-reference of Fury; the liberties taken with Hamlet and Star Trek in East, West; above all, the cavalier reworking of ancient texts and myths in The Satanic Verses; all of these are liable to the pedantic corrective that “it didn’t really happen like that”.

Yes, Mr. Footman, very good! You’re almost there. Your final conclusion should be: Mr. Salman Rushdie writes fiction: “An imaginative creation or a pretense that does not represent actuality but has been invented.” F-I-C-T-I-O-N.

Hint: Any need for the word “magic”, “myth” etc.

Bonus charity gesture: Hamlet is a play (P-L-A-Y), also an imaginative work, and while you may have endeared yourself to some fan boy communities, even Wikipedia knows that Star Trek isn’t depicting reality either.

Helpful suggestion: A political science beginner’s course on matters related to free speech and the limits thereof.

Token of thanks: No tangible objects needed! Just promise to think before you hand Guardian any more word vomit, especially on Rushdie news of which we readers get far too much. I’m subscribed to its RSS feed after all. Cheers!

Momentary Obsessions

In Art, Authors, Film, Literature, music on July 24, 2008 at 12:56 pm

Click on images

Is it bright where you are?

The Death of Elizabeth (1828)

The Death of Elizabeth (1828)

Portrait (1909) by Henri Le Fauconnier

Portrait (1909) by Henri Le Fauconnie

(Google translate for link)

Music: “Absence” from Les Nuits d’Été Op. 7 by Hector Belioz, lyrics by Théophile Gautier
Mezzo-soprano: Dame Janet Baker
Conductor: Herbert Blomstedt.
Orchestra: Danish radio symphonic orchestra

(Info about the cycle) (Lyrics)

The burden of both worlds

In Books, Caribbean, Excerpts, Fiction, Jamaica, Literature on July 24, 2008 at 11:28 am

“Tell me , do you have any coloured blood?”

Mark recognized, with anger and embarrassment, the small halt in his breathing but he answered easily enough, “Of course. Why do you ask?”

“Shouldn’t I? It seems an interesting point about a man like you.”

“I suppose so,” said Mark. “But it’s not usual to hear a European ask it.”

[...]

“It worries you quite a bit, eh?”

Mark grinned…”Does it show so much?” he asked.

“You ought to have seen your face, ” Hancko said, “when I asked you.”

“It’s a queer business,” said Mark. “Being my colour and and my class in my sort of country. All your training…all your influences and most of the education you get encourages you to value one side of what you were born and to despise the other. It becomes a reflex by the time you’re about five years old.”

“What are you going to do?” Hancko asked him then.

[...]

“What [are] you getting at?”

“Everything,” he replied, looking steadily at Mark, and with the accent of his English only discernible by the faint hardness of the vowels. “Everything you want to do, no matter how complex and untidy it looks, has something specific in it that moves the whole thing. An essence that you can get at.” He closed his hand slowly, like a man grasping a sinking stone in the water before it reached the bottom. ” Every question, comes down finally to ‘What’, not ‘Why’. In our case it’s a matter of giving an allegiance to the destiny of the poor. A real allegiance, I mean, that’s almost like religious faith, but not quite. Don’t mind that, though. It’s an allegiance to them as a class, to what they have to offer, to the work you must do with them. In your country one lot of people who are white rule and prosper by using the people like you. They’re able to use you because they allow you a good share in their world, and because they’ve given you a set of values to live by that depend on the approval of that world. And the poor of your world, the blacks, they’re kept poor because you, people like you I mean, get an idea clearly in life that there will always be something irreconcilable between the white world and the black. And only the white world has any value, call it beauty if you like, for you. Is that right?”

“Yes,” Mark said slowly. “I suppose that is the way it works.”

“It’s not a question,” Hancko continued, “of starting a race war: that’s almost more stupid than the other thing. It’s only a question of taking sides. Every time history becomes urgent and a little sick, as it is now, a man has to pick a side. Especially men like you who carry both your worlds within you, in your blood.”

From Voices Under The Window by John Hearne, published by Peepal Tree Press

Weekly Geeks Answers – Final Round

In Books, Fiction, Literature on July 23, 2008 at 6:48 pm

Hope it hasn’t been mentioned and my old eyes have deceived me, but have you seen the PBS version of Persuasion? I really enjoyed the whole PBS Jane Austen series.Tasses

No, I’m afraid not. I tend to avoid Austen adaptations unless there’s something in the advertising that indicates the director produced something beyond the ordinary. More importantly, I’m not even sure if I have PBS. But I remember reading reviews of it online and viewers feeling much the same as you did.

With all the Wyndham you’ve been reading, can you tell us which one appealed to you most? What about him made you want to read multiple titles?

Also, re: Wide Sargasso Sea — do you have an opinion in general on the writing of “sequels” using another author’s characters?Melanie

The Chrysalids retains its top spot because my reread revealed why images of it had stayed with me from boarding school (even if I couldn’t remember specific details). It’s also the best developed one in terms of plot and theme.

Generally when I find an author I like I seek out his other titles immediately. Penguin’s re-release of much of his backlist and the novels’ short length made it all too easy for me to gorge.

In general I lay a pox on authors who go about messing with other books in order to write pre- or sequels. I’m a huge Austen fan but I’ll never read those Darcy’s Diary claptrap. I made an exception for Wide Sargasso Sea because it’s a) considered a classic and b) Rhys wrote other novels that are also well-regarded.

On Literature and Knowledge: Is this more a theoretical book or more an op-ed from the author? Do you disagree with any of the author’s arguments?bookchronicle

Ahhh, it’s a bit of both with the op-ed strain being a bit more dominant. She goes to some lengths to define and elucidate an understanding of “knowledge” different from the scientific and, ergo, arguing for literature’s importance as is rather than trying to torture it into the objective paradigm.

I’ve read it months ago but I do remember being sceptical about her support for the idea that literature nurtures empathetic knowledge in readers. It’s a library book though, so I don’t have a copy here to go into more details. Hope I was clear enough!

How do you think Persuasion compares to other Austen novels? Would you recommend it to someone new to the author, or would you tell them to try something else first?Christine

Oh, I love it. Here’s my ranking, leaving out P&P because I’ve forgotten how much I like it and so must re-read to make things clear. Emma’s first, Northanger Abbey, Mansfield Park and Persuasion are all tied in for 2nd place because I can’t decide which I like better, while Sense and Sensibility languishes at the bottom because it’s good Austen but I don’t see what all the fuss is about.

You know, it all depends on what kind of reader the newbie is. All of Austen’s major novels are of a certain quality that renders that issue irrelevant. NA may not have MP’s complex architecture but it has a persuasive, enchanting element coupled with Austen’s judicious eye that wins readers over, for example. It’s more about what that new reader is likely to connect with first because, despite similar themes, Austen’s novels vary in style and focus, she brings different things to the fore in her works. I suppose most would go with P&P because it’s considered THE book but that’s a boring tactic, don’t you think? Sometimes it’s neater to take a divergent path even if you end up at the same finishing point.

Thanks to everyone for the great questions!

Weekly Geeks Answers – Round Two

In Books, Fiction on July 21, 2008 at 12:47 pm

Round One

The Lydia Millet questions

I just recently read a Lydia Millet novel. What’d you think of her? In the one I read, the characterization was brilliant, although her writing felt heavy at times.

How were Millet’s characters in the novel you read? How well were they drawn? Did you find yourself attracted to some while repelled by others? – kelskels

That’s a trickier question than you might expect. Her characterization for the kind of novel she wanted to write was excellent, IMO. In one review (via Soft Skull)– the only one you need read on this novel, btw, as the newspaper ones were pure pap for the most part — the critic wrote that “Millet delivers a novel that strips a character of all pretense, custom, habit and certitude, even of personality, to leave an entity that moves blindly forward in a world of blunt instinct.” I agree completely but it left others complaining that they weren’t the “fully dimensional”, proper rounded characters that all novelists must write all the time to be considered any good. Far be it from me to declare such critics flapping philistines with woefully limited ideas of what fiction is, may they please spare the public their editorially approved opinions but…*ahem* yes, I thought How the Dead Dream did well on that score. I too found her writing heavy at times the first time around but on a reread lost all sight of what I found problematic in the first place…until I picked up My Happy Life, another of her novels, which threw all that heaviness to the fore so I had to put it down and give myself a break.
Yes, I felt that pull and push to certain characters…did you read How the Dead Dream too or is this Millet’s general style? :D It’s like you’re in my head.

How the Dead Dream” is a book I have been meaning to read for some time now.

Who this book would speak more powerfully to. Do you believe that animal lovers/owners would connect with the main character more so than non-animal people?

Did this book make you think about the differences in how people treat their human family members as opposed to their animal family?

What do you think is the main message Millet is trying to get across to her readers?Joanne

While the main character may be more appealing to animal lovers I don’t think he would connect to them anymore than other readers precisely because he’s not a typical animal lover. Indeed for most of the novel although he becomes more conscious and concerned about others and the wider world he doesn’t develop in a clear cut, “let’s join PETA” manner.

No, the book didn’t make me think about how persons treat pets differently from relatives…. I think one of Millet’s main purposes in writing the book was to change environmentalism’s image to the average person. She wanted to sap it of its sentimental, “hobby” like status where people cry over cute pandas and instead highlight how it is as serious, and vital an issue as oil prices or health care, say, which are seen as more general “issues”. Especially when it comes to talking about animal extinction.

What’s Literature and Knowledge like? Easy to read and understand?Maree

Ummm…I would say it’s only easy to understand if you’re used to reading university-level texts on abstract matter like theory. That being said Dorothy Walsh is meticulous in defining her terms and building her argument careful from chapter to chapter, anticipating questions and answering them well, for the most part, and avoiding silly jargon. She writes so clearly, with a touch of humour that it’s a book I’d recommend to those who wanted to dip their toes into books on literature and aesthetics but are unsure of where to start and are afraid of being overwhelmed.

Was Nick right to sacrifice his vocation (teaching, scholarship) for a life of beauty and pleasure? Why do Nick and the MP argue about Richard Strauss?Amateur Reader

You know, I don’t think it’s a question of right or wrong since poor Nick didn’t even seem clear on what the heck he was going to write for his doctorate. He was clear about it except when he had to explain it to others — and maybe he was just shy, poor thing — but I say that if you can’t string two clear sentences together on your thesis you’re in trouble. Much easier to cut and snort. (I know that sweet Nick thought that no one would understand his oh so literary topic but I call BS.) He did get a whole (ugly) building out of it!

Nick and the MP’s musical arguments are symbolic of the British government’s oppression of homosexuals. Strauss controversially supported the Nazi regime who were famously homophobic and Gerald, a Thatcherite, no doubt supported Thatcher’s anti-gay legislation she established in the 80s.

(I went for the most outlandish explanation I could think of. How did I do?)

Have you read any of Dubus’ novels? Which form do you think he masters, or is he skillful with both? Which was your favorite story from this collection?Dew

Dubus only wrote one novel, an early one, which I’ve rarely seen mention and so am not much interested in. He (and I) consider him to be a short story writer. It’s his son Dubus III that’s known for his novels.

My favourite story from that collection is probably the first one “Killings” which, to my surprise, was adapted into a movie.

Yes, well.

In Books, Fiction, Literature, Reviews on July 21, 2008 at 12:00 pm

I have several drafts on Wharton (whoops, missed that deadline), Silent Light (for First Magazine), Lydia Millet (that one was supposed to be an epic), A.L. Kennedy and others seething from neglect in the bowels of my dashboard (while I wonder what else I can do for Open Letters Monthly). There are many (many) print and online literary magazine issues languishing unread. (This never, never happens. If I read anything it’s my LRB and OLM.) I’ll offer no excuses only my apologies and this post which I just churned out in an effort to get the juices flowing.

My most recent novel read is The Line of Beauty by Alan Hollinghurst. It’s a Booker winner so I heard about it but the prize plus the title emitted waves of tedium — I figured it featured some middle-aged don’s limpid natterings plus an affair with a fresh young student. This changed last year when I read Hollinghurst’s excellent TLS Commentary piece on Ronald Firbank. I thought his name sounded familiar and behold! he was the same Booker winner of that one book. Still wary I swerved and reached for his first novel instead The Swimming-pool Library and was amazed. Never had I imagined such an unabashedly sexual novel could at the same time be so “literary” — in this case simply meaning a book with complex themes, stimulating, morally ambiguous character dynamics, lovely writing, interesting set up of ideas, motifs and so on.

A lot can happen between 1988 when that book was published to 2004. If I had known that The Line of Beauty was so recent I might have skipped it for one of the 90s novels. (I held the impression it was a mid-90s novel for some reason.) Hollinghurst aged, mellowed, became wiser, a little less outrageous, more subtle, judicious, wilier, perhaps, likes to take his time, turn the wheel, build the moment with layer upon intricately built layer. Basically, it turned out to be the novel I dreaded. The sort of book that, I imagine, innocent hoi polloi buy in an effort to obey their betters by partaking in the superior literature of the day, only to have it lay on the nighttime table for half-a-year with the book mark at somewhere around page 110 holding up the latest Stephanie Plum and the new non-fiction sensation.

If I were a Henry James fan I may have loved this book, squeeing in delight at every big and small allusion. (Amateur Reader doesn’t think so.) Usually, I get a bit excited when a writer so consistently links his book to another’s, especially if it’s a classic one with which I am unfamiliar. Unless it’s Henry James whose books have always looked very long and sound very boring. (I was wrong about Edith — could be wrong about James…but have you seen the size of his books? I do it for Proust but he’s French. I’ll do a lot for French writers. And British Victorian writers but James is Edwardian, right? Missed it, old chum. Can we pretend his fiction is Edwardian for the sake of this post and my excuses? Isn’t he American or something? There, Americans don’t count, I go for the British.)

Nick Guest, the protagonist in Hollinghurst’s most recent novel, is a doctorate student in Literature at UCL writing an unfathomable thesis on James, his favourite writer. He graduated from Worcester College, Oxford where, despite his middle-class trappings, he managed to make friends with the handsome rower Toby whose uncle (on Mom’s side) is an Earl and whose politician father is similarly (though I think a less illustriously, title-wise) connected and very wealthy besides. The family likes Nick, so much so that they rent him one of the rooms in its London home, making him feel like one of the family. It helps that he can act as a vaguely defined guardian for Toby’s younger 19 year old sister who is clinically depressed and a bit wild besides: keep her from cutting herself, vet her boyfriends, assess and report on her general well-being, all the things a 21 year old is uniquely qualified to do. He is also a gay virgin and desperate to hook-up and indulge in much thought over pleasures.

Not much in the book happens as Hollinghurst covers three years of Guest in the Fedden household. Nick sleeps with some guys, is eternally conflicted about his existence in this upper-class lifestyle, oft disapproving and yet addicted to its sensual gifts and lifetime of ease. He sees through Gerald’s fake politician affability yet takes pride in being connected to Gerald in the first place. He wants to be true to himself and those around him but can’t quite manage it much of the time, probably because he’s not so sure what to make of himself. (I’m guessing my ignorance of all things Henry James is working against me here.) To be fair, the choice of sleeping mates is an essential structural point. At the beginning, in more innocent times (of limited opportunity), he puts aside a long-held crush for Toby and sends out a lonely heart letter to a Jamaican working class man in his late 20s. In the second section he’s made a leap and bags Wani, a beautiful, wealthy Lebanese millionaire (from his Oxford batch), a closeted gay whose debonair, effortless cool demeanour that the world admires is wholly owed to Cocaine Productions. In the third that’s done away with due to ex-lovers left and right succumbing to an “illness” that goes unnamed for most of the story. Each marks an evolution in Nick’s character to an extent.

The story’s historical backdrop colours the story heavily as well, something that only became obvious to me after I pulled myself out of Nick’s constant “OMG I’m so middle class + gay but I love all this sex+drugs+money+class privilege but oooh they can be so callous + self-delusional and I’m totes better than that haha but am I really, I’m so lost? lawks” loop. They’re in Thatcher’s England as the book starts out at around the peak of her popularity and ends after her last Tory win when her prospects begin to dim — all the while England’s unemployment numbers rises in the millions. As an upper-class Tory who treats his rural constituents as if they were extra-terrestrial visitors who must be humoured one realises how effectively Gerald’s status acts as blinkers. So his Thatcher-mania is almost redundant in that regard. There’s a scene near the end where Gerald is over-the-moon to have “The Lady” at his house for his wedding anniversary party — which doesn’t figure much for his poor wife must remind him that they will have the first dance not him and Thatcher — in which Hollinghurst has a jolly, slightly caustic old time describing all the plump, middle-aged Thatcherites following her around reverentially, patting their balding pates while eyeing her bounteous crop enviously, kneeling on the floor by her as she sits on the coach desperate to get in a word. It was too much like those deb balls you read in Regency romances or a parody of a Jane Austen ballroom scene except that our intrepid hero sees through it all and gleefully succumbs to it (even though he’s not a Thatcherite). Story of his life.

Homosexuality figures largely as well and lends the novel a furtive quality. Most of Nick’s upper-class society know that he’s gay they just politely ignore it except the rougher ones who take jibes at him in order to establish some imaginary superiority. It’s a shadow world that, unfortunately, is gaining more public attention because of AIDS. The landscape is trickier because Nick has a penchant for black lovers who aren’t fortunate enough to have millionaire Daddies to smooth over the race issue among his company. Wani has that but is supremely conscious of its less than stellar supermarket origins therefore he’s not going to make things worse by even implicitly acknowledging a relationship with Nick. Add this to Nick’s class issues and although his life seems charmed for most of the novel it’s more like he’s dancing on a precipice held up by sheer luck. And though his richer friends may be more secured Hollinghurst never allows that secure decadence to permeate the entire novel. It has a much more enclosed quality like a snow globe and around them things are harder, more precarious, less glamorous.

Rather, this is how the novel appears to me now as I turn it over. I assure you while reading it it felt more like trying to do the foxtrot hip deep in mud. I know it is a more complex novel that The Swimming-Pool Library , far more intricately built. There are untold things you could pick apart that I’ve not mentioned, including the musical allusions and the architectural references and close attention to buildings in particular, which carries over from TS-PL. No doubt critics would view Hollinghurst’s change in hero an advancement — from the rich, carefree, lusty, outrageous yet often judicious William Beckwith to the anxious, naive, smart but wilfull, middle-class Nick more liable to sink than sail and so therefore a tastier morsel for a good novelist. However, I prefer when Hollinghurst’s caustic humour and abandonment is closer to the surface, when he doesn’t draw the curtain on a sex scene early enough to make it “tasteful” and more palatable (I suppose). That writer appeared in The Line of Beauty but not early enough to save it. My interest in Hollinghurst still remains, though, and I intend to read all of his backlist so that should tell you something.

Weekly Geek Answers – Round One

In Books, Fiction, Literature on July 20, 2008 at 6:58 pm

The Weekly Geek activity

What was your favorite (or least favorite) part of Persuasion? Did you think Captain Wentworth wrote the best, most romantic love letter of all time??? Have you seen any movie versions of Persuasion? Which one is your favorite if you have?Becky

As I look back now I can’t say that I have a particular favourite section. The novel as a whole stands out to me very brightly in being the opposite of what I expected — the boring Austen novel. It’s the last major one I read after contemplating a reread of Pride & Prejudice because I thought it would be slow — everyone mentions it’s about “patience” which is an upstanding theme but doesn’t sound exciting unless you’re going to make it allegorical and over-the-top like Pilgrim’s Progress (as I remember it anyway). Instead it was filled with near unbearable tension and I found myself entirely taken with Anne and her troubles.

I’ve never seen any of the film adaptations and tend to avoid them as a rule. Parts of the film industry appear to see Austen as a dependable money cranker, fans ever ready to take in another run-of-the-mill boots and petticoats in the country romance rather than making much of anything. Three exceptions to his is Ang Lee & Emma Thompson’s “Sense & Sensibility” (which I like more than the book (!)), the BBC’s faithful P&P 1995 tv series and (somewhat controversially) the latest P&P adaptation starring Keira Knightley. It wasn’t the most faithful and there are some corny lines (help us) but it’s the most cinematic one I’ve ever seen over all others (including the BBC).

How would you describe Andre Dubus’ literary style?Bybee

In the school of Hemingway, perhaps? That seems to be a catch-all phrase for male writers who write plain, efficient sentences. He’s very much a realist as it’s generally understood and focused on character. They’re usually working class — the men are often military and the women are their mothers, wives, girlfriends or widows — and troubled. He writes with a singular sympathy — I’m not exaggerating here. I write this about other authors but if I were to name a prototype Dubus’ stories would be it — and a measured perspective to all whether it’s a New England waitress with an abusive boyfriend or a misogynistic Marine for whom women are simply things to stick his willy in. He gives them all some grace.

His stories’ success is wholly based on how compelling they are regardless of how mundane and typical the situations may be. Without that there isn’t really anything else for you to rest your eye on and get much nourishment from. But at his best — watch out! He’s the only writer who has ever made me soak my pillow with tears. (I’m an easy crier and tears can trickle down but at the end of “Rose” which I think is at the end of his The Last Worthless Evening I was sobbing, hiccuping, the works.) For anyone who thinks short stories are lesser than novels, Dubus is the man to read.

The Wide Sargasso Sea questions

Tell me more about Wide Sargasso Sea! Most of the reviews I’ve seen of it have been on the fence. Personally, I didn’t like the way either Rochester and Annette were protrayed. Also, Rhys changed a lot about her main character (including her name), which disturbed me. What do you think of Rhys’s writing style? Do you think she did Jane Eyre a service or disservice by writing a “sequel?”Katherine

I’ve been wanting to read Wide Sargasso Sea for ages. How did you like it in comparison to Jane Eyre?Alessandra

I started Wide Sargasso Sea once… it seemed to weird so I never finished it. Did you like it? Find it weird? Did it mess up the Jane Eyre story for you or add to it?Suey

I wrote a bit on this novel before with a promise to write more, which I fully intended to do, until I lost all my damn notes. *ahem*

I turned the last page, my centre of mass shifted, something that always happens when a work has more than justified its existence — in one sense, it justified and confirmed mine as well. That should have been an euphoric feeling but I was also sorrowful. The best thing happened — I’d read another great, great work that confirms why I read fiction, specifically novels. And the worst thing happened — my perspective on Jane Eyre had changed forever. Each book by a different author inhabits its own world of course. It’s only that I’ll never be able to read about Brontë’s poor, monstrous Bertha Mason without wondering what, to Brontë’s mind, brought her there to that Thornfield attic. Rhys showed one possibility and it moved me, almost unbearably.

No fence sitting here, I’m a full on fan. I’m not the person to go to when assessing a novel’s “weirdness” because I love nothing so much as crazy, over-the-top French authors, heated imagery, spaced out sentences etc. So Rhys’ hot house, Eden-after-the-fall with the off-kilter, slightly menacing characters were a plus for me rather than a minus. It didn’t mess up Jane Eyre for me although it did open me a little wider to Brontë’s stereotypical treatment of Bertha. Funnily enough it’s Vilette that gives my Jane Eyre enthusiasm a more tarnished quality. I suppose it’s because it’s one thing for an author to lay a j’accuse at another but a whole different thing when the original turns the gun on herself, as it were.

I love both Wide Sargasso Sea and Jane Eyre in completely different ways. The authors are so different: hailing from different times, countries, class…just such different worlds and produced such different books that, despite the obvious links, I can’t put them side by side and say which one I prefer.

Katherine, your question is trickier. I’m not sure what big changes Rhys made to the Antoinette character besides the name change since Brontë didn’t give much beyond vague details on Bertha’s background as best as I can remember. (But I don’t have the best memory so please expound in comments if you care to!) For a novel to be based on Bertha I’d think a novelist would have to go beyond what Brontë mentioned to get much of a story. Neither did I take issue with how Antoinette and Rochester were portrayed. Especially in Rochester’s case his behaviour was very plausible. In Jane Eyre he was never a saint or even a very good character for much of the story and in light of how English male gentry were raised and Europe’s scientific view of Creoles — where everything from the tropical climate to miscegenation made them suspect — and add that to his young age…I may not have approved of but story-wise it worked.

The name change disturbed me but only in the way I figure Rhys meant it to. Rochester is denying Antoinette her personhood and that plays pretty well as one explanation as to how things played out in Jane Eyre.

I am not one for classic prequels or sequels. It’s why it took me so long to get to Wide Sargasso Sea even though I’d heard of it since I was 12/13; and heard it described as a sort of post-colonial, West Indian answer to the imperial British classic, something which its proponents no doubt expected to appeal to young Jamaican students. Not to me since even then I instinctively disliked that kind of overtly political, messagey stuff when it came to literature. Also it was contradictory since until that point I had learned implicitly that British classics were THE books of the English-speaking world and then all of a sudden I was expected to do a 180 and want to knock it down. (I was a reader before high school and so it may have been easier for those who only read school assigned texts which included West Indian lit. Most bookstores on the island, though, gave a different message.)

I only came to it when I made the decision to read more West Indian literature. I think it’s an excellent novel in which the author didn’t write it as a kind of cheap Jane Eyre vs. Wide Sargasso Sea smack down so I don’t think it besmirches Brontë’s literary legacy.

“Are you having a laugh?”*

In Books, Fiction, Humour, Reviews on July 19, 2008 at 7:19 pm

This won’t be the most edifying post you’ve ever read here but I saw a similar bit at Sterne and decided I’d share some Amazon one/two star reviews on some of the books I read this year. It’s less about the book in question than the reason the book got trashed…

Persuasion by Jane Austen

2.0 out of 5 stars Such a huge disappointment., January 16, 2008

When I saw Masterpiece Theater was doing a series on Jane Austen and her novels, I decided to read them in the order the shows would air–starting with Persuasion. It was the first and last of Austen’s that I will read. She may well have captured the mores and social rules of the time, but she didn’t create characters I could really care about. I stuck with it to the end and found the revelations about Mr. Elliot to come out of nowhere and the ending romance to be something we could see coming from the very start. I’ll take Edith Wharton over Austen any day.

The Stone Angel by Margaret Laurence

1.0 out of 5 stars Superlatives apply., April 10, 2001

What I mean by this is that affixing the title of “Worst book ever” to The Stone Angel is not a stretch. I have read some truly bad novels in my time, but The Stone Angel is simply horrifying. Never has there been a more repulsive character than Hagar, a neurotic, arrogant, despicable old woman. The book is told in a series of intermittent flashbacks that seem pointless in conjunction with Hagar’s current situation (which is that her family wants to put her in a nursing home).At first I was mildly interested by the florid writing style, but the book soon made me numb (it actually caused me physical pain). The reason for this is that the main character of The Stone Angel’s story is the most repulsive fictional creation I’ve ever beheld. Hagar’s bloated idiocy renders her ineffably repellent after just a few chapters. Being 90 years old, her thoughts and dialogue are completely separated from reason, destroying any interest a person could have in the progress of the story. Her flashbacks further reinforce her overweening nature. I suppose this book has merit if you wish to enter the mind of a 90-year old arrogant woman whose logical faculties have been shattered, but who really wants to read about that? Sure it’s believable (for which some reviews have credited it), but why on earth does anyone care about a cantankerous old hag with bowel problems? Talk about the ultimate anti-hero!

[...]

V for Vendetta by Alan Moore & David Lloyd.

2.0 out of 5 stars Very well done … but somehow lacking, September 29, 2005

Let me first say that it’s a well-written, fascinating, literate piece of work. I thoroughly enjoyed reading it.

Then again, afterwards you’re left with a sort of empty feeling. Because where did those horrors Moore alludes to come from? And the answer is: from the beliefs that Moore espouses!

Yes, ladies and gentlemen. In the scene where he broadcasts a message via a TV station, he plainly states that we are just animals, fresh off the tree. And this was the exact view that Hitler, for one, used to justify his campaign of killing the unwanted: the old, the infirm, the mentally ill, gays, Jews. As Bethell writes:

“During the period of American neutrality in World War I, Kellogg was posted to the headquarters of the German general staff and was shocked to find German military leaders, sometimes with the Kaiser present, supporting the war with an “evolutionary rationale.” They did so with “a particularly crude form of natural selection, defined as inexorable, bloody battle. …
[...]
“You like Darwin?” The German intellectuals were saying. “We’ll give you Darwin.” (end quote)

*I’ve been watching all of Extras these days.

Weekly Geeks

In Books, Fiction on July 19, 2008 at 5:05 pm

I joined this initiative started by Dewey months and months ago but never participated until now. Members come up with a weekly theme question bloggers partake if they are so inclined, links are collected, we visit each other, mingle and have great fun. Since I’m one of those awful persons who swear up and down that they have something great about to splash on this blog in the next instant, lovely readers voice their anticipation, and nothing comes forth, this one is right up my alley.

1. In your blog, list any books you’ve read but haven’t reviewed yet. If you’re all caught up on reviews, maybe you could try this with whatever book(s) you finish this week.

2. Ask your readers to ask you questions about any of the books they want. In your comments, not in their blogs. Most likely, people who will ask you questions will be people who have read one of the books or know something about it because they want to read it.

3. Later, take whichever questions you like from your comments and use them in a post about each book. I’ll probably turn mine into a sort of interview-review. Link to each blogger next to that blogger’s question(s).

4. Visit other Weekly Geeks and ask them some questions!

My vast list. Asterisks denote books for which posts are pending. I left out books that I never intended to review:

Wide Sargasso Sea – Jean Rhys
Literature and Knowledge – Dorothy Walsh
Finding a Girl in America and Other Stories – Andre Dubus
Spin – Robert Charles Wilson
Persuasion – Jane Austen
How the Dead Dream – Lydia Millet*
The Chrysalids – John Wyndham*
The Day of the Triffids – John Wyndham*
The Trouble with Lichen – John Wyndham*
Chocky – John Wyndham*
Paradise – A.L. Kennedy
Chess Story – Stefan Zweig, translated by Joel Rotenberg
The Line of Beauty – Alan Hollinghurst*

Ask away (if I have any readers left)! Make it as long, short, trivial, profound, facetious as you like. I am your humble servant. It’s likely that I’ll answer questions in an actual post since I can blather on…

Alive and reading

In Books, Fiction, Literature, What I'm Reading on July 19, 2008 at 3:28 pm

To break through my marvellous summer blogging block, let’s have a look at what I am or about to gobble up, shall we? (I have a zillion half-finished 1,000 word drafts molting in the dashboard, not to mention literary magazines (print and online) languishing in neglect. Pathetic.)

I bought a pile of Peepal Tree Press books earlier this year one of which is published in conjunction with the Calabash Literary Festival we all know and love. I’m still with Jamaica’s first literary vanguard so I started with John Hearne’s Voices Under the Window. It’s a nice step forward after reading Rachel Manley’s book about her grandparents because Drumblair endsright around the time when Jamaica was moving into the black power movement and she (being of lighter skin) discovered it difficult (being of lighter skin) to make a place for herself. Her grandparent’s legacy in Jamaica’s fight for independence turned out to be an albatross. Hearne, as Kwame Dawes wrote in the novel’s introduction, was in a similar position because of his skin colour and his neglect to pen a suitably political novel to reflect the times, according to his detractors. Beyond that Dawes makes much of Hearne’s flashback technique and how it shapes the novels over-all structure and influences one’s reading. I’m curious to see what I’ll make of it.

Northwestern University Press is currently my favourite press because of the Pierre Jean Jouve in its blacklist. Paulina 1880 made the start of my year amazing and I’m expecting similar wonder here. I don’t even knowwhat The Desert World’s about yet, but Lydia Davis is the translator (w00t!). Ugh, if only she could have translated all of Proust for Penguin.

Still with Adam Bede. My reading here has been rather distracted after an earnest start so I haven’t had anything thoughtful to blog about here or mention over at The Valve. Anyway, the other participants have rather l33t close-reading skills so colour me mostly a bystander in this experiment. Not that George Eliot is encouraging me to be much else. I’m more of Rich Puchalsky’s mind so far — I’m partial to all the character’s Eliot does not think much of and more or less wearied of that magnificent country paragon Adam Bede and the saintly Dinah (who God should please love so much that he takes her to her heavenly home so that I don’t have to abide anymore of her perfect preacher letters). Mrs. Poysner is my favourite so far if only because one minute I think she’s rather horrid and the next minute the best thing Adam Bede has going for it. Here Eliot is unable to lay hold hard enough to my moral rudder in order to establish what I ought to feel about her. Blergh.

What’s currently on your reading plate? And is your summer going well?

Where does “The Atlantic” find these women?

In Books, Fantasy/Science Fiction, WTF on June 29, 2008 at 7:11 pm

Is there some kind of secret underground sanctuary that churns out these dinosaurs?

Those of you who pitch science fiction to wives and girlfriends who do not enjoy it are probably saying something along the following lines: “Space ships! Alien monsters! Men in tights!” Instead, for women who find that sort of thing distasteful, talk about it as a fairy tale–only a fairy tale with science instead of magic. The basic emotional space it taps is the same.

My head hurts. (via The Elegant Variation in case you think I actually read “The Atlantic”.)

I’ve got new posts coming up for you soon, I pwomise.

Drunken inspiration

In Books, Excerpts, Fiction, Literature on June 18, 2008 at 10:41 am

My life is nowhere near as simple as it may appear. Being me is a job — is labour so time-consuming and expensive that I have to have a second job just to support it. So that I can drink, I have to get drink and that isn’t something people give away and then there’s drink that I need because I have drunk and the other drink I have to keep around because, sooner or later, I will drink it. That’s a full-time occupation: that’s like being a miner, or a nurse. I involve constant work. Robert said that he’d be cross that I would bear, because he didn’t understand my situation and couldn’t know that it was a lie. I already have my cross: we’ve been getting acquainted for years.

The truth of the matter is: yes, you do carry the weight of it, drag it along and heartily wish you were free — especially during mornings, early evenings, periods spent in bank queues, or near banks, or any part of of any Sunday. You believe that you should not, and cannot, go on and, naturally, you are right.

Because in the end, you will always trade places: this is a physical law: that your cross will change to something merciful, will lift your body up and start the task of bearing you.

I drink myself higher, it’s all I need to ascend. This is my meditation when the worrying gets bad — in conjunction with this lovely truth: that many others long before me have recognised the nature of my calling and left ingenious clues behind them to that effect. Al-khol, ethanol, ethyl alcohol — we christened drink in the magic of distillation, we baptised it with tokens of its heat, the words we give it kindle, burn, shine. They are made out of alchemy, spirits: coloured with Arabic, Latin, Greek: and they hide within their syllables the names for primordial matter and for the ether that soothes between everything, that permeates all substance and all space. C2H5OH — generations before its components were discovered, we understood th essence of alcohol, its absolutes: that is oxygen and hydrogen and carbon — the earth’s irreplaceable elements, the water of our life.

I work this all out in my kitchen: how it makes sense and is like a poem, in that it also makes no sense whatsoever, but it any case touches you very much.

From Paradise by A.L. Kennedy

Programme interruption

In music on June 17, 2008 at 3:26 pm

This is the ugliest art I will ever display on my blog but it is worth it for it graces the cover of Wolf Parade’s sophomore release Mount Zoomer! Yeeeeeeeesssss.

*ahem* Carry on.

Minor scribbles

In Books, Fiction, General, Literature on June 17, 2008 at 12:54 pm

Edit: La la, here is my review up at FM: The Intoxication of Transformation.

I got wrestled into being a regular contributor to First Magazine to pronounce on all things ♣literary. Since I’m barely able to keep up with my blog we’ll see how it goes. My first bit will be on Zweig’s The Post-Office Girl and, depending on what actually turns up on the site, I’ll post some complementary commentary here because I love that little book to pieces. Easily re-readable which is always a good sign. I’ll have to go back and reread Chess Story since I didn’t quite get it the first time around…

The Valve is holding a summer reading group and the book of choice is Adam Bede by the lovely George Eliot. It’s practically my first book by her since I barely remember a thing about Mill on the Floss which I picked up over a decade ago. It ought to be fun so consider joining in. Chapters 1-5 should have be read by today but the reading schedule is generous so one should have little problem catching up. I’m rereading the chapters (and eyeballing what others say first) before I put anything up. Have you read it before?

How are the other Golconda slaves doing with the Edith Wharton? I found it perfect with its mix of social commentary and romance. I was not expecting it to be such a fun read as I had the impression Wharton was a very serious, serious writer, depressed maybe, and that Winona Ryder chick was in that movie adaptation and is she ever in a fun movie (besides Beetlejuice). I’m a bit more eager to scoop up her other novels though. It’s an interesting book to read in conjunction with The Post-Office Girl. Both involve impoverished characters (though I daresay my Christine in Zweig is a lot worse off) with precarious positions in higher society whose values change as a result of their experience albeit in different ways.

Au contraire, I can submit articles on anything I like! Isn’t that nice.

Blood & Periwinkles

In Books, Fantasy/Science Fiction, Fiction, Literature on June 17, 2008 at 12:28 pm

I completed nine books in May but posted few reviews so I thought I’d get you up to speed on my literary exploits. You know how I felt about the Rothfuss book. I thought I knew my position on John Wyndham until I read Chocky (any connection to the horror film franchise?) which underscored all of my reservations on how Wyndham wrote female characters. (Niall was wise in his reservations.) Lots of bullshit about women depending on instinct while the good ol’ boys relied on reason. And Wyndham didn’t do much with the story — just used it as a playground for daft gender theories and cool speculations about what gadgets an alien race might have. He tucked in a creepy scene near the end — he does creepy very well — but it couldn’t save the book. I abandoned my first draft on his work in order to start another to factor in my reassessment. The Chrysalids, The Trouble with Lichen and The Day of the Triffids still rock. (Lizzy has been reading some Wyndham as well.)

Earlier this year Anne of Table Talk transformed my idea of what could be considered Young Adult literature with Alan Garner’s The Owl Service. Desperate for a good fantasy I recalled one of the books she had suggested about which I’d been curious: †Bloodtide by Melvin Burgess. Well, she did it again. Periodically throughout the book I’d put it down, lips agape, and mouth to the air around me, Come on, now, this is YA? The prose and plot development are simple enough and the focus on young twins, a boy and girl, who are 14 at the beginning, and how Burgess depicts them are recognizably YA. During the first few chapters the only thing that raised my eyebrow was that the father of the twins had married his daughter off to a man described as being “not yet thirty”. Trifle young, isn’t she? I thought, shifting uncomfortably.

Burgess, in his wisdom, revealed an Icelandic saga story was his inspiration at the back of the book. Think violence, ambition, betrayal, incest, meddling gods, all ruled by fate upgraded with unholy 20th century modifications. Think human and animal hybrids, called “halfmen”, genetically engineered on demand, solely built for warfare, which means that in addition to having claws or hands eminently suitable to certain weaponry, for example, the creature may also be geared to understand negative emotions and ideas like hate, made to be aggressive and loyal to his creator but lack pity or love. The process wasn’t perfect so quite a few of the creations went crazy and “pure” humans scorned them so they lived on the edge of human communities, munching on any bodies (of any kind, human or not) that were flung out to the outlying boundaries.

All that madness aside, and there’s a lot of it, the most compelling and heartbreaking element was Signy Volson’s fate. Readers follow her journey from her start as a violent, independent, bold and loyal but in many ways still very much an inexperienced 14 year old girl. She is the only daughter of Val Volson, an ambitious, brutal gang lord who owns half of London. It’s a dystopian future in which the “Old London” is a prison in the wilderness, miles away from the smoothly run, advanced, civilised England (which I assume is more like our present-day) by a stretch of halfmen-inhabited land and a high wall enclosure. To further his ambitions of uniting London, defeating halfmen and taking on the rest of country, he marries his daughter to his rival Conor, who owns the other half of London, as part of a treaty.

Signy follows orders under protest but, to her surprise and her twin brother Siggy’s disgust, she falls in love. What follows is betrayal on the most awesome scale, mass murders, incest, pogroms, fratricide, gods who appear as one-eyed bulls or sly red foxes and gift magical weapons or facilitate the establishment of dynasties with a tell-tale mischievous style. Signy’s initial passive role as virgin sacrifice belies how subsequent events both horrible and poignant force her to take on a more decisive role, one fuelled by a disturbing, heart-breaking mix of love, hate and complete self-absorption. The woman we see at the end seems almost nothing like the idealistic young girl who dreamt of her and her husband building a new Jerusalem. And though she is a mover and shaker on the other hand Burgess strongly implies that all characters are working towards a destiny they had no real control over which just raises the volume of the booming doom drums as you read along.

He manages all the story’s elements with ease and a certain flair. He changes narrative perspective periodically among an omniscient 3rd person in an observational role (also used to do a little foreshadowing) and first person with major and minor characters. For the halfmen he adopts a slang that forms onomatopoeias that fit what whatever animal the human is mixed with (whether pig or dog) which, combined with clear grasp of personalities, makes for some memorable, signature passages. (This is begging for a quote but the book was recalled. Silly library readers.)

Burgess gave me hope so I cautiously moved further into fantastical territory with Patricia A. McKillip’s with The Changeling Sea. A short novel published in the late 80s it explores the usual McKillip themes of self-discovery and -realisation and love’s painful consequences. (Romantic, and to a lesser extent familial, love is always torturous in McKillip’s books, sometimes a destructive force.) More fairy tale than faux D&D princess + GRRRRL power fantasy, at its centre is a young woman called Periwinkle who loses her father at sea and then her mother to it as she, deep in depression, gives her attention to little else but any window from which she can look out to the water. Angry at both the sea and her mother’s surrender to it she moves to a friend’s abandoned home. It once belong to an elderly woman who, among other things, taught her some useless spells. Unaware that she is mired in a funk herself she trudges from her floor scrubbing job at the local inn to her isolated new abode, taking detours to curse at the sea and check on her mother. It takes a (solid gold) chained giant sea-dragon, a charming, mysterious young magician and a tortured, dark-haired prince (is there any other kind?) of mixed heritage to disturb the girl and the entire sea-side town.

McKillip works better with redone or fairy tale inspired stories that focus on a few characters rather than conventional mage + long lost king/queen + quest with an ensemble cast. They suit her metaphorical prose and minimalist plots. In The Changeling Sea she doesn’t waste time on explicating the setting so that we can identify which bastardized medieval Europe we’re getting this time. She doesn’t hurt our ears with awful attempts at archaic English phrasing. It’s only some brief descriptions of the royals’ transportation and clothing that hint at a pre-modern time, but it’s pleasurable to imagine the book with a more indiosyncratic mix.

The relationship between the prince and the scrubbing girl is similar to the one in Winter Rose — their doomed love for each other causes as much pain as pleasure. Again, it is the girl who has to help save the prince unearth who he really is. Lighter touches come with a prince less emotionally blocked and a young wizard more ironic than old and grave. There’s the usual cast of humorous villages, a trope McKillip manages well by not trying too hard. It all comes to a mostly bittersweet ending with a couple of bright spots.

For McKillip magic is never simply thunderbolts and levitation, another reason why she works best with fairy tales. Characters express their anger and hurt through spells, enchantments represent identity issues and familiar secrets. These are the domestic conflicts of broken couples, depressed widows, broken homes, survivor’s grief. The dark magic cannot be broken until parted couples forgive and compromise, feelings resolve and closure is found. This is not the thwarted ambitions of would-be tyrants and long-lost princelings. Others do that well but not McKillip, or so I thought until I read The Riddle-Master trilogy.

I wonder what age group it would be recommended for if it got age-banded.

Glimpses of an idiot

In Books, Fiction, Literature, What I'm Reading on June 15, 2008 at 9:29 pm

I’m in the middle of Glimpses of the Moon by Edith Wharton, which is a smashin’ good read by the by, for the Slaves of Golconda. But for this post all I want to say is that Nicholas Lansing is a stupid ass and I hope he drowns off the side of Ibis in a spectacularly horrid incident. And may Carol Hicksies (or whatever her stupid name is) get the measles.

Paris Review Spring 2008 – Short fiction

In Fiction, Literature, Short Stories, literary journals on June 3, 2008 at 12:44 pm

Some days ago there was a kerfuffle about The Virginia Quartlery Review public airing of its readers commentary on submitted stories. I haven’t bothered to read the disgruntled comments because writers (online) tend to get disgruntled about a lot of things for which I, as a reader, can only raise a disinterested eyebrow. One good post that came out of it was Rhian Ellis’ evaluation of the stories in a VQR issue (via pinkyspaperhaus). She claimed that, typical of a trend in literary magazines, the stories focused on external, cultural and/or political events at the expense of characters; these tended to be ciphers for the author’s ideas.

The only lit mag fiction I read on a regular basis is what’s published in The Paris Review — I prefer critical journals. Many of the stores it prints aren’t proper ones but excerpts from soon-to-be published novels, which I find mildly annoying. Actual short stories, even only competent ones work better than novel excerpts of similar quality because they are structured to. I find TPR’s selection to be the opposite of VQR’s per Ellis’ take.

Here the stories tend to be nothing but character studies of one kind or another: US immigrants dealing with culture shock (often in university settings); divorced family dealing with everyday life in the aftermath; settled parent dealing with wayward young or not so young offspring; some childhood memory; uniquely middle-class problems like stock problem obsession…you get the drift. I don’t have anything against fiction about the middle-class, of which I am an enthusiastic member. But I do relish variety and I find that it’s the contributors who depart from the norm that offer the most impressive pieces (ie I go to Chapters.ca or call the indie book store and order their books immediately). It’s not impossible that this is partly so simply because they are so different. It may be coincidental that the stories that veer off the beaten TPR path are a notch above the rest or that those writers have to be so much better to get printed while a Pulitzer winner’s stodgy, middle-of-the-way entry sails in. (It also helps if you’re dead and woefully under-appreciated or dead and famous.) Anyway, it’s not that the middle-class isn’t important — it’s not that any topic you choose to write about must hit such arbitrary criteria — it’s that you must make me feel as if your fiction needs to exist.

Significant departures in theme or style tend to occur when the writer isn’t American, and/or is of an older generation, like Daniel Kehlman and Alessandro Barricco or dead Russian writers who do cryptic political parables. The exceptions to this are Benjamin Percy and Jesse Ball, the first who writes about the lower classes and the second who doesn’t only travel on the typical realist road. Of those who write the TPR standard and make it compelling, again they tend to be foreigners like Mohsin Hamid and Damon Galgut. This is no surprise: for whatever reason I’m almost always unimpressed by the TPR-published authors that everyone else is praising and handing out awards to. Remember that Icebergs tale I shrugged at earlier this year? Got a National Magazine Award nomination. (As did André Aciman’s and Uzodinma Iweala’s. From that lot only Iweala’s story grabbed me.)

If you open any recent issue 9.9 times out of 10 you’ll get a story done in a conventional style, 1st or 3rd person, male narrator/protagonist. Style-wise Balls and Barricco’s stories are the most inventive ones I’ve yet read; both happened to play with space on the page. For Barricco the spaces between groups of words worked like they sometimes do in poetry, putting breaks in thoughts without the use of punctuation which impacts on rhythm as well; and he used no paragraph breaks. He wrote from multiple narrative perspectives, too, different genders and class, allowing a more complete and varied picture of the first, and very dangerous, car race in Europe. In Ball’s story, winner of the Plimpton Prize for Fiction, I discerned the breaks in the way sentences, paragraphs and dialogue were put together without any spatial reinforcement. It was gratifying to read in his Bookslut blog interview (which I can’t find because the site was created to be impervious to all search engines — brilliant idea) that the original manuscript is about twice as long because of the gaps he interspersed throughout the text. The gruesome revenge by duels, random violent acts, disjointed, surreal sequences that may or may not be dreams, the lack of “realistic” characters, all are memorable and not the TPR norm. I like when the magazine surprises, and the people involved do too, so let’s hope stories like that are published more often.

Unfortunately, the fiction in the Spring 2008 issue came too early to fulfil that expressed desire. The first story ended on a high note, the second started strong then petered out and the third didn’t get (me) anywhere.

Tim Winton is an Australian writer who has the honour of being a Booker finalist. Therefore it’s no surprise that he writes fine, elegant prose — a superior example of the readable type — that carries one along as the narrator describes moments from his childhood living with his parents in a small seaside town during the 60s. (So I assume since he and a pal meet up with a bunch of hippie surfers (one can be both right?).) Winton writes of the relationship between the child and his parents with a delicate tension that makes one believe that there’s more that went on, perhaps later in the narrator’s life, that is not revealed. All we get is a father anxious about his son going near any sizeable water body because of an old friend’s fatal drowning incident and his own lack of swimming ability. It’s the son’s new friend Loonie who tells him about the first source of the father’s anxiety. Loonie is, of course, an extrovert and a rapscallion while the narrator is a quiet, “solitary by nature” type although not bereft of all childish mischief. (For once I’d like to read the rapscallion’s story. Any takers?)

It’s all very, very nice but not very exciting, eh? Rather same old, same old until a page or two at the end when the narrator describes the euphoria he feels when he watches and then does surfing for the first time.

I couldn’t have put words to it as a boy, but later I understood what seized my imagination that day. How strange it was to see men do something beautiful. Something pointless and elegant, as though nobody saw or cared. In Sawyer, a town of millers and loggers and dairy farmers, with one butcher and a rep from the rural bank, men did solid, practical things, mostly with their hands…The only exception was strange Yuri Orlov, who carved lovely old-word toys from stuff he fossicked up from the forest floor. But…people said he was half mad anyway.

[...]

For all those years when Loonie and I surfed together…we never spoke about the business of beauty…There was never any doubt about the primary thrill of surfing, the huge body rush we got flying down the line with the wind in our ears. We…quickly understood how narcotic the feeling was, how addictive it became; from day one I was stoned from just watching. We talked about skill and courage and luck — we shared all that, and in time we surfed to fool with death — but for me there was still the outlaw feeling of doing something graceful, as if dancing on water was the best and bravest thing a man could do.

I admit it’s arguable whether Winton assuredly rode that wave of sentimentality or wiped out but for me the earnestness and emotional fervency innervated a boring seascape. It broke through Winton’s proper prose and, perhaps because I’m an island girl, the kinship the man feels in his old age at the very end, when he witnesses a child going through a similar experience, lent the story a memorable grace weightier than the kind he tried to achieve in the previous bits. But if this is a novel excerpt — since I detected that nagging lack I suspect it is — I’d only accept the book free of charge. Maybe.

In comparison to Winton’s gated community fiction — yes, his character appears to be working class but the *writing style strangled that completely — Ryan McIlvain’s is less cordoned off and settled, not only because it is set mostly among impoverished Brazilian neighbourhoods and involves Mormon missionaries. There is a wider variety of characters, many out-of-place, and all interacting and getting into conflicts. McLeod is a young Mormon from the USA a few months away from the end of his missionary work. So close to finishing he hits up against an accumulation of obstacles as his missionary partner, Elder Passos who he doesn’t much like, and other hitherto friendlier parties pile on the negative critiques on his country’s foreign policy right around the time the USA begins to bomb Iraq. The story entices for a while as one gets a peek into the how people from all classes live, some amusing encounters between the missionaries and their flock, and McLeod’s grapples with his weakening faith (inversely proportioned to his sexual desire).

Near the end I became frustrated with McLeod’s smug victim-complex. More importantly I wasn’t sure what McIlvain was up to with his motley crew of earthy, wise-cracking 20 something Mormon missionaries, self-righteous, condescending anti-American Brazilians and colourful local citizenry with special attention given to luscious, brazen, flirty women and prostitutes with a no-nonsense, professional air. Maybe he didn’t need one but all the elements just hung together. When I reached the end where McLeod and Pessos engage in fisticuffs I felt as though I’d seen the detail of a painting put in a frame with lots of empty space around needing to be filled in order to have the detail make sense. The basic theme is of this young man’s burgeoning self coming to the fore in a foreign land after living a repressive lifestyle but…so? It was at this point that I began to wonder if Gabriel Josipovici had spoilt me for modern fiction until Stefan Zweig and A.L. Kennedy came to rescue.

J. David Steven’s “Box” is the last of the trio. I don’t get it. *shrugs* It has a slightly quirky, absurd quality. A random group of persons in a hotel meeting room are at the location to attend several different conferences on anything from accounting tips to kitchen knives. They’re all socialising in a single room with a locked door (they soon discover) when one of the walls goes up to reveal another room. Some people move into it to explore the new space when the partition suddenly lowers, allowing a few to scramble back to the first room before its sealed off. There is no door in the new space and the 20 occupants, including one child, hear a strange flushing noise from the original room. This happens over and over again with the rooms shrinking in size and so tough decisions have to be made about who should stay behind while the others continue. Predictably, they choose a fair and random system which they all abide by at first until human selfishness and survival instincts pervert. It comes off as a humorously written psychological experiment that ends on a darker note. I must be missing some clever reference that makes this story — the only contribution that reads like the writer conceived it as a short story — more than the sum of its parts.

*Which is not to say that if you write about the working class there has to be a lot of swear words and slang but for god’s sakes I think the milieu and lifestyle needs to count for something different, some adjustment. He could have written about a Rockefeller kid in the same tone and you wouldn’t notice a lick of difference: all covered in pleasant silk gauze.

I’m so excited.

In WTF, literary journals on May 26, 2008 at 3:35 pm

I got an email from Bookforum, helpfully letting me know that their new issue was online, so of course I wasted no time in clicking right over.

The first thing I see are the feature articles in nice big type. Number one is:

Right Makes Might
KEVIN MATTSON on THE CONSERVATIVE TAKEOVER OF AMERICAN POLITICS

To say the least, not exactly what I read Bookforum for, but, okay, whatever, what’s feature number two?

Voices Carry
LAWRENCE HILL on CIVIL WAR SLAVE NARRATIVES

Well, this isn’t the most obviously literary topic imaginable, but it could have potential. But no. The essay is far more about history than art.

All right, our final feature:

Fiction and Political Fact
MORRIS DICKSTEIN on POLITICAL NOVELS

I wonder who out there thought that Bookforum readers were interested in New York Review of Books, The Sequel? Or The Poor Man’s Times Literary Supplement?

“Rapists are basically superheteros.”

In Books, Excerpts, Fiction, Literature, What I'm Reading on May 24, 2008 at 12:29 pm

The only reason I can give for choosing to excerpt this passage rather than any of the more respectable, representative excerpts is because it makes me laugh for about five minutes.

As a rule T. revealed little in the way of personal information, since Fulton did not seem to require it. For Fulton communication was a one-way street. And when, on occasion, T. chose to contribute to the conversation with a brief disclosure of his own, Fulton became bored and changed the subject.

“So my father,” said T. on the way to the racquet club one Wednesday, reclining in the leather passenger seat of Fulton’s Land Cruiser, “used to be an ad executive in Manhattan, but now he mixes drinks at a transvestite bar in Key West.”

“He turned gay?”

“I guess so.”

“Huh,” said Fulton, hunching down and squinting into the side-view mirror. “Did you see that? Asian woman in the Hyundai almost rear-ended me.”

“No. Didn’t see.”

“Asians can’t drive for shit.”

“Might want to keep that insight to yourself.”

“It’s not exactly a secret, T. Damn you’re a rube. Disoriented Orientals. Ring a bell?”

“If the poor woman had rear-ended this car she would have been killed instantly.”

“You gotta watch out, T.,” said Fulton, shaking his head. “That stuff’s in the genes. You could turn homo too.”

“You think so?”

“Watch out for it. If you feel the urge, rent a copy of Anal Alley and have a jerkoff marathon.”

“That’s very helpful.”

“What am I saying? That’s like offering smack to a  guy on methadone. Better stay around the front side, T. Avoid the ass region completely.”

“Good tip.”

“Janet’s sister’s church has this deal where they deprogram them. I don’t think it works though.”

“No? Doesn’t work?”

“It’s a boot camp. They tell them man-boy love is the work of Satan. They bring in the straight guys to teach them how to act straight. Like you’re not allowed to smoke, it’s faggy. Then they lock them up in small rooms and yell their heads off at them. ‘Repent, sinners! For the sake of Jesus Christ Our Lord, cast out the homo devil from your butt!’ It’s kind of like hardcore bondage and domination. It’s supposed to scare them straight but I think it actually makes them horny. Some Christian faggots actually hook up there. Serious. It’s basically a dating service for Christian homos.”

“What does Janet’s sister think of that?”

“She put her son in it and he came out with a brand-new assfriend. That’s how she found out the real deal. I have a faggot nephew.

“I didn’t know.”

“No blood relation though. Janet’s side of the family only. My genes are pure hetero. I had a great-grandfather who was a rapist.”

“Excuse me?”

“Yeah. The guy raped. Rapists are basically superheteros. A rapist is a hetero on steroids.”

“That’s quite a theory you got there.”

“I forgot to tell you, you gotta use the shit racquet today. The titanium’s being restrung.”

From How the Dead Dream by Lydia Millet, Soft Skull Press.

The Hulls of White Yachts

In Caribbean, Literature, Poetry on May 22, 2008 at 12:48 pm

Printed in the May 15th New York Review of Books.

The hulls of white yachts riding the orange water
of the marina at dusk, and, under their bowsprits the chuckle
of the chain in the stained sea; try to get there
before a green light winks from the mast and the foc’sle
blazes with glare, while dusk hangs in suspension
with crosstrees and ropes and a like-livid sky
with its beer stein of cloud froth touched by the sun,
as stars come out to watch the evening die.
In this orange hour the light reads like Dante,
three lines at a time, their symmetrical tension,
quiet bars rippling from the Paradiso
as a dinghy writes lines made by the scanty
metre of its oar strokes, and we, so
mesmerized can barely talk. Happier
than any man now is one who sits drinking
with his lifelong companion under the winking
stars and the steady arc lamp at the end of the pier.

Derek Walcott

I dig Walcott. Truly. But I wonder if the NYRB would ever consider posting a poem by Edward K Brathwaite? That could be interesting. I’m curious because a Walcott poem led me to look up a Brathwaite one that I know he’s alluding to (damn if I can find which one it is yet) and I got caught up in reading his 60s work which, wow, pretty in your face. But then the NYRB wouldn’t print something like Walcott’s “Dread Song”, anyway.

Things of interest

In Books, Fiction, General, Literature, literary journals on May 22, 2008 at 9:15 am

You want to listen to Bat Segundo’s interview with Sarah Hall and buy The Carhullan Army aka Daughters of the North. How can you resist? You shouldn’t. Sarah Weinman agrees!

I can’t think of enough good things to say about this except that it should be read, now and years to come.

The novel, for some goddamned reason, has not been getting near any of the attention it deserves nor is Sarah Hall considering that her Electric Michelangelo was a Booker finalist. (I can’t believe all you print people slobbered on Gessen’s shoes and all Carhullan gets is a notice in the New Yorker.)

Newspapers and magazines have been jumping into the blogging pool for some months now but the only one that has managed to impress is Harper’s Online Sentences — yes, the title is uninspired, but what can you do, those print folks — run by Wyatt Mason. (There’s something about those LRB contributors….) He blogs about books I don’t typically seen covered anywhere else and so far has provided some thoughtful coverage on a Q&A (I and II) with James Wood and Jonathan Franzen. I’m kinda tired of reading about both men at the moment so it’s telling that Mason managed to get past my instinctive yawn.

The latest London Review of Books has two of its eye-catching articles available for free online. James Meeks makes a very persuasive case for the high quality of James Kelman’s work in Dead not Died, inclusive rather than in spite of his generous use of Glaswegian dialect and cuss words. I nearly wrote down the review’s conclusion in my notebook.

If I spend so much time on Kelman’s use of language, it’s partly because Kieron’s story is so bound up with it, and partly because I am not sure that all his potential readers can bring themselves to credit the degree of artistry, the weighing of each word and comma, that he puts into his work. There’s a reluctance to accept Kelman for what he is, a perfectionist and a radical Modernist writer of exceptional brilliance, and this reluctance is not just bourgeois superciliousness. There’s a generous but misdirected romanticism, too, which would like to imagine Kelman warbling his native fucknotes wild, simply sluicing a measure of his authentic working-class soul onto the page without the mediation of rational thought: a one-shot exotic. The real reason Kelman, despite his stature and reputation, remains something of a literary outsider is not, I suspect, so much that great, radical Modernist writers aren’t supposed to come from working-class Glasgow, as that great, radical Modernist writers are supposed to be dead. Dead, and wrapped up in a Penguin Classic: that’s when it’s safe to regret that their work was underappreciated or misunderstood (or how little they were paid) in their lifetimes. You can write what you like about Beckett or Kafka and know they’re not going to come round and tell you you’re talking nonsense, or confound your expectations with a new work. Kelman is still alive, still writing great books, climbing.

Terry Eagleton, always an amusing fellow, spends more than half of his “review” giving a rundown on the ever changing theories about literary works in relation to authors through the years, and splits the other half telling us what’s in the reviewed book, something which bore only a superficial link with his previous wind up, and some actual commentary. I giggled a lot while reading it in Starbucks.

Hip hip hurrah! Spring’s premature summer warmth distracted me for a few weeks but now that the weather has returned to a seasonal chilly gloom I remembered to check on the Lady Margaret Lectures at Cambridge which are about Milton this year. Behold! Another podcast is up, this time with Sharon Achinstein’s effort which focuses on Milton as a prose writer and poet. I haven’t listened to it yet but I was too excited to exclude it from this post. The next lecture won’t be until THE END of October…:( :( :( . If you’re a LRB subscriber Quentin Skinner’s transcript of his lecture is printed as What does it mean to be a free person? in the newest issue (May 22nd).

To finish, I’d like to declare that, contrary to previous suspicions, Gabriel Josipovici has not spoiled me for all other modern literature. I’ve fallen a little bit in love with that characters in Stefan Zweig’s The Post-Office Girl, the way he’s written them in light of how I think the plot may develop, and I’m expecting great things from Edith Wharton’s New York Stories which I picked up in preparation for the next Slaves of Golconda read, The Glimpses of the Moon. Roxana Robinson’s introduction made Wharton’s background sound remarkably as though it was taken straight out of an Austen novel.

Two books about early Jamaican life

In Books, Caribbean, History, Jamaica, Literature, Non-fiction, Reviews on May 21, 2008 at 11:45 am

I’m not a memoir person and only become so under special circumstances. The first memoir, *From Harvey River: A Memoir of My Mother and Her People, is written by Lorna Goodison one of my favourite poets who turns out to be a remarkable prose writer. That wouldn’t have been special enough without the added bonus of her mother’s life is the book’s main focus. Add the fact that one of my favourite Goodison poems is dedicated to and about that woman, then I’m sold.

The second memoir, Drumblair: Memories of a Jamaican Childhood by Rachel Manley, benefited from the goodwill gained by the first. Here was another notable Jamaican woman writing not only or even primarily about herself but about life with her grandparents: his Right Excellent Norman Washington Manley, one of the nation’s founders and a National Hero, and Edna Manley, one of our most acclaimed artists. (I attended summer programmes and took piano lessons at the school named after her.) She also deals to a lesser extent with her so so relationship with her father, Michael Manley, a former Jamaica prime minister.

Goodison’s memoir provides the unexpected pleasure of revealing much about Jamaica’s history and lifestyle of which I had not an inkling: what brought certain Europeans like the Irish and Scottish settlers; specific details on the Maroons; and simply how every day life was for ordinary Jamaicans, how they kept house, earned a living, their cultural mores, how much had changed and stayed the same. It complemented details I picked up in Andrew Salkey’s A Quality of Violence and Banana Bottom by Claude McKay on how every and anything obviously connected to our African ancestry was rejected. An attitude that seems so alien to me now when I recall donning Nigerian dress for prep school events or how church ladies wore extravagant outfits to impress the congregation on Sundays. I understand the old attitude and yet I don’t.

That Goodison is a poet and not averse to fictionalizing and streamlining accounts helped her book enormously. She played with words by mixing the Queen’s English with a readable Jamaican patois which changed the rhythm and tone to capture a particularly Jamaican, specifically Hanoverian — different parts of the island have their own variations in dialect — moment or sentiment. As life then was more heavily influenced by Victorian England the two different speeches in juxtaposition reflected that. It is clear that Goodison loves words. At one point she lists the names of local produce for the pleasure of sound as well as more practical reasons, reminding me of one of her well-known poems, To Us, All Flowers are Roses. In her love for words she continues to showcases the islanders’ creativity, our spirit and ingenuity to ourselves as well as others.

She has a judicious sense of what readers would find interesting. I cannot stress enough how vital a skill this is for someone writing on things that personally concern her. The writer may find every minute detail and throwaway incident riveting while the outsider is left to fan herself, dream about mocha frappuccinos and wonder why she tolerates such minutiae from anyone not related by blood or marriage. Goodison is up front about embellishing parts of her mother’s life, adjusting timelines. One is not perturbed not only because the seamless narrative pulls one in from start to finish or because one gets a good idea of what is fictionalised from the whimsical way she depicts certain scenes, but because, for a reader like me and a book like this a strict adherance to facts is not necessary for Goodison to record her mother’s life as she perceives it. It’s one of the best books I’ve read so far this year — I’ve already leant my copy out (I never do this) and have been singing its praises to any willing ear. (For an example of everything I’ve mention read this excerpt.)

It is too bad that this book came out long after Drumblair — Manley could have learned a lot from how Goodison wrote her tale. I have no idea whether any part of Drumblair is intentionally fictionalized. On certain subjects like Bustamante’s character and his political style she readily admits her family’s bias since her grandfather was his political rival — they both led the two rival political parties that still dominate Jamaica politics. Since she is dealing with such historically important political and cultural personages she has more responsibility to factual truth than a Jamaican poetess indulging in family memorabilia, maybe. (Although she writes, “This is not history. This is memory.”) In the end, I’m glad I read it.

But I’m surprised that it managed to win Canada’s Governor General award. If It weren’t for the Geoffrey Philp mention and the Manley name I don’t know how long I would have lasted. Rachel Manley has a tendency to give too much detail about memories that I, without the benefit of familiar relations, can only yawn and blink at. Cute episodes with housing staff which I know must be included to establish what living in the mighty Drumblair house was like became a bit tedious. At other times it’s the intricate political maneuvering that made my eyes glaze. When content becomes a morass I cannot reach for style because her prose is serviceable but not very light and nimble. Her voice comes through loud and clear but there’s not poetry, no grace, nothing that sets her a part as a Writer, yet she is a well-regarded poet. (Her editor probably deserves some free drinks, at least.) In my limited estimation Goodison is the better at writing in the different genres.

Still, the book isn’t all bad. I appreciate how she presents her family members in their full complexity, the good and the less so. They are loved but not idolized. Her grandparent’s married life, like all long lasting ones I imagine, is one of love, yes, but also of tolerance, accommodation of tiptoeing or strategic obliviousness to faults, of intimate knowledge coupled with incomprehensibility, right up to the end, of the other’s choices and habits. Theoretically we know this but it is not often portrayed in the media I absorb.

Much of the Manleys’ political life is marked by as many defeats as triumphs — Rachel describes it as a life “haunted by shadows” — with the most searing one that of Norman never winning an election after the country gained independence despite being a, clearly the family as presented her believing he was the, driving force behind the movement. A “Father of the Nation”. As a lawyer he took up the part of many of the lower classes and even helped to gain Bustamante’s freedom when he bucked up against the colonial authorities. But Bustamante’s charisma and earthy personality eclipses his rival’s contemplative, intellectual demeanor, and so one gains most of the spotlight while the other quietly goes on.

What was aching [Michael's] heart was the small margin of his father’s defeat, and the irony that his country would be led into independence by anyone but Norman Manley. He knew of no other colonial territory of that time where the man who led the fight for independence was not the acknowledged leader of the emerging nation, the runaway victor of its first election; Ghana’s Nkrumah, Nigeria’s Azikiwi, India’s Nehru– the names would hammer in his head.

Such a mixed life does not end on an upbeat, positive, everything nice note, either. Rachel describes herself as a troublemaker as a child, called “Miss Badness”, distant from her mother who lived in England, has an ambivalent relationship with her father, and a grandmother obsessed in making something of it (for the better, yes, but it was always a thing). At the book’s end circumstances are different but the main elements have not changed but are sustained by different issues. Rachel is a university student eager to join the Black Power radicals pushing for change except that her fair skin and connection to the establishment make her an outsider. Political rebellion is more complicated when your grandfather is tagged as one who is a new version of the old colonial style, that change cannot occur when one uses the master’s tools. “Patois should be taught in schools!” she cres defiantly. (It’s amusing and disheartening that such ideas are still being wrestled over. Even Nalo Hopkinson met up on it.) Edna declared

These young hot-heads were in their cradles when we were struggling for universal suffrage and workers rights’ and self-government! Who the hell do they think got the British out?

But images speak as loudly as words and Rachel noted that it was a woman who looked all but Caucasian with “flawless English” who says them.

As you can tell there’s a lot of historical information easily conveyed through Rachel’s life because her family looms large in events. I get a better idea of how our government gradually gained more and more power as opposed to the (understandably) simplified accounts I had before. There was even a predecessor to CARICOM – a failed West Indian federation built on ideals similar to the Pan Africanism movement — that I knew more about — in which Norman and Busta played leading roles, for a time. And I receive a much clearer picture of the People’s National Party’s (Norman’s group) socialist (some would say communist) background — a fact darkly hinted at, its lasting impact on Jamaica argued over in the Jamaica Observer’s opinion pages which I read in my teen years without true understanding. I even learnt the origins of a certain “fire and blood” speech given by Edward Seaga, a former Jamaican PM, which I remember hearing about as a child, again with no clue.

It is very strange to read about your country’s beginnings and have it feel so…recent. (My mother lived in pre-independence) To read about persons deliberately, actively, maybe even self-consciously trying to be Jamaican, to figure out what that even is. Some of the most tantalizing bits were Rachel’s brief, intermittent descriptions of the island’s nascent artistic movement, of Edna’s interactions with artists and writers, of her nurturing of new ones. Most, if not all of the poetry she and Norman quite is either by Browning, who had a Jamaican wife (didn’t know that), or Mike Smith and George Campbell, friends of theirs who were also involved in the project of being Jamaican by creating Jamaican art. Roger Mais gets name checked in Edna’s encounter a few rastas who temporarily squatted in her studio and had a fondness for her sculpture “Samson”, the blunter, roughter counterpart to the more delicate “Delilah” which was the crowd favourite. (It’s obviously an allusion to Brother Man but must be one to Black Lightning as well — too coincidental otherwise.) I’d have loved to read more about that.

Yes, Drumblair was definitely a fruitful, rewarding read. But it’s no Harvey River.

*What is up with weird, inexplicable title changes and ugly foreign covers? Poor British and Americans. :P

For all you Ishiguro fans

In Authors, Excerpts, Literature, literary journals on May 15, 2008 at 10:10 am

Here are some vague details on what could possibly, maybe be his new book. At this point in the piece he and the interviewer discuss whether Ishiguro truly has “chameleon-like” story telling skill because he changes setting drastically from book to book. Ishiguro feels that thematically he’s retreading similar territory.

INTERVIEWER

I think that’s very particular to you. It shows a certain chameleon-like ability.

ISHIGURO

I don’t think it is that chameleon-like. What I’m saying is I’ve written the same book three times. I just somehow get away with it.

INTERVIEWER

You think that you have, but everyone who read your first novels and then read The Remains of the Day had a psychedelic moment — they were transported from this convincing Japanese setting to Lord Darlington’s estate.

ISHIGURO

That’s because people see the last thing first. For me, the essence doesn’t lie in the setting. I know that it does in some cases. In Primo Levi, take away the setting and you’ve taken away the book. But I went to a great performance of The Tempest recently, set in the Arctic. Most writers have certain things that they decide quite consciously, and other things they decide less consciously. In my case, the choice of narrator and setting are deliberate. You do have to choose a setting with great care, because with a setting come all kinds of emotional and historical reverberations. But I leave quite a large area for improvisation after that. For example, I’ve arrived at an odd setting for the novel I’m writing at the moment.

INTERVIEWER

What’s it about?

ISHIGURO

I won’t talk too much about it, but let me use its early stages as an example. I’d wanted for some time to write a novel about how societies remember and forget. I’d written about how individuals come to terms with uncomfortable memories. It occurred to me that the way an individual remembers and forgets is quite different to the way a society does. When is it better to just forget? This comes up over and over again. France after the Second World War is an interesting case. You could argue that De Gaulle was right to say, We need to get the country working again. Let’s not worry too much about who collaborated and who didn’t. Let’s leave all this soul-searching to another time. But some would say that justice was ill served by that, that it leads eventually to bigger problems. It’s what an analyst might say about an individual who’s repressing. If I were to write about France, though, it becomes a book about France. I imagined myself having to face all these experts on Vichy France asking me, So what are you saying about France? What are you accusing us of? And I’d have to say, Actually, it was just supposed to stand for this bigger theme. Another option was the Star Wars strategy: “in a galaxy far, far away.” Never Let Me Go went in that direction, and that has its own challenges. So for a long time, I had this problem.

INTERVIEWER

What did you decide?

ISHIGURO

A possible solution was to set the novel in Britain in 450 A.D. when the Romans left and the Anglo-Saxons took over, which led to the annihilation of the Celts. Nobody knows what the hell happened to the Celts. They just disappeared. It was either genocide or assimilation. I figured that the further you go back in time, the more likely the story would be read metaphorically. People see Gladiator and interpret it as a modern parable.

From “The Art of Fiction” No. 196 interview with Kazuo Ishiguro in The Paris Review No. 184, Spring 2008.

Walcott continued

In Books, Literature, Poetry on May 13, 2008 at 2:45 pm

I’m posting this incomplete commentary on what I’ve called Walcott’s Frederiksted trilogy in Sea Grapes because if I hold on to it for much longer it will never be completed. First part here which should be read or skimmed in order to better appreciate the following.

The next three poems are a US Virgin Islands trio in which Walcott focuses on Frederkisted, in St. Croix, the island’s former centre now outshone by Christiansted. According to Wikipedia Frederiksted’s port was its major source of industry, tied in with the sugar trade, and when that collapsed it turned to tourism “with some success”. In all three the speaker stands as a critical observer of his surroundings, ever distant and, in the first two poems, cynical. These deal with the town’s economical and cultural depression, peaking in “Frederiksted Nights” before ending in the meditative anti-climax of “Frederiksted, Dusk”.

In “The Virgins”, the first of the three poems, things don’t start so well.

Down the dead streets of sun-stoned Frederiksted,
the first freeport to die for tourism,
strolling at funeral pace, I am reminded
of life not lost to the American dream,
but my small-islander’s simplicities,
can’t better our new empire’s civilized
exchange of cameras, watches, perfumes, brandies
for the good life, so cheaply underpriced
that only the crime rate is on the rise
in streets blighted with sun, stone arches
and plazas blown dry by the hysteria
of rumour. A condominium drowns
in vacancy; its bargains are dusted,
but only a jewelled housefly drones
over the bargains. The roulettes spin
rustily to the wind; the vigorous trade
that every morning would begin afresh
by revving up green water round the pierhead
heading for where the banks of silver thresh.

The title is ironic because the city Walcott describes, far from evoking any such youthful, dewy associations, is filled with “dead streets” that are “blighted with sun”. What’s particularly noticeable is how he inverts all the usual things tropical islands promote as attractive vacation features — sun, ocean, fresh breezes and warm, clear waters — and turns them into destructive agents. Besides the sun the condominiums “drown in vacancy” and “plazas” are “blown dry by the hysteria of rumour”. Walcott himself is in an inverted role — he is not a native here but a tourist in a different country. Even the slower, island stroll indicative of the locals’ less hectic take on life is taken “at funeral pace”. The picture is bleak and the absence of other persons or bustle of activity gives the impression of a ghost town.

What’s caused all this death? Walcott blames tourism and its pathological commodification. He writes that the freeport as the “first..to die for tourism”.

The last few lines are a bit of a puzzle for me. I theorise that “the vigorous trade…revving up green water” refers to the cruise ship industry. That interpretation allows me me to compare it the schooner in “Sea Grapes”. Unlike “that little sail” the cruise ship is not delineated as a physical object but as a less tangible “trade” that is set up to carry a negative connotation. It has no double nor is it linked to a more benign, local image. Walcott only mentions it at the end so the first and last impression readers get is of it leaving indefinitely whereas in “Sea Grapes”, although we have the boat “beating” out of the Caribbean the idea it represents, its link to literary history, returns in the figure of the giant releasing hexameters that turn up in “the Caribbean surf”. And in cruel contrast to the used up town it is the almost certainly foreign owned cruise ship which Walcott describes with prosperous, optimistic diction: “vigorous trade/that ever bright morning” starts “afresh” breaking “green water”; if it isn’t yet clear the “banks of silver thresh” — more lucrative connotations there — as its next destination make it obvious.

So there we have it, the islander’s contempt for cheap colonialism and tourism’s empty rewards. Like I said, when a Walcott poem appears straightforward something is up. That simplicity begins to unravel in Frederiksted Nights. The town is resurrected only to engage in desperate death throes before falling back to dead empty streets.

In the first stanza a band plays at (presumably) the same pier which witnessed the cruise ship’s triumphant departure. Nearby are the expected vendors selling food (“fish-fries”) or their bodies (“the Puerta Ricenan putas/or the lemon Dominican whores”). Walcott creates a highly energetic scene with all the players connected by electrical and sexual diction — the “charge” of the mixed musical style “ignites the fish fries/by the sizzling pierhead”; the line about the prostitutes runs into the one about the “electric guitars rocketing”. It is not a gay scene and electricity’s volatility is heightened by the anger that is similarly a part of the performance. One that ought to be more like the relaxing entertainment brochures promise guest; and the easy sexual pleasures spread by word of mouth. That danger is married in words like “bomb cock”, “crotch trap”, “thudding pelvis”. But what could have ended in a bigger blaze is cut, “short-circuited” and even the moon is a “blown bulb”.

Perhaps there wasn’t enough of an energy supply with all the empty hotel rooms. Again in this scene Walcott is the only observer except for his companion. He’s a little unsympathetic here as is simple small-island perspective sums up and dismisses his environs and the people in it as being at a dead-end. Further on he writes the area off as a characterless any-town with the requisite banks, hotels, poorhouses and “library full of dead books”. Yet that café’s name, “The Corner”, is not a chance inclusion. His lady companion leaves him for its “defeated Chicano proprietor” which is one indication that she sees something in him and perhaps the town that Walcott has missed or underestimated. From that second stanza his insistence on the simple, dismal tourist trap rings with a sullen obstinacy, the awareness that he may be wrong.

Strangely, or perhaps logically, what new dimensionality he affords the town is informed by his doomed romance. (Pretty funny, too.) It continues the pattern first noted in “Sea Grapes” of how the speaker projects his thoughts and moods on to the landscape. When he walks through the towns again he winces and feels his heart being devoured by places that once carried happier associations. He doesn’t look beyond himself and so the poem does not end with a clearer, brighter light source but with him feeling “vague as the moon in daylight”. Only Walcott, I think, can turn an amusing tantrum — kicking ashes at the “stupid pier” — into a graceful ending where he acknowledges that he, rather than anyone else, is the static one, stuck and frustrated.

Also interesting to note is the different takes on simplicity. In “The Virgins” its presented as the positive, sympathetic small-island underdog who just doesn’t get this rampant consumerism. In “Frederiksted Nights” it depicts a more worrying and deficient lack of complexity and depth. In “Frederiksted, Dusk”, the last of the bunch, combines the senses of the first two but broadens to take on more elevated musings.

The musical hack

In Books, Excerpts, Fantasy/Science Fiction, WTF on May 13, 2008 at 1:56 pm

I just left Dan Green’s blog where Augustine complained about blogs being “Bookworm MySpace” which makes me feel rather guilty about this post. (Sort of. Mildly.) But I’m still pissed about being duped by this Rothfuss fellow’s hype machine, at myself more than anyone else. So, before I take a long trek to the bookstore in order to purge all my negative feelings before I get my $7.99 + tax back, I’d like to poke more fun at what is basically a writer among legions ‘doing’ other people, doing Tolkien. They [are] faint photocopies. You get these great big books which are set in a medieval kingdom that is basically somebody’s impression of what they liked about Tolkien, combined with what they enjoyed about playing Dungeons and Dragons as a high schooler. Thank you, Neil Gaiman. Maybe I’ll try one of your books after all.

In this scene our wearied hero walks home with his drunken friends after the beaaauuutiful girl of his dreams turns out to be dating one of his school colleagues.

In the fullness of time*, and with considerable help from Deoch and Wilem, I became drunk.

Thus it was that three students made their slightly erratic way back to the University. See them as they go, weaving only slightly. It is quiet, and when the belling tower strikes the late hour, it doesn’t break the silence so much as it underpins it**. The crickets, too, respect the silence. Their calls are like careful stitches in its fabric, almost too small to be seen***.

The night is like warm velvet around them. The stars, burning diamonds in the cloudless sky, turn the road beneath their feet a silver grey****. The University and Imre are the hearts of understanding and art, the strongest of the four corners of civilization. Here on the road between the two there is nothing but old trees and long grass bending to the wind. The night is perfect in a wild way, almost terrifying beautiful.

The three boys, one dark, one light, and one– for lack of a better word — fiery*****, do not notice the night. Perhaps some part of them does, but they are young, and drunk, and busy knowing deep in their hearts that they will never grow old or die. They also know that they are friends, and they share a certain love that will never leave them. The boys know many other things, but none of them seem as important as this. Perhaps they are right.*******

*Ugh! I don’t care if he’s even trying for a but of humour here. Unless you are at a writing level no lower than A.S. Byatt do not use this phrase. Not even ironically.

**Wtf does that mean?

***No. I would have liked to accept this, it makes marginally more sense than what came before, but is this all flowing from the boys “weaving” before? That makes it a “no”.

****I’m getting nitpicky now but can stars give off that much light, really? I’ll give it a pass on the assumption that I could be wrong, so accustomed I am to city living, and that in Faux Medieval Europe all things are possible.

***** You never have any better words. Never. Ever.

******This entire paragraph was maudlin sap and the chapter should have been nixed because it adds absolutely nothing to the story and there are no great ideas or show of style here that justifies its existence. Nothing in this book justifies its existence.

Well. I feel a little better now. Slightly.

The Sciences will save literature!

In Books, Fiction, Literary Criticism, Literature on May 13, 2008 at 11:11 am

Hurray for statistics and psychology!

As a science and humanities student I find this article rather quaint (this person is hardly the first to suggest this). (Oh and are any of the theories he so manfully takes down en vogue anymore?) As one specializing in neuroscience (bioethics) I’m sighing at yet someone else rushing to the infant field (comparative to all other sciences) to provide all the answers. No doubt he’ll want to study brain images of a men and women reading Jane Eyre and then come to some farcical conclusion. I just e-mailed it to my biology professor (who loves fiction) and I think I still hear him laughing through my computer speakers…

Anyway, you tell me what you think about this delightful man’s attempts to humble the humanities before the great Science Gaze while retaining “what makes literature special”. (You will find no mention of what that is, btw.)

Measure for Measure by Jonathan Gottschall

Literary studies should become more like the sciences. Literature professors should apply science’s research methods, its theories, its statistical tools, and its insistence on hypothesis and proof. Instead of philosophical despair about the possibility of knowledge, they should embrace science’s spirit of intellectual optimism. If they do, literary studies can be transformed into a discipline in which real understanding of literature and the human experience builds up along with all of the words.

[...]

The alternative is to let literary study keep withering away, and that would be a tragedy. Homo sapiens is a bizarre literary ape – one that, outside of working and sleeping, may well spend most of its remaining hours lost in landscapes of make-believe. Across the breadth of human history, across the wide mosaic of world cultures, there has never been a society in which people don’t devote great gobs of time to seeing, creating, and hearing fictions – from folktales to film, from theater to television. Stories represent our biggest and most preciously varied repository of information about human nature. Without a robust study of literature there can be no adequate reckoning of the human condition – no full understanding of art, culture, psychology, or even of biology. As Binghamton University biologist David Sloan Wilson says, “the natural history of our species” is written in love poems, adventure stories, fables, myths, tales, and novels.

Don’t they do this sort of thing in “Culture Studies” already?

It’s been a while

In Books, Fantasy/Science Fiction, Fiction, General, Literature on May 7, 2008 at 1:16 pm

How are you, dear readers? If any of you still exist :P . The premature summer heat of spring (which has now returned to seasonal temperatures) burnt away any and all interests in blogs and blogging. I decided to go with it until it ran out. My reading was not similarly effected. I’ve read the first two in Scalzi’s Old Man’s War…series? for he will continue to write for it as long as he is so inclined and sales are encouraging. One of the local stores brought in a pack of John Wyndham releases so I’ve spent a few days, eyes wide open, reading through The Chrysalids and The Day of the Triffids (whoa, just…whoa) and I hope to be able to share some thoughts with you about them in a few days. Wyndham appears to be fascinated with man’s ability to change and adapt to new ideas, new environments and the consequences of those who cling to static paradigms. And for an old SF writer his female characters aren’t bad at all. (Unlike others of which I recently learned.)

I don’t know if I’ll be able to write anything much on the Scalzi. I found them fun and entertaining (with The Ghost Brigades guilty of some wearying pages long info-dumping) but they didn’t seem to be saying anything. Not that Scalzi is obligated to do so but novels about such a militaristic society complete with very liberal bioengineering kinda beg for a little something but from what I observed he kinda dances around it, dips a toe in, and then jumps into another action plot line. I am unsure of myself, though, because I theorised that my limited SF experience may hinder my perspective, somewhat. For instance it is common knowledge that the novels were heavily influenced by Heinlein fiction but I’ve never read the guy.

How the Dead Dream proved elusive on a first reading so I’ve chosen to reread it again. Worries that it would read too familiar were not confirmed for reasons I have yet to refine. I find Lydia Millet’s characters, her main character at least, eccentric rather than quirky (the silly, unnecessary, waste of space, for-giggles type) because she takes that one extreme feature, places it immediately before, and explicates how it’s an extension of the character’s basic personality in a very non-showy yet arresting manner. She doesn’t try to wear you out with circus tricks. Because of this her humorous moments work a lot better because at first it’s unexpected. And though a critic described those moments as “asides” are more integral and necessary — without them this would be a boring, didactic lecture with unfulfilled potential.

Is it too late to comment on that Slaves of Golconda read? I couldn’t finish it. Cristina García did not seem so much interested in writing a novel as a series of character profiles (complete with headings) strung weakly together by a basic, uninteresting plot. (Uninteresting to me, at any rate. Woo woo Cuba-communist-intergenerational clash-fish-out-of-water-immigrants-in different country. Tell me something I don’t know or at least try and do something different with the damn thing.) Stuck in the middle of that was an amateur YA novel wherein a young girl struggles with her domineering, restrictive mother, giving readers the right dose of teenage rebellion and oh-so-unconsciously deep insights into human nature. Snore. I’ll try to see what the others got out of it as I think I’m the only one who wasn’t enamoured.

Villette: Nope. Sorry, I know some of you are fans but Brontë was in preacher mode far too often throughout the narrative. Things would just start to get interesting and then she would push Lucy Snowe aside to interject some pages long sermon on the follies of Catholicism and the wonders of enlightened English Protestants; also how stupid and frivolous the French are and how smart and noble the English. She even gave that stupid, self-absorbed English doctor — I count it a miracle that she managed to engage in near Austen-like sarcasm every so often — and her precious pet English whateverhernameis a charmed happy ending. Near the end I skipped pages just to see if the prof jumped Snowe or not. If Shirley is anything like that I’ll abstain.

I’d like to say the writing made up for it but some of her passages were uncomfortably close to Emily Brontë’s exhausting melodrama in Wuthering Heights when it came to depicting Snowe’s depression. That is what led to the skipped pages — near the end Snowe woke up in the middle of the night after being ineffectively drugged (I think?) and escaped out of the house wandering the streets. I thought to myself, Oh holy…I’m not going through one of your damn deranged moments again. Do the prof, slit your wrists, or I’ll slit mine. Later on I picked up that whatever festival she experienced during that night was an actual occurrence. No doubt it’s important but you’d have to pay me to get me to read it for any significant thematic developments.

I started The Name of the Wind by Patrick Rothfuss. (Curse my inability to keep to my F/SF moratorium.) It is the latest fantasy sensation purported to be “one of the best stories told in any medium in a decade…Shelve [it] beside The Lord of the Rings…and look forward to the day when it’s mentioned in the same breath, perhaps as first among equals.” (Name of reviewer hidden to protect the hoodwinked.) I am at chapter eight. Let’s start ticking off the clichés shall we?

  • Famous, brilliant, exceptional assassin tortured about his horrible, horrible past – Check
  • Inn as prominent setting – Check (Seriously? I saw it on the first page and thought, Oh god not another faux medieval European setting, please [insert favourite deity here]. [Your favourite deity] didn’t listen.)
  • Assassin accompanied by best, loyal buddy who is “dark” so of course he had to be graceful, moving like a dancer and blah blah blah. I bet he’s also noble and respects nature? Sidekicks are allowed that much. – Check
  • Ignorant village locals – Check
  • Dull looking sword that belies its true value as it is no doubt really famous and/or powerful – Check
  • Innocent children’s rhymes that turn out to be totally true and significant! No one saw that coming! – Check

All of this would be forgivable — all of it– if Rothfuss made something new with those elements. Take it to a different place. Aforementioned hoodwinked reviewer implied this is what he does as the book is “a brooding, thoroughly adult meditation on how heroism went wrong”. In a 700+ pages it may be too early to expect all of this to pop up by page 63. The problem is that the writing is so mediocre, at times verging on hysterical, that I may not wait long enough to find it. Ursula K. Le Guin (who was no doubt threatened) wrote that “It is a rare and great pleasure to find a fantasist writing…with true music in the words”. Let’s have an example of this musician at work. (All formatting mine.)

Sunlight poured into the Waystone. It was a cool fresh light, fitted for beginnings. It brushed past the miller as he set his waterwheel turning for the day. It lit the forge the smith was rekindling after four days of cold metal work. It touched draft horses hitched to wagons and sickle blades glittering sharp and ready at the beginning of an autumn day.

Inside the Waystone, the light fell across Chronicler’s face and touched a beginning there, a blank page waiting the first words of a story. The light flowed across the bar, scattered a thousand tiny rainbow beginnings from the colored bottles, and climbed the wall toward the sword, as if searching for one final beginning.

But when the light touched the sword there were no beginnings to be seen. In fact, the light the sword reflected [Ed: *&#$$*# sword -- it's the second in 20+ small pages that he's given us this " old dull sword" routine] was dull, burnished, and ages old. Looking at it, Chronicler remembered that though it was the beginning of the a day, it was also late autumn and growing colder. The sword shone with the knowledge that dawn was a small beginning compared to the ending of a seas: the ending of a year. [Ed: It shone with what?)

Do you see what he’s trying to get at there? Not me. Something about…no can’t fathom it. For a “thoroughly adult” book he does not think much of our intelligence. I get that fire might something to keep an eye on in the book but if I read one more line about fires snapping, crackling, blazing, flaring, spitting or glowing I’m going to burn…a fake copy of this book because I still have the receipt for the real one and the return window is still open. Whether you like Tolkien’s prose or not it’s difficult to deny that he had a particular style that showed its influences while seeming authentic rather than imitative. There is nothing that stands out about Rothfuss’ prose, much less anything musical. The best thing I can say is that he avoids writing any poetry for the most part, sticking to cute childish limericks.

That’s another thing. The different peoples presented are poorly costumed facsimiles of real world counterparts. So the main character’s people are gypsies with a different name and they meet up on a dour community who are costumed Puritans. I’m becoming quite bored with religious folks being used as the predictable resisters of all joy and intellectual curiosity. Wyndham has them in The Chrysalids but he makes the community’s philosophy work as an understandable, natural reaction to the events rather than a story element he hit with a dart on a story board. It’s FANTASY, Rothfuss. Be inventive! Go crazy! Maybe make the religious folks curious and open-minded, eh? Maybe make the non-believers rigid and unwelcoming? LOTR’s appeal was that while its influences and source material were obvious on a conceptual level Tolkien went to great lengths to make something completely new — or to make it appear so. It’s the difference between the good ol’ days of remixed music when the artist gave it such a different setting that a new side to the music was exposed, a new angle provided — not these days when a “remix” means asking a rapper to add a verse.

High fantasy is not for me. Tolkien and Kay were flukes in a genre filled with flawed heroes spouting cheesy lore. At least in romance the tortured alpha heroes are sexy.

Quiz – Day Four (technically)

In Books, Literature, quizzes/memes on April 24, 2008 at 8:38 am

Thursday quiz at OUP

Section Seven: Espionage and Intrigue
1. Spy for Walsingham and stabbed in a brawl, as legend has it.
2. Pseudo-equine archetypal guise for malice.
3. The Prince’s schoolmates set against him by a usurping uncle.
4. An anarchist plots to blow up the Greenwich Observatory.
5. A holiday sailing trip cum plot to foil the Germans.

Section Eight: Political Animals
1. A sea monster lends its name to his principle of a strong state.
2. Taking America as a model, it Pained the English government.
3. Her vindication laid the foundations for modern feminism.
4. For everyone and no-one, this book killed the deity.
5. This tract takes its title from a head of state.

Literature quizzes

In Books, Literature, quizzes/memes on April 23, 2008 at 10:06 am

Yes, another one that is perhaps more fun and, to fit the site, book-related. To commemorate the relaunch of the Oxford World Classics — they’re getting a fresh new design and everything! First heard about it on Bookslut — the OUP blog is posting a series of quizzes the answers to which will be posted on Friday. I’m dismal at it but maybe you could give it a go?

Monday’s quiz

Section One: Their Daily Bread
1. The witch of the place presides over a rotten wedding feast.
2. His sweet tooth eats through a Wilkie Collins epic.
3. He fried his kidney in Dublin town.
4. She takes the credit for the boef en daube.
5. Her cupboard was full of jam tarts, lemon tarts, Spanish tarts and cheese-cakes.

Section Two: ‘It’s a hard-knock life’
1. Misselthwaite’s maid.
2. Raksha’s man-cub.
3. Discovered in a handbag at Victoria Station.
4. Would rather sail the Mississippi than paint a fence.
5. Left Kansas for emerald delights.

Tuesday’s quiz

Section Three: Black and White and Read All Over
1. A seductive Mother Superior and a naïve with no vocation.
2. This cloistered anti-hero’s downfall is akin to Legion’s end.
3. An eighteenth-century reverend faces the trials of Job in Edenic England.
4. This almost-saint journeyed from Huntingdon to St Albans.
5. His saucy epic satires spite his regal Roman name.

Section Four: In the Wars
1. Russian epic retelling of the Napoleonic invasion.
2. The Wretched man the barricades in grande Paris.
3. Story of young Henry at Chancellorsville.
4. Led the invasion of Gallia and wrote about it.
5. A Prussian intellectual’s military manifesto.

Wednesday’s quiz

Section Five: That’s Amore
1. Sanskrit text on life, love and spirituality.
2. Banned as obscene, it revolutionised the understanding of female sexuality.
3. Roman poet banished for his subject of adultery.
4. This Parisian’s deviance gave his name to unconventional proclivities.
5. Classic mother who murdered the progeny as the ultimate revenge.

Section Six: Neither Flesh, Fish, nor Fowl
1. An Italian puppet with greater ambitions.
2. This mad scientist’s creation begs for a female companion.
3. Has coffin, will travel.
4. This loch-dwelling mum seeks medieval revenge.
5. Gothic nocturnal female whose bloodlust stoked a later novel.

Keep an eye on the blog for the other two!

How Privileged Are You?

In General, Personal, quizzes/memes on April 18, 2008 at 11:30 am

The original authors of this exercise are Will Barratt, Meagan Cahill, Angie Carlen, Minnette Huck, Drew Lurker, and Stacy Ploskonka at Illinois State University. If you participate, they ask that you PLEASE acknowledge their copyright. (via Charlotte’s Web)

Bold the true statements. You can explain further if you wish.

1. Father went to college
2. Father finished college
3. Mother went to college
4. Mother finished college

5. Have any relative who is an attorney, physician, or professor.
6. Were the same or higher class than your high school teachers.
7. Had more than 50 books in your childhood home.

8. Had more than 500 books in your childhood home
9. Were read children’s books by a parent
10. Had lessons of any kind before you turned 18
11. Had more than two kinds of lessons before you turned 18

Swimming, ballet, music (piano, violin, voice), a brief spurt with Judo.
12. The people in the media who dress and talk like me are portrayed positively
13. Had a credit card with your name on it before you turned 18
14. Your parents (or a trust) paid for the majority of your college costs
15. Your parents (or a trust) paid for all of your college costs
16. Went to a private high school
Private high schools in Jamaica are typically the worst things you could saddle your child with, although they are known to scoop a good public high school teacher or two when they get fed up with low government pay.
17. Went to summer camp
Yeah, loved that stuff.
18. Had a private tutor before you turned 18
For a very brief period in preparation for Common Entrance (10+) exams when I was in prep school (private elementary).
19. Family vacations involved staying at hotels
A few times but 90% of them it involved staying with family.
20. Your clothing was all bought new before you turned 18
Either bought new or sewn by my aunt or a close family friend.
21. Your parents bought you a car that was not a hand-me-down from them
Yeah, but it was used. My Mum worked with hotels and typically drove company cars so there was nothing to hand down.
22. There was original art in your house when you were a child
Not many and I have no idea where it came from because none of it was my type.
23. You and your family lived in a single-family house
My extended family (aunts and cousins). I guess it was a “single-family” house that my Mum extended it. This only happened after she decided to get my younger brother and I out of hotel living. I got shipped to boarding school. On breaks I’d as often stay with my Mum (at hotels) than in Kingston (at the house). So I only felt as if I properly lived in such a home for sixth form.
24. Your parent(s) owned their own house or apartment before you left home
Don’t have a clue.
25. You had your own room as a child
26. You had a phone in your room before you turned 18
27. Participated in a SAT/ACT prep course
Yes, but that was only after I took SAT I on my own. The tutor heard of my score and “recruited” me for his college prep programme but I never paid anything since he doesn’t prep for SAT IIs as they are subject specific. I was doing my A-levels. (SAT IIs were much easier.)
28. Had your own TV in your room in high school
Never and still don’t. The idea makes me uncomfortable — seems excessive and guaranteed to suck away precious hours. I’m in a situation now, though, when the available tv is so small and pathetic (and often co-opted by the landlady’s boyfriend-now-husband to watch Westerns) that I may invest in one.
29. Owned a mutual fund or IRA in high school or college
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.
30. Flew anywhere on a commercial airline before you turned 16
Well, you know, us Caribbean folk like to go abroad.
31. Went on a cruise with your family
Don’t think I’ll ever do this. Stuck on a ship with fake golf courses and retirees chilling by the pool and godawful night entertainment? Do not want. (Maybe those Antarctic/Arctic cruises? Maybe. There seems to be something to those.)
32. Went on more than one cruise with your family
33. Your parents took you to museums and art galleries as you grew up
34. You were unaware of how much heating bills were for your family
N/A

Yikes. Lots more bolding than I expected. Feel free to do this one if you care to.

Free e-books are evil

In Books, Fantasy/Science Fiction on April 16, 2008 at 7:01 pm

How many books have you downloaded from the Tor free e-book programme?

Four but only two should count as the books by Scalzi and Wilson were the only ones in which I was truly interested. The others were I-know-I’ll-hate-this-but-it’s-free-surely-there’s-other-good-books-in-this-deal. So far I’ve tried one of the latter group and it was about as horrible as I expected (cheesy high fantasy).

How many have you read?

One and one-thirds.

How many books will you own written by the two authors combined by this time tomorrow?

Five or six. I already own Spin by Robert C. Wilson which I promptly leant to one of my SF-reading pals who hadn’t heard of the author before. I’m in the middle of Scalzi’s Old Man’s War e-book and about a minute ago said out loud to myself, “I have got to get this book in paper form.” The local Chapters has two out of the three books in his trilogy plus The Android’s Dream and I plan to get all three. I’ll try the local indie on the latest OMW release in hard cover plus any Wilson books but I’m not optimistic because it’s not the place to go for genre fiction (unless it’s of the YA variety). So whatever isn’t bought at the indie store will be purchased online. I don’t know which Wilson books I want just yet if that be the case. I figure I’ll put the other titles in a box and make a blind selection.

In conclusion, does this make Tor’s programme evil?

Yes. I was so good at not buying book’s for weeks and weeks and weeks and then look what it did!

Dreaming in…Zzzzzzzzzz.

In Books, Caribbean, Fiction, Literature, What I'm Reading on April 16, 2008 at 11:44 am

I don’t know about this book. Not to be mean but my first reaction on seeing the cover was, Hmmmm, shouldn’t this have an Oprah book club sticker? the NYT’s Kakutani found it “completely original”? Why am I not heartened. I had the feeling it was going to be one of those melodramatic, multi-generational matriarchal family sagas — I don’t really do multi-generational family sagas. (It’s why I have Thomas Mann’s Magic Mountain and not Buddenbrooks. Also it was name checked in Norwegian Wood a lot but, yeah, I’ve seen ol’ Budden in used book stores and haven’t gotten past that word in the various novel summaries.) Anything labelled a “saga” gets a suspicious glance.

I’m not even past page 20 yet and already I’m annoyed. I think she cheated in the first chapter — couldn’t figure out a way to start the story right so she split it two under the headings of different names and proceeded to give us character profiles. The paragraph organization seems out of whack. I suppose Garcia could have done it for artistic effect — the grandmother at the beginning is a bit addled and unsettled from her husband’s death in a different country so the structure reflects this. But it’s not working for me. The sentences don’t hang together and I feel disoriented within paragraphs wondering what the hell I’m supposed to be getting from any of this.

Already the expected fat but stern, lovable and quirky female character has popped up in the form of a nurse-turned-baker.

I’m still going with it. It’s under 300 pages and it’s not awful. For a decidedly more effective, less colourful, romantic and quirky take on Cuba see When in Cuba, a photography feature by Boogie on First Magazine. If you like what you see there check out the rest on his website (click on “Cuba”).

Poetry is harrrrrrrd

In Books, Literature, Poetry, What I'm Reading on April 16, 2008 at 11:13 am

What a difference a new (to me) contemporary poetry collection makes. Reading Walcott has led me to new ideas about the different forms of poetry collections, how they’re arranged, specifically, and how that influences my reading. It reminded me what a lot of work it is. I’m (pleasantly) forced to do minute analysis that I don’t do when reading novels (though I probably should but, argh, so many words and stuff! :p). I marvelled again at the big ideas that a poet would do his best to encompass and convey in a single page. Sea Grapes was not the only collection capable of doing this but if one is going to acquire new perspectives it’s best to do so with remarkable poems rather than bland ones.

Did I mention it was hard? Not that I should overstate things but I found his poems more difficult to close read than those in, say, Louise Glück’s Averno. There are still poems in her collection that I find opaque but it’s more due to the fact that I haven’t given them my full attention; and I feel that, once I find the right starting point,the poem’s other points will become readily apparent or more accessible, based on past experience. With Sea Grapes‘ poems I may find one entry point and follow that path to the end (if I’m very lucky) or part way and then have to step back and find another path in and another until I feel satisfied with what I’ve gleaned. Each poem is like a maze with several pathways to the end but in Averno the walls between the different routes are more permeable. Which is not to say that Walcott’s poems don’t work as unified wholes but he puts a lot into them and almost always chooses to do so with varying degrees of subtlety and complex interlinking. If I read a poem, like “The Virgins”, and got the main gist after about two or three readings — not close reading just repetition to get the poem’s basic sense — in one sense it didn’t feel like a Walcott experience. What? I’d think to myself. Must be some kind of trap here…he’s lulled me into complacency.

I’ve properly read the collection’s first five poems which worked as a loose group for me. They all have strong, obvious Caribbean connections where as the next few poems shift to New York, Europe and the Christian creation myth and I could see thematic connections but could not quite get into their situations; you’re working with my current, incomplete take on the book.

The book’s title is taken from the opening poem. Because of that I use it as the collection’s epicentre and when reading other poems, endeavour to find out whether they develop ideas, references or images in “Sea Grapes”. Averno worked differently: the title poem was placed in the middle as a kind of climax with various peaks before in the poems about Persephone, her mother and Hades. This realization has made me seriously consider the wisdom of buying “selected” editions without first trying the complete versions. Anyway, on to “Sea Grapes”.

That little sail in light
which tires of islands,
a schooner beating up the Caribbean

for home, could be Odysseus,
home-bound on the Aegean,
that father and husband’s

longing, under gnarled sour grapes, is
like the adulterer hearing Nausicaa’s name
in every gull’s outcry;

This brings nobody peace. The ancient war
between obsession and responsibility
will never finish and has been the same

for the sea-wanderer or the one on shore
now wriggling on his sandals to walk home,
since Troy lost its old flame,

and the blind giant’s boulder heaved the trough
from whose ground-swell the great hexameters come
to finish up as Caribbean surf.

The classics can console. But not enough.

A sea grape bush grows near beaches in tropical climates in the Caribbean area. It can withstand a high amount of salt and so is often planted to stabilize beach edges. It’s also edible and good as jam. And with that you’re immediately put by the sea, a setting that permeates the first few poems in this collection and courses through much of Walcott’s poetry. He works to establish the island image in the reader’s mind, particularly Caribbean ones, and then investigates how its past and present affects both his and the reader’s perspective. He does this through literary and biblical references, playing on assumptions and stereotypes (inverting and reversing them including his own expected role), working with contrasts and, in some moments, making a straight play at trying to encompass and define in words intangible, revelatory, powerful moments. There will be many similes to help readers out and Walcott is very careful in shaping our focus with word and verse length and rhythm to create effects that develop the poem’s meaning.

Note the diction in the first two stanzas. Walcott quietly builds the scene with short lines filled with one or two syllable words. They are tight, compact, focused until he starts to explicate his feelings. The third stanza acts as a transition and the rest are expansive with longer lines, longer words, less commas so that the less uninterrupted rhythm coerces us to break down his meaning rather than be caught up in stark images (although there is the “blind giant” near the end). The poem ends in brevity.

The enjambments in the first three stanzas help to compact meaning while still effecting a flow of continuous thematic development. The first break puts “home” with the “home-bound” Odysseus; his more appropriate “longing” for family contrasted with his adulterous one for Nausicaa (which is a departure from Homer’s The Odyssey if I’m remembering it right). He forges connections with other word arrangements as well with “Caribbean”, “Odysseus” and “Aegean” all at the end of successive lines.

One has a clearer idea of what techniques Walcott uses to convey a topic that’s discernible after a couple of reads. Observing the schooner sailing Caribbean waters reminds him of Odysseus’ ship sailing the Aegean. The ancient Greek’s own experiences of attempting to reconcile his familial obligations with his own desires reminds Walcott of his own conflict, one that partly lies with the Homer epic itself — the love he has for Western European art when his existence and residence was brought about by that region’s greed and inhumanity. It is “[t]he ancient war/between obsession and responsibility” taking place “under snarled sour grapes”. This frustration is why he describes the boat as being tired of its surrounds, so anxious to leave its “beating up” the water to get home. This projection of his interior mood on to the external objects is something that will pop up in subsequent poems.

The word “war” is a little jarring in the leisurely setting (yes, I can’t help but see it that way, there’s a guy chilling on the beach after all) and the fierce turmoil the word conveys also works against the poem’s quiet. Earlier on, I pointedly mentioned that Walcott “quietly” created various scenes because the entire poem appeals strongly to sight but not to sound. It has a banked quality, a restrained subtely that is broken only when he mentions a “gull’s outcry”. For me, though, that word isn’t a particularly sensual choice. This silence helps create a tension that is broken in a later poem. The adjective “ancient” before war is more important because it solidifies that link between now and the past and interjects the idea that Walcott’s problem is not singular, perhaps not even unique, for it “has been the same/for the sea wanderer or the one on shore/now wriggling on his sandals to walk home”.

Although the poem at the end conveys defeatism, as a reader, when I see such dour thoughts develop into such a beautifully evocative passage –

and the blind giant’s boulder heaved the trough
from whose ground-swell the great hexameters come
to finish up as Caribbean surf.

– it’s an optimistic moment, despite the bald, final statements that follow. There will always be a separation but it can be bridged if not erased.

Next: Walcott’s Frederiksted trilogy

Alive

In Books, Fiction, Literature, Poetry, What I'm Reading on April 13, 2008 at 3:00 pm

Yes, yes I’m still alive but am busy and also, frankly, not in a blogging mood. This will change as soon as I figure out how to write my first post on Walcott — I must string comments on a few poems together in a way that makes sense and doesn’t bore me to tears. This is harder than it sounds, at least for the first poem in the collection, Sea Grapes, as I find myself coming up with the tired “Walcott’s-conflict-with-mixed-heritage” yadda yadda which is probably all right but my thoughts on the other four poems are so much more interesting. And that may be because they take on and develop bits of “Sea Grapes”. If all else fails I’ll read what others have said as it seems to be one of his popular poems.

There is not much new, reading wise, as it is end of term and exam season so I had and still have a lot of glorious marking to look forward to. Undergrads always seem to have a lot of drama around this time too so I had to deal with one student who had a panic attack over a late assignment and another who came in asking for help on a topic but who ended up in tears about a boyfriend who made her “feel like shit”. Mmmmhhhmm. Worst, the Science student-run food shop is now closed so I no longer have access to 45¢ doughnuts or $1.00 Arizona teas.

Villette is now an odd companion read with the Walcott for he is very restrained and subtle, careful, while Lucy has just escaped from mental torment including suicidal thoughts — my goodness! How did the Victorian readership react to that? — as Volume I ends with her physical collapse on a strange street during a storm. It seemed a bit much after Walcott’s brief, laden lines on Sunday Lemons.

Brontë’s anti-Catholicism is also bothersome because it looms so largely in the story. For a moment or two I spitefully wished Lucy had succumbed to a priest’s kindness and ended up on her knees in a Carmelite nunnery in the Italian hills somewhere so I could point and laugh.

I’m having a harder time of explicating anything on contemporary prose. I finished a Dubus and the latest from Lydia Millet but cannot put anything down neither on screen or paper. A re-reading ought to fix things but I’m reluctant to do so for, in my impatience, I long for more and new not to go over the old. And I belatedly recall that I have Dreaming in Cuban to read for Slaves of Golconda, due at the end of the month. (I’ll probably reread. I’m less concerned about the Dubus than the Millet because on one level I enjoyed it and got what it was going for, more or less, on another there’s a stubborn gap between us. Listening to her Bat Segundo interview did not bridge it although it did cement the first impressions I had. Also, fun!)

Reading the World 2008 (via Literary Saloon) is here so if anyone needs ideas for translated reads (especially Chinese literature) do have a look around the site. The latest Bookforum (which had scads and scads of uninterrupted (ie no ads) fiction reviews in which I blissfully rolled around) reviewed one of FSG’s selections for the initiative: The GIrl on the Fridge by Etgar Keret, translated by Miriam Shlesinger and Sondra Silverston. The best surprise this issue was the review of Rudy Wurlitzer’s latest novel The Drop Edge of Yonder, his first in 20+ years. I read a novel excerpt of Nog (to be reissued in 2009 according to the review) in The Paris Review No. 38 and my interest in eventually reading his fiction never faded. Another Paris Review contributor’s book is with Reading the World: The Corpse Walker by Yiwu Liao, translated by Huang Wen, published by Knopf, and one of the books I am sure to get (along with The Diving Pool).

Sunday Salon: Wo Wow

In Books, Caribbean, Literature, Poetry, Sunday Salon, literary journals on April 6, 2008 at 11:25 am

It’s a beautiful Sunday spring morning here which I enjoyed earlier in open-toed shoes even though my toes curled a little at 10°C. Life was made better by the internet re-launch of First Magazine a Jamaican publication that defies easy categorisation. Because it isn’t trying to be anything else but excellent you get an attention-grabbing mixture of literature, photography and journalism that encompass a variety of styles: hard-edged photojournalism, Paris-Vogue-tacky editorials, better-than-New Yorker-short stories (I know this because my eyelids didn’t start to droop after the first paragraph), on-the-spot interviews of “regular” Jamaicans, history articles, –whether it’s about controversial African-American boxers or older, dapper Jamaicans posing with their vintage vehicle (reminded me a bit of Sartorialist shots) –, music, and who knows what the contributors will come up with next. Jamaica — the good, bad and ugly — is all there open to censor, appreciation, critique, laughter; there’s a strange dissonance that’s created when you move from pictures of a murder scene to a glam shot of Miss Jamaica (which reminded me of Marlon James’ The Miss Jamaica Mulatto Factory). But it’s working for me.

The only thing the staff needs to do is get those older issues out in PDF! I could only make it through two of those slideshows, eyes straining at the 1 point, blurred font before I gave up.

*****

Many bloggers have noted that it’s Poetry Month in Canada & the USA. Kate is hosting a Modest Poetry Challenge: all you have to do is write a critical post on a poem, not just the poem itself, in order to encourage us to develop the skills and vocabulary for a task that most of us avoid because we don’t feel confident enough to do so. I’m not officially joining the challenge but I do intend to do more posts on Paradise Lost. Reading Lorna Goodison’s memoir on her mother put me in a Caribbean frame of mind so I ended up picking up Derek Walcott’s Sea Grapes one of his 70s collections. I studied him for A-levels but never really got him — the teacher constantly bleated about his “ambivalence” towards the two apposite cultures he inherited and then got annoyed when we bleated the same thing back to her — and I’ve become less enchanted with “Collected” editions, more interested in reading single titles from beginning to end and get a feel for the product, the way I do with fiction.

Sunday Salon

A fabulous Harvey girl

In Books, Caribbean, Excerpts, Jamaica, Literature, Non-fiction on April 3, 2008 at 9:15 pm

The baby was plump and pretty as a ripe ox-heart tomato. Her mother, Margaret Wilson Harvey, gently squeezed the soft cheeks to open the tiny mouth and rubbed her little finger, which had been dipped in sugar, back and forth, over and under the small tongue to anoint the child with the gift of sweet speech. “Her name is Doris,” she said to her husband, David.

In later years, my mother preferred to spell her name Dorice, although in actual fact she was christened Doris. But she was registered under a different name altogether — Clarabelle. This came about because of a disagreement between her parents as to what they should call their seventh child. Her father, David, was a romantic and a dreamer, a man who loved music and books, and an avid reader of lesser known nineteenth-century authors. He had read a story in which the heroine was called Clarabelle, and he found it to be a lovely and fitting name. He told his wife, Margaret, that that was to be the baby girl’s name. Well, Margaret had her heart set on Doris, because it was the name of a school friend of hers, a real person, not some made-up somebody who lived in a book. Doris Louise, that was what the child would be called. They argued over it and after a while it became clear that Margaret was not going to let David best her this time. He had given their other children names like Cleodine, Albertha, Edmund, and Flavius. Lofty-sounding names which were rapidly hacked down to size by the blunt tongues of Hanover people. Cleo, Berta, Eddie, and Flavy. That was what remained of those names when Hanover people were finished with them. Margaret had managed to name her first-born son Howard, and her father had named Rose. Simple names for real people.

There was nobody who could be as stubborn and heard-headed as Margaret when she set her mind to something. She was determined that her baby was not going to be called Clarabelle.  “Sound like a blasted cow name,” she said. David gave up arguing with his wife about the business of naming the pretty-faced, chubby little girl, especially after Margaret reminded him graphically of who exactly had endured the necessary hard and bloody labour to bring the child into the world. He dutifully accompanied her to church and christened the baby Doris, on the last Sunday in June 1910. Then the next day he rode into the town of Lucea and registered the child as Clarabelle Louise Harvey, and he never told anyone about this deed for fifteen years. As a matter of fact, he is not known to have ever told anyone about it, because the family only found this out when my mother tried to sit for her first Jamaica Local Exams, for which she needed her birth certificate. When she went to the Registrar of Births and Deaths, they told her that there was no Doris Louise Harvey on record, but that there was a Clarabelle Louise Harvey born to David and Margaret Harvey, née Wilson, of Harvey River, Hanover. She burst into tears when she heard what her legal name was. “Clarabelle go to hell” her brothers chanted when the terrible truth was revealed. Not one to take teasing lightly, she told them to go to hell their damn selves.

Eventually her name was converted by deed poll to Doris. Thereafter, she signed her name Dorice, as if to distance herself from the whole Clarabelle/Doris business. Besides, Dorice, pronounce “Do-reese,” conjured up images of a woman who was not ordinary; and to be ordinary, according to my mother’s older sister, Cleodine, was just about the worst thing that a member of the Harvey family could be.

From From Harvey River: A Memoir of My Mother and Her People by Lorna Goodison, published by Mclelland & Stewart, a book I started and finished in a day for I could not bear to part from it.

Weeeee!

In Books, Lists, Literature, literary journals on April 2, 2008 at 9:08 pm

I won a free year subscription to Bookmarks Magazine! Like a true pooterish, basement dwelling blogger the best thing I like about engaging in the on-line literary world is all of the freebies. It is a print magazine but I learned about it through blogs so it’s all the same thing and….

ANYWAY. :) They encourage readers to send in a recommendation list of your ten favourite books and if yours is selected to be printed in an issue you score the freebie. Here’s the unedited version of what will appear in the May/June 2008 issue. As I look through the list again I cringe at my grievous omission of translators — sorry Mildred Boyer, Harold Morland (Borges) and Alfred Birnbaum (who also “adapted with the participation of the author”? Yikes)! and, now that I know it’s actually going to be printed, Josipovici. Curses.

Oh, well. What do you think? In the next life I’ll be damned into the role of a copy writer?

  1. Purple Hibiscus by Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie – It took a war novel for Adichie to win the Orange prize but her first published novel will always rank first for me. It is, among other things, the story of 15 year old Kambili’s gradual discovery of herself in the privileged but oppressive household of her paper mogul father, who shows Christian charity by using fists at home and supporting schools and free speech in a politically turbulent Nigeria. Adichie’s prose and poignant character portrayals will make you catch your breath.
  2. Sun Also Rises by Ernest Hemingway – Hemingway’s descriptions of Pamplona, Spain would tempt any reader to fall in love with the town and country, sight unseen. The characters and setting worked together at a level unsurpassed in his later novels.
  3. Jane Eyre by Charlotte Brontë – There are few better characters in English literature than Jane Eyre. Bronte created her with the divine fire that makes such literary figures unforgettable. The dramatic prose is a bonus.
  4. Dreamtigers by Jorge Luis Borges – Here is a universally respected writer who should be more widely read. His words take you on travels through art, history, literary, philosophy, mythology, the rise and fall of nations. This collection of short stories and poems that defy categorisation is a good as start as any.
  5. The Iliad by Homer, translated by Richmond Lattimore – Fagles’ translations are oft praised but Lattimore is the man I go to for the full, mythic grandeur of Ancient Greek myth. This epic poem is a favourite for its literary quality, violenct action and high drama: the perfect blockbuster.
  6. The Last Worthless Evening by Andre Dubus – I consider Dubus to be one of the greatest American 20th century writers. In a prose that at first sight seems so ordinary, he describes in emotionally captivating detail the lives of the ordinary — waitresses, soldiers, teenagers — and in them you recognise yourself.
  7. Poems of the Sea edited by J.D. McClatchy – Whatever form an ocean lover’s thoughts could take there is a poem in this collection that captures it. From anonymous sea shanties, to urban dwellers’ yearnings, to ship wrecks, poets like Sara Teasdale, Noel Coward and Constantine Cavafy explore the full scope of humanity’s relation to the sea.
  8. Hard-boiled Wonderland and the End of the World by Haruki Murakami – I’m a big Murakami fan and it’s my favourite novel. He takes you on crazy adventures underground and through the subconscious and never loses you. In fact, he makes it into a genuine suspenseful mystery.
  9. Selected Poems by Lorna Goodison – She is one of the best poets that Jamaica has to offer and in this collection one pretty much gets all her best stuff here. Her poetry explores all aspects of female experience with an intelligence, humour and creative power that makes it accessible to anyone, regardless of their gender or nationality.
  10. Swann’s Way by Marcel Proust, translated by Lydia Davis – I haven’t finished all of the In Search of Lost Time novels but it’s not because I regret reading “Swann’s Way”. To the contrary I think it’s the kind of book that could, at the very least, have a significant impact on anyone’s philosophy. And reading Proust’s prose via Davis is an ecstatic experience.

Mmmm, I’m full…of books!

In Books, Fiction, Literature, What I'm Reading on April 2, 2008 at 4:30 pm

(I have no excuses for this nonsensical post title. I did just have a nice bowl of chilli.)

Villette is proving to be a completely different experience from Jane Eyre which may not be a bad thing — it’s only made me more curious and unsettled (so far). Brontë’s prose still possesses that alluring quality that leads you by the nose, calling you to pick the book up again regardless of what other things may need your attention. In Jane Eyre I credited it to the novel’s rhythmic, formal, steady prose that’s typical of 18th and 19th century British novels; it’s the sort that you can sink into, that isn’t ornate or elaborate but is rich in detail — about the characters, the geographical locale, the weather, the architecture, all setting whether tangible or intangible. In many ways it is what I regard as “the novel” form and style, although I would expire from boredom if all books were like that.

Villette contains most of those characteristics except that, to my surprise, the prose becomes even more formal, stilted, with an abruptly elusive energy that pushes me out of the story and the heroine’s mind, both of I which I had expected to easily settle within. I had to reread certain phrases because their complex, unfamiliar, obsolete structures disarmed me. Brontë calls attention to its written nature rather than make any effort to simulate a person’s speech patterns. (I’m sorry I did not taken note of examples but if I come across anymore (or decide to spend time scanning read pages) I’ll edit the post.)

I suppose it fits Brontë’s heroine Lucy Snow whose personality in this first person narrative is abrupt, adverse to easy intimacy and who puts a lot of energy into appearing as cold as her surname suggests, both to the reader and the novel’s other characters. This I did not expect, knowing nothing about the book before I started except that the girl is a teacher at some point. Jane Eyre 2.0 she is not.  She is not as open as Jane but makes cryptic remarks about her home life. I know, or she leads one to assume, that home and its inhabitants hold no warm associations for her and that in her early 20s they went through a crisis that left her adrift to seek her own fortune. But the identity of those inhabitants, “kindred” she calls them, and whether there is any love lost among them is still a secret at page 66 with no assurance that it will be revealed. Her godmother and her son with whom Lucy spent a few vacations are the only ones she likes tolerably enough. They left her tranquil which is what she craves most. From this one can ascertain that her childhood was of comparable misfortune with Jane Eyre’s, perhaps not as bad, but no Avonlea, yet Snowe’s painfully polite and proper prose dares you to feel any pity or sympathy for her. If you’re looking for charming, courageous urchins more loveable because others describe them as unlovely seek out Dickens.

Yet I do not dislike Lucy Snowe. Her reticence piques my curiosity and Brontë layers in little scenes and lines that hint at Lucy’s more tempestuous inclinations and vulnerabilities. Brontë ably sets her heroine’s story with dramatic phrasing — “How deeply glad I was when the door of a very small chamber at length closed on me and my exhaustion. Again I might rest: though the cloud of doubt would be thick to-morrow as ever; the necessity for exertion more urgent, the peril (of destitution) nearer, the conflict (for existence) more severe.” — and suitable Biblical allusions — of major characters in peril, from Joseph abandoned in the well to Jesus’ crucifixion –that inject the book with excitable energy. You’re just waiting for it all to burst out. In some respects it is a “Jane Eyre II” for we have again an almost poor and unfortunate, not conventionally attractive young woman tossed to fate who must depend almost entirely on her mental resources to find the right environment in which she can thrive. A different character gives different results, as it should.

Clearly, Brontë can do whatever she likes and have me tag along. This forced me to consider more closely what precisely is it she does that makes her a favourite: her novels’ characters but not a single type; her prose but a particular style; maybe her plot. But there are thousands of books that follow similar formulas that I wouldn’t read free of cost. And though her novels have strong plots they are not “plotty” (so I awkwardly termed those) that move quickly, with simple prose that really is just simple, with empathetic characters created to be most appealing etc. She takes her time to illustrate each part of each stage in her protagonists’ lives, every character written as though he had a special importance vital to that particular scene. So, you know, the books take a while.

I approached an answer some hours after breakfast but lunch muddled my brain. Let’s see…I still think the characters are part of her winning strategy. She has the talent of creating resilient, flawed characters in perilous situations and they prove their hardiness before she plunges them into true desperation. Starting out with a milquetoast as your main guy never, ever works unless a) you’re not writing a “character” book or b) your technical writing skills are so stellar as to allow one to ignore the milquetoast. Who doesn’t like gumption? There’s also a tantalizing tension in her writing that mirrors the one in her characters — the pull between control and passion. This sets her apart from dear old Emily who’s passion from beginning to end, I think, which was “atmospheric” in her descriptive natural scenes and “drama-queen-oh-just-off-yourselves-already” in her characters. For Villette so far Charlotte’s prose is more restrained and Lucy is crying one sentence but berating herself for doing so in a mature, stalwart tone in the next. Besides’ Snowe’s personality this may also have something to do with the fact that she’s penning this story in her old age so if Lucy seems like a fuddy duddy in her 20s you can imagine how she is in her 60s, say.

No, I’m not satisfied with that answer but it will have to do for now.  I’m more pleased with the fact that the book has given me so much to think about and I’m not even in sight of the 100th page in a 500+ book.

The only problem I have is with the edition. Helen Cooper is the lovely woman who wrote the introduction and annotated the latest Penguin Classics issue and it’s clear her specialisation is in post-colonial studies. That’s fine. I appreciated the historical contextualization she did in the introduction, as well as the relevant remarks on Brontë’s racism as it pertains to Celtics and her anti-Catholic, anti-French attitude. Good, good. I can’t help thinking, though, the she’s narrowed her lens too much in writing the notes. A character can’t drink tea or use a guinea in this thing without it being linked to the slave trade in a tone of slight disapproval. I’m surprised that when Brontë described a cotton dress she didn’t mention anything about American South plantations. Unlike Jane Eyre which has a strong theme of slavery and rebellion and is certainly riper for that analysis considering that ol’ Jane’s inheritance was from, you know, actual slavery, and the link to Bertha Mason etc. Snowe never sees herself in similar terms at all.  In other words, I don’t see how my understanding of the novel is advanced by this tedious flotsam. The introduction promises me I’ll see the point of all this later but right now she just seems to be filling up a word count.

Especially since she over-explains some, a trend I also noticed in the Penguin Classics Jane Eyre. It’s fine to tell me of the Pilgrim’s Progress allusions and inform me that Lucy “embarks upon a similar journey — emotional, professional and spiritual”; but I’m not so dim as to not be able to see for myself that Lucy’s “name emphasizes her external coldness: the novel her inner passions”. That’s the damn story isn’t it? Or she notes and explains a reference to monomania as it was understood in the 19th century, highlights a bible verse describing a comparable attitude towards God, used in reference to the same monomaniac but feels the need to explain Brontë’s purpose for doing so. It’s.in.the.verse.  I remember in Jane Eyre whole themes being explained in the notes as my jaw hung open in shock after which I checked the front to make sure I wasn’t reading one of those odious yellow Cliff notes.

Quit it! Make it relevant, save the trees and my patience.

Two things

In Authors, Literature, Poetry, literary journals on March 30, 2008 at 8:22 pm
  • Colin Burrow’s contribution to this year’s Lady Margaret Lectures on Milton at Cambridge U is now available as a podcast (finally!). Entitled “Milton’s Singularity” it even comes with a handout (PDF). That’s exactly why he’s one of my favourite lit crits. Unfortunately for rabid Milton fans the next lecture, “Milton: Poetry vs. Prose” by Sharon Achinstein, is scheduled all the way in May! And then it will take a whole month before it gets uploaded because those silly Cambridge people apparently have better things to do. Sigh.
  • Fence, a darn good literary magazine, is offering its annual subscription for the price you’d like to pay, starting as low as $1.00 USD. Contributions of $300 or more gets you a lifetime subscription. The offer ends at April 30th. Fancy taking them up on it? (via Chekhov’s Mistress which has the full details)

Sunday Salon: Reading Meme

In Books, Fiction, General, Literature, Sunday Salon on March 30, 2008 at 6:56 pm

Eva in her Striped Armchair came up with a fun description of the different kinds of ways the habitual reader relates to books, how she groups them. I thought it would make a fun meme so I decided to tackle it. You should read hers first because it’s funnier than mine.

The guilt read – Translations and Caribbean fiction used to fall under this category but now picking them up is becoming a habit and the urge springs from natural cravings rather than guilt when I peruse my recent reads and notice I’ve fallen into the white American/UK rut again. For example Geoffrey Philp’s highlighting of Kwame Dawes’ artistic project on HIV/Aids in Jamaica at the Pulitzer Center (unfortunately?) made me rub my lips and think, Hmmmm…I could totally go for a Jamaican novel right now.

I think the only guilt reads I have left are the unread books I want to and should read but for which I can’t quite summon up the mood so I check my bookmarks for new books. :p Oh, and contemporary fiction. Sometimes I have a natural craving, a lot of the time I am comfortably settled in to a whole range of classics…and then I hop over to Dan Green’s site and feel wretched for not picking up Stephen Marche’s or Jesse Ball’s latest yet. *squirm* (He often advocates the importance of covering contemporary fiction.)

However, I picked up Lydia Millet’s latest of my own free will! It doesn’t seem to be getting half the excited attention Oh Pure and Radiant Heart did so that must earn me extra brownie points with…my imaginary literary supervisor.

One of my favourite bloggers really liked this book/author read: I have quite a few favourite bloggers with wholly different tastes from me so I don’t have this problem since I just don’t read the books. :P Of those who do we are curious about or appreciate the same or similar authors. And, to be perfectly frank, I adore you all but am quite careful about following up on recommendations about authors new to me because I prefer to buy rather than borrow books and I know I’m a moody reader. It’s doubtful that I’ll get to a new book before the return window closes so I like to think I made good investments. There are about two bloggers who can send me to the book store to try an author I don’t know that hasn’t received much blog or print attention. So my records been perfect so far.

I’ve been reading a bunch of 20th century lit recently, so now I need to read a classic: For Eva it was YA lit that sent her for the classic, and for me in this category “classic” means anything pre-20th century. This happened recently and is what sent me to Austen and now to Brontë because I’m still craving female authors.

I regularly become weary of modern prose and wish for more archaic rhythms and formal, repetitive structures. It’s what I was raised on and what I first respected.

well, I haven’t enjoyed a single book by this author ever, but s/he’s really popular, so I ought to give it another go: No, no. If I didn’t like it it sucked or wasn’t my cup of tea. Passes are only given if I didn’t finish the book abandoned it for other reasons besides the possibility that it was so godawful I could not get past page 3. (Gallant, Rusdhie and Vonnegut have this pass. In light of that replace “popular” with “respected”.)

Of course, there’s the why does the world suck so much? read, whose main job is to make me completely forget all of my problems. Romances may fall under this category, as do fantasies and favourite pre-20th century classics. Basically, I guess, the books I loved when I was a kid.

Then there’s the I’m going somewhere and need a book small enough to fit in my purse/suitcase/etc choice: Yeah, this is why Don Quixote will never leave my bedroom. I always carry a book around and since I find myself out and about doing so much research these days, or doing office hours etc. I am less inclined to purchase hardcovers. Why big publisher persist in producing hardcovers in GINORMOUS dimensions is beyond me; they even curse some of their trade paperbacks with hardcover-like lengths and widths. I suspect they want to justify charging me $30+ for a tiny 200+ pager so I tend to flip the bird and silently inform them to pray that I remember their precious tome when it comes out in paperback. Indie publishers produce saner hardcover sizes that cost less so I feel kinder towards those.

I was anxious to get my hands on Quiet Girl by Peter Høeg and Winnie and Wolf by A.N. Wilson until I saw the brontosauruses the respective publishers expected me to lug around. (The second one is also obscenely expensive even for a hardcover. I don’t know if the publishers thought that J.K. Rowling wrote the book? How else do they expect it to sell? Huh.)

the random seduction read: This hasn’t happened to me in a while. I have so many ideas about the kind of books I’d like to try…even when I’m randomly browsing I typically have a criterion in mind.

I bought this X years ago, and I still haven’t read it, which is a horrible waste of money read, which provides a strong incentive to get those books off the TBR shelf: Yeah, as mentioned up top, I have a lot of those. But not as many as Danielle.

I call X one of my favourite authors, and I haven’t read anything by him/her in forever read: I have a few of those: Borges, Sylvia Townsend Warner, Cicero, Proust. Dubus recently fell off that list. I try to get through my Borges’ Collected Fictions but the arrangement of everything just pushed together is overwhelming, I think, so I decided to gradually collect individual books. I do that for Ted Hughes because his Collected Poems is a whopper at 1333 pages. I’d like to know the jokers who bought that with the intention of actually reading it… The individual collections are packaged more nicely, anyway.

If you’d like to take this and adapt it to your specifications feel free.

Sunday Salon: Tropic Moon by Georges Simenon

In Books, Fiction, Literature, Reviews, Sunday Salon on March 30, 2008 at 4:13 pm

My small press reading tally for the month was unspectacular. Out of 9 (!) reads only two could count unless one stretched the definition to include university presses. (OUP’s Persuasion classics edition which I can’t say I was too impressed with.) The two romances were impulse reads finished within a day each. (One great, one blah.) Three books were for for a requested review and the SF novel was a surprise appearance.

Excuses out of the way I can pay attention to one of my reads that did count, Tropic Moon by Georges Simenon, translated by Norman Rush. (Yes, imprints are “small presses” on my blog for March.) He is an in-house favourite at NYRB classics or at least the editor’s favourite. The imprint is fairly successful at getting periodicals to direct some attention to his work when it releases a new edition, the NYRB itself a sure retainer of the books’ introductions. For the first time I hit on a female author from their catalogue whose work did not immediately impress — I intend to try again — so I decided to favour a male.

Comparison of the French and English titles along warrants some fruitful attention. Coup de chaleur means heatstroke; the book’s French title is Coup de lune. However, “Moonstroke” isn’t a very fetching title. “Tropic Moon” may at first seem inexact, a bit off-target, except that it isn’t once you start reading. One already gets the heat factor from the word “tropic” and throughout most of the book the naive, beleaguered young hero, Joseph Timar, complains about the sun’s harrowing intensity in Gabon. At the end the meaning is clinched when an unravelled Timar leaves Libreville, the country’s capital, on a shop, and overhears someone ironically ask a lieutenant still wearing his sun helmet at night: “Afraid of moonstroke?” Even without the original French one could piece it all together — it was because I had that I sought out the novel’s original title to see if it confirmed my ideas.

Why all this fuss about the title? At that aforementioned moment near the story’s end Timar fits rather neatly into the addled, crazy definition of moonstruck, fresh from a bout of dengue fever and a mental breakdown from living in a corrupt, racist French colonial outpost. Even then Simenon’s choice of using the moon is curious because the sun is the book’s more prominent celestial body, if you go by by the number of times its mentioned. Set in the early 1930s Europeans still retain that curious view that the tropical sun had harmful psychological effects. They looked down on creoles (Caribbean persons of European descent) as strange others not quite as refined, civilised and as normal as true Euros and this was partly explained by the hot climate. Charlotte Brontë incorporated this view into her depiction of Bertha Mason and her Jamaican family; Rhys expounded on (and undermined) it in Wide Sargasso Sea. (I’d like to review it but I lost my notes.) Using “moonstruck”, wholly appropriate on one hand with the moon as a symbol associated with illness and the female gender which links to Timar’s disastrous relationship with Adèle (to name a few instances), on the other hand serves as a diversionary prop there to shift attention from all the serious events that transpired in daylight. Yet that fit as well because Timar, at the end, was in full denial, cryptically announcing to himself and others that “It doesn’t exist!” His brain, perhaps, in retreat to protect him from past experience, to allow him to heal.

Simenon steadily lays the pressure on from the beginning. The novel opens with Timar worriedly asking himself, “Was there really any reason for him to be so anxious? No. Nothing out of the ordinary had happened.” But the anxiety behind each word is palpable as he recalls the excitement he felt during his arrival only to have it collapse two pages later in acknowledgement of a yet unexplained danger. You can tell this isn’t going to be a story with a happy ending; the story justifies it though, makes it a necessity, rather than some dourness thrown in to lend the tale faux gravitas. (A problem in some contemporary fiction: Haweswater was great up until the epilogue when Hall threw in a random death to force some arbitrary pattern on to the text. ) Timar’s uncle got him a job in Gabon with SACOVA, a logging company, and at first he tries to approach the trip as a kind of vacation or adventure, out to experience the strange but thrilling colonial life.

What a sight! This was the real Africa! In the café with the African masks on the wall, Timar cranked up the old gramophone. He felt like a real colonial.

He quickly gets a reality check on how things are run, the disconnect between the head offices and the lowly minions, when a SACOVA employee in Libreville laughs at his unexpected arrival, explains that there is no able boat to get him into the interior which will remain so for many weeks and, anyway, the man he is supposed to replace threatens to shoot anyone who makes the attempt. After four days of aimlessness, familiarising himself with the very small town, there was little left to do than to end up in bed with Adèle, the hotel owner, a married woman about twice his age (he’s 23) who walks around in a long black silk dress under which she may or may not be naked. In fact, she seduces him.

She is his main entry into Libreville’s world, not least because she allegedly slept with every able bodied (white) man available. Timar is largely passive through it all, observing and being manoeuvred into stranger and more shocking experiences; similar to Murakami Haruki’s heroes except that Simenon’s created world is claustrophobic and the character’s passiveness is a vital survival mechanism.

Expectedly, he does not initially see the African’s as three dimensional persons like himself. His first of one who carries him from his ship to the shore when he arrived is of a “naked arm, a black arm” that pulls him into the boat, who then is simply a “black” who takes him to shore. The problem is that the French residents are as strange, a strangeness of moral turpitude; damaging because the white workers are untroubled by their part in it but the government officials disingenuous superiority mask their own active enforcement of the underhanded system. Because Timar is an outsider with no fervent hatred of black Africans (he passively absorbed the prevailing ideas as most everyone else) when one of Adèle’s black servants is murdered he cannot blithely shrug it off like the rest. He has an inkling of who the murderer is, which grows into a certainty. Everyone else knew from the start who did it, including the police, who are willing to entertain other explanations since the murderer is white.

He does not expect this. Well, no one expects murder but he does not expect to recognise it as a symptom of the society’s more malignant condition. His inexperience makes him vulnerable and his infatuation with Adèle leaves him even more exposed because, despite the needling anxiety, the relentless sun beating down through the flimsy protection of his sun helmet, he tries to live in the miasma. The sun figuratively does its best to pierce through Timar’s assumptions about colonial life and his futile hopes and desire about his future prospects with Adèle. Ironically, the moments when this does occur and he gains further insight result in physical sickness. He joins with her in a risky scheme, with the help of family influence and money, to buy a concession miles from Libreville, accessible by boat. During the trip on the river they make a stop at a village and Adèle keeps an appointment that she initially refuses to admit happened and then denies its importance. In frustration and anger he is careless about skin protection and contracts dengue fever. Near the end he eventually buckles under the pressure of carrying on the act in an oppressively hot courtroom where Adèle is on the stand at the trial for Thomas’ murder. An African man from the same village as Thomas is the defendant in the case, sold out by a bribed tribal leader. Adèle’s husband fell sick and eventually died from a recurrent illness on the same night Thomas was murdered. It was too much to hope that Timar could have taken it for omen it was.

In what I think is characteristic of Simenon’s roman durs moral enlightenment, truth and virtue are not liberators but simply harbingers of other miseries. In Tropic Moon no one else but the hero is interested in such unworthy pursuits and they will turn viciously turn on anyone who dares to do so. It’s grimly humorous that it is Adèle who simultaneously entangles him in her affairs yet tries to foster his ignorance to protect him from its effects out of what I think is true affection. She is attracted to him because of his adolescent air and wishes to somehow preserve that quality.

It’s a very short novel, almost a novella at 133 pages, written in a simple prose like Murakami except that Simenon’s isn’t plain at all. His descriptive prose is light on the details but the absence is enigmatic. His withholding of information forces one to concentrate on what he does point while constantly wondering about what he’s only implied or left out altogether. It creates a mystery both out of the sentences, words containing hidden meanings; the brief scenes pregnant with clues, the characters making hidden gestures and coded remarks; the plot itself as Simenon dabbles the murderer’s identity here and there. It heightens my interest in his mystery books, his “entertainment” novels — they must be very good.

The brevity also acts as a way to measure Timar’s changing attitudes toward the black locals. From the abstract black arm at the beginning to the more fully drawn sailors who take him down on his last trip on the river from the concession back to Libreville.

An immense feeling of peace, that’s what he was experiencing, but he peace tinged with sadness — he didn’t know why. He had tenderness to spare within him, though it lacked a precise object, and it seemed to him that he was on the verge of understanding this land of Africa, which had provoked him so far to nothing but an unhealthy exaltation.

The river was calm, and the blacks steered the canoe to the bank and tied it up. Timar wasn’t scared, he didn’t feel the least twinge of apprehension, though he was the only one there who didn’t speak the language. To the contrary — he felt as though they’d all taken him under their wing, like a child entrusted to their care.

He doesn’t turn into a humanitarian but his familiarising time with them plays a role in the courtroom scene where he cannot stand to be silent as everyone seems set to ignore the confused accused and his mother, there with only a translator to help them, as they plead his innocence.

This impression may be coloured by the biographical articles I’ve read on Simenon but I detected a confident arrogance in the story’s short length as well, as if he wished to prove to himself and to others that he could create a complex, weighty work without resorting to 500 pages of elaborate sentences and an extensive vocabulary. That grabbed my attention, making me more alert from the beginning.

Timar’s alertness is more costly. His growing “understanding of this land Africa” leads him to what he feels is a temporary rejection of its existence as he leaves its shores, kicked out by annoyed officials who don’t really want the right answers to their questions. French West Africa was a land and represented a future that he wanted nothing to be a part of and seems to hold a French bourgeois life as the antidote.

Graham Greene’s A Burnt-Out Case has a somewhat similar theme and plot: a famous Catholic architect abandons a successful life in Europe for the numbing anonymity of anywhere, Congo just happening to be the destination available when he went to the airport. Timar is Catholic too. The difference is that Greene’s book is more hopeful despite the tragic ending. He allows his defeatist protagonist to temporarily achieve a reconciliation with his past. Greene, from the beginning, does not even spare him from the lightly mocking tone he applies to a narrow-minded Catholic priest who likes to fancy himself a martyr, or a bellicose, egotistical colonial. For Simenon religion is just another part of the setting with no impact on the thoughts or morals of any characters. Your conscience is your only guide and if it does it’s job it will be a painful process from beginning to end.

No longer an Amazon customer

In Books, Publishing, Rants, WTF on March 29, 2008 at 8:25 pm

I’m not sure if you heard but in a boneheaded, asinine, flagrantly anti-customer move, Amazon decided Print On Demand (POD) publishers must print their books through Amazon’s newly acquired POD publisher BookSurge (with a reputation for quality service) or Amazon will no longer sell their books (via Petrona). Customers will only be able to get the books from third party sellers so the purchases won’t be eligible for any Amazon promotions, including the free shipping offer. Of course, you can still get it through Kindle, that product still too needs to be established.

Protests that the publishers are free to go elsewhere are disingenuous: Amazon is the premier site online for book information — even if one doesn’t buy directly from the site it’s likely that one goes there to get book details, reviews and, most importantly for me, excerpts. I make a conscious decision to buy from local stores but for friends abroad its the easiest way to buy books for me and if I’m pre-ordering it’s where I’d go to do so. Not any more.

I will no longer link to Amazon on my site. I’ll stick to publisher sites or use Book Depository. (I’ve been trying to do that regularly now, for a while, but it’s hard to break linking habits and, let’s face it, Amazon typically has the most information.) However, this move overrides the convenience factor. I’ll change the links in my most popular posts and, on bored days, I’ll go through random posts (reviews and the like) to edit links. Please, pardon the updates of old posts that may appear in your RSS readers.

I’m pissed off. I know that brick & mortar book stores long complained about its dominance but I could never feel more than token sympathy because Amazon made itself into an important resource on a scale they couldn’t manage, in a fair and innovative way, to the best of my knowledge. Other bloggers criticised the stupid “one click” patent but as a customer I didn’t think it affected me much. But this ultimatum dumps more expenses on publishers and actively impedes developments in POD, and subsequently makes it harder for me, the customer, to acquire products. If their books are only available through third party sellers whose sales they may or may not be earning any money there’s no incentive for them to list their inventory there making it harder for me, the customer, to get the facts on the books I want. This is a slap in the face I can’t ignore. I’ve cancelled all of my pre-orders and deleted my wishlist. Amazon, you can just fuck right off.

“Persuasion” by Jane Austen: A Measured, Pertinent, Critical Response.

In Books, Fiction, Literature, What I'm Reading on March 28, 2008 at 12:59 pm
  • OMG, Anne Elliot is the most adorable character EVER. BFF!
  • Admiral Croft too! His gratifyingly open, perfectly amiable dialogue seems to envelope the reader in addition to any character he addresses. Curious as to how such admirable older male characters are never the fathers of Austen’s heroines, no? Interesting…
  • The book is almost DONE and ol’ Cap’n Wentworth still hasn’t made any moves yet. It’s killing me, damn it, go ravish Anne already! My heart broke ten times at least, since you two became reacquainted. The suspense! Argh.

Random observations

In Books, Fiction, General on March 23, 2008 at 9:29 pm

I am hammering out the last versions of several essays for my assorted overlords while fielding panicked questions from sweet, harried undergrads. Instead of mind destroying posts on Dubus and Simenon…you get this. Enjoy!

  • How the crap can there be only 32 copies of Tropic Moon by Simenon on LibraryThing? It just isn’t right. I keep on assuming that because it’s a bookish site all of us using the same radar but that’s obviously not true. It could also mean I am more susceptible to advertising. I don’t seem to be in the mood to review lit mags much these days but the latest TLS featured a great Commentary article by Paul Theroux on Simenon. He wrote the introduction for NYRB’s newest Simenon release, The Widow.
  • Goose Lane — ever heard of it? It appears to be a spiffy indie Canadian publisher that sells music. (Huh? Yeah I know.) At the bookstore earlier this week I decided to scan every shelf in the Fiction & Literature section for any small press books authored by women on the shelf which is how I discovered it. Goose Lane had a Libby Creelman and…something else but I didn’t take the final step to purchase. The website isn’t very helpful in letting me know which books tempted me. The Creelman book was The Darren Effect. I was intrigued but it opened with a character apparently on his death bed in the hospital and I wasn’t eager to go that route again after The Stone Angel.
  • I ended up leaving with two books that aren’t really indie or small (anymore). Everything I read about Millet’s Oh Pure and Radiant Heart made me blink in indifference. I thought her Globe & Mail review of the latest Coetzee sucked. Why did I get her latest, How the Dead Dream? Maybe it was the dinosaur eye on the cover. Mostly I’m hoping it will give me something weird which I need after Dubus staunch realism (naturalism? huh). I was expecting to see Soft Skull Press on the spine but it was Counterpoint instead. I then concluded she had moved on to a bigger (or different) press with her latest book. Turns out SSP and two other publishers got swallowed and digested into a bigger entity that’s running things now. (Except not editing, right? Richard Nash is still big cheese?) Thankfully, SSP’s site is still around so I’d suggest you google for it instead when looking for its books, since Counterpoint’s site is a dead bore.
  • It’s French! It promises passionate romance! It’s French! Voice Over by Céline Curiol, translated by Sam Richard, sold to the gullible afro lady. Read the novel summary and you’ll see how susceptible I am to the French angle. Set that story almost anywhere else and I’d roll my eyes. This ones published by Mclelland & Stewart. I’ve predictably strayed from my original reading list but I needed the estrogen boost. Look to your right (and a few scrolls) you’ll notice that my classic reading picks fall along the same lines.

Star Wars as science fiction?

In Books, Fantasy/Science Fiction, Literature on March 19, 2008 at 2:35 pm

(Yes, I know, countless geeks online have had this discussion ad finitum.)

Astonishingly, I think I may become one of those SF readers who hold to the view that one can’t simply plop a space ship into your novel and automatically ascend into the ranks. Take Star Wars, for instance. I know that genre fans place it in the SF romance pile but as Robert C. Wilson has led me to a new fascination I can’t afford, the Lucas films look nothing so much as a mishmash of Lord of the Rings and Camelot. It occurs in space and they get to fly around in beat up space ships and zing around fancy swords but does the technology impact their understanding of themselves, their philosophies, anything? Do we even have to know how any of it works beyond plot utility? The asthmatic whats-his-face’s Deathstar may as well be the ring of doom, except with less flexibility because a gun is a gun is a gun.

This is unfair to Star Wars because the sequels aspired to be nothing more than great B movie shlock but films are what make up the bulk of my SF experience so far. I also blame SF fans who have hollered long and hard for the genre’s distinct identity separate from (and superior to) fantasy. If I read a SF work and don’t find my mind operating in a notably different way I tend to lose interest; while I hold an innate interest in elves, gods and sea monsters, well-lit flying saucers and oogy green men don’t hold a similar basic appeal.

By the by have you read any Georges Simenon? He wrote some weird little thinkers (or roman durs as he preferred to call them). Norman Rush, in the introduction to Tropic Moon, rightfully brought up Graham Greene’s work and his attitude towards it, but after I finished the very short novel (133 pages) my thoughts fell on Joseph Conrad. If I can allow Simenon the legitimate investigation in colonization’s effects on the colonizer with less focus on the colonized why can’t I do the same for Conrad? Maybe if his book had a better title; I’m so over the “Dark Continent” bullshit.

Which reminds me of a little rant I’m brewing about the Virginia Quarterly Review and the angle they choose to pursue when covering different peoples. I must get over my ire about the cover choices first and, you know, read the content before I can make any substantial complaints. But perhaps you can see the difficulty. I don’t need to tell you which ones are the African issues. We all know (sub-Saharan, because who needs those random countries up top there…somewhere? Are we even considering them a part of the continent anymore?) Africa = misery. As if it has any art and culture to put on the cover. (Or to put within its pages judging by the need to get Art Spiegelman, as an example, for certain issues and not for others.)

Sure, we've got problems, but there's more to us than that -- who knew?

Oi! We're dying! Let's have a lot of foreigners telling us what's wrong! We don't have enough artists to help fill a whole issue! If only we were somehow physically linked to *North* America...

Memes, Quizzes, brains on hold

In Books, General, Personal, blogging, quizzes/memes on March 17, 2008 at 5:57 pm

Verbivore tagged me for the “Kind things” meme — go see hers, it has pictures of flowers and doggies! — so I’ll take the opportunity to envelope you in fluff, like a good blogger should.

  • List five kind things you do for yourself.
  • List five kind things you do for your closest friend, partner or child.
  • List five kind things you have done for a stranger.
  • Have fun!
  • Tag five people.

Five kind things I do for myself

Walk everywhere
I don’t really exercise and my diet is regulated by vague ideas about moderation. Hmmm, have had coffee so many days in a row? Should take a break and have juice instead. Don’t forget to have an apple to balance the yummy eggs and sausage. Every so often I crave a salad. My trump card, then, is to avoid vehicular transportation whenever I can. I walk to school every day as well as to all the book stores, even the ones downtown that are 40-50 minutes by foot from where I live. I try to go at a brisk pace. Then treat myself to some ice cream.

Read/blogging
I would explode if I did not all of you to discuss books with. I would live in book stores if I weren’t able to buy most of the books I wish whenever I like. (Library offerings are just too limited, especially when it comes to translated fiction and anyway I want to *own* beautiful, beautiful books not borrow them.)

Mark out solitary time
Although I do have a little brother the 12 year age difference is enough for me to still consider myself an “only child”, in some senses. Some of the best memories of my childhood is when I walked by the harbour nestling under trees or on the dock with a book or journal, sometimes reading, sometimes daydreaming or being quiet, absorbing my surroundings.

Canadian winters has forced me to change that system somewhat. I’ve channelled this need into doing various activities by myself, if I’m so inclined, a habit that some of my friends still find a bit odd, because, omg they could *never* go to the cinema by themselves, how *embarrassing*. (I still love them.) So during winter it’s more likely to find me enjoying my Bookforum at one of the many local coffee shops, or taking in a Bergman revival alone in the shadows, or prowling at an art gallery.

Subscribe to literary magazines
I don’t know what I do without them now! I’m addicted to the conversation among those pages even if very few of them approach my ideal. I don’t even begrudge those that devote a lot of pages to political and history books because most newspapers have become worthless for anything beyond the most basic reports.

Join the anime club
Now my life is complete.

;)

Five kind things I do for my closest friend/s

Buy stamps
The Shoppers Drug Mart is closer to my place (and she’s too lazy to get off the bus to make a stop at the one on her bus route) so I get the stamps she needs for her letters.

Listen
Some people seem to attract drama even though they’re the nicest person on the planet. It’s weird.

Encourage their independence
Sacrificing your life to keep people happy is not worth it.

Being frank/accepting
I can almost see the sigh of relief when I don’t provide the carefully looked for reaction of shock/disgust/ridicule/condemnation when they tell me about so and so. And this goes for both conservative and liberal views. I’m not perfect at withholding the harsh condemnation but I’m working on it.

Buy them pizza
I honour my bets (sigh). And a large three topping pizza for ten bucks is pretty good.

Five kind things you have done for a stranger

Provide bus fare
I hope it was for bus fare

Donate time to food bank
I, along with a bunch of others, collect for the food bank every Halloween. Good times.

Be friendly to international/exchange students
Because of the times I travel in and out of Canada I inevitably meet a foreign student who’s come to Canada for the first time at the airport who’s heading to the same school. I’ve made a lot of great friends that way so it works out for me too. It’s much better, for me, than the official shadow programme the International Students Association provides. It’s a good programme but I think it’s so much easier for both involved when you meet up in an informal environment and hit it off rather than (potentially) getting stuck with someone who wants to burnish their resume.

Donate books
Instead of bartering them at the bookstore I’ll sometimes donate them to the public library, especially if they are fairly recent releases that they haven’t acquired yet or wouldn’t mind more copies of.

Volunteering
I do it a lot, although it has slowed down some now that I’m in grad school. I’m thinking of signing up for a semi-regular position at the local public library but all of the posts require that you own a car or have access to one, and I don’t just want to shelve books or sit at a desk.

*****

Here’s Dewey’s Negativity meme

1. When you dislike a book, do you say so in your blog? Why or why not?
Wild horses couldn’t stop me from verbally stabbing a book in the spine if it has the temerity to disappoint me. :D I write however I feel about books here so the negative has to be mentioned at some point. The occasional bad read is unavoidable but I prefer complete enjoyment, especially the kind that is multifaceted.

2. Do you temper your feelings about books you didn’t like, so as not to completely slam them? Why or why not?
Ahh…no. What I might do is read over a few pages to see if they’re as bad as I remember but if they are then I convey that. I can feel passionate about a book but I’ve been vicious or vindictive (as far as I know) and I’m more careful to provide evidence for negative reviews.

3. What do you think is the best way to respond when you see a negative review about a book you enjoyed?
If it’s the unsupported, thumbs-up-or-down kind I ignore it and if it’s not I may share my different reaction and perhaps comment on any examples the reader provided to say if I saw the same thing but from a different angle or if it simply didn’t bother me, things like that. I don’t mind disagreement and I’ve never had trolls in my comment section.

4. What is your own most common reaction when you see a negative review of a book you loved or a positive review of a book you hated?
I don’t have one, I think. It all depends on the review’s quality — if it’s good I’ll be attentive, if not, dismissive.

5. What is your own most common reaction when you get a comment that disagrees with your opinion of a book?
Same answer to question 4.

6. What if you don’t like a book that was a free review copy? What then?
Same approach applies. If a publisher can afford to send them, it can afford to lose control of the results.

7. What do you do if you don’t finish a book? Do you review it or not? If you review it, do you mention that you didn’t finish it?
If I haven’t finished a book I’ll post some commentary depending on whether I feel the urge to and, of course, I mention it’s incomplete status. I would not consider such commentary a “review”.

*****

Quizzes from my reliable source, Shaken & Stirred.

Your Score: Tigger

You scored 14 Ego, 13 Anxiety, and 16 Agency!

And as they went, Tigger told Roo (who wanted to know)
all about the things that Tiggers could do.

“Can they fly?” asked Roo.

“Yes,” said Tigger, “they’re very good flyers, Tiggers
are. Strornry good flyers.”

“Oo!” said Roo. “Can they fly as well as Owl?”

“Yes,” said Tigger. “Only they don’t want to.”

“Why don’t they want to?” well, they just don’t like it
somehow.”

Roo couldn’t understand this, because he thought it
would be lovely to be able to fly, but Tigger said it was
difficult to explain to anybody who wasn’t a Tigger himself.

You scored as Tigger!

ABOUT TIGGER: Tigger is the newest addition to the Hundred Acre Wood, and he lives with Kanga and Roo, because Roo’s strengthening medicine turned out to be the thing that Tiggers like best. Tigger is bouncy and confident -some of his friends think he is a little TOO bouncy and confident, but attempts to unbounce him tend to be fruitless.

WHAT THIS SAYS ABOUT YOU: You are a positive and confident person. You feel capable of dealing with anything and everything, and funnily enough, you usually ARE. You don’t worry about much, and you love to go out and find new adventures.

Your friends and family might sometimes be a little exasperated by your boundless enthusiasm. You don’t like to admit your mistakes, and when you find yourself in over you head, you tend to bluff your way out of things. You would be surprised, however, at how happy the people around you would be if you would actually admit to a mistake. It would make you seem more human, somehow.

Link: The Deep and Meaningful Winnie-The-Pooh Character Test written by wolfcaroling on OkCupid, home of the The Dating Persona Test
View My Profile(wolfcaroling)

Reading update

In Books, Fantasy/Science Fiction, Fiction, Literature, Short Stories, What I'm Reading on March 17, 2008 at 8:55 am

Readers who keep up with any part of the science fiction online community are probably aware of Tor’s ebook giveaway — a superior version of HarperCollins tentative lame duck. I’m not a big SF reader but I am a years long subscriber to John Scalzi’s Whatever so when I read that his Old Man’s War was among the freebies I signed up for the newsletter — the only condition Tor lays on participants. I registered in time for his, couldn’t sum up the energy to unsubscribe, and ended up downloading Robert Charles Wilson’s Spin the next week. (I passed on last week’s Lackey co-authored text. I know that she’s supposed to be great, at least in that one Arthurian novel, but the interchangeable winsome cover maidens with piercing stares who gaze from cliffs/behind veils/from luxurious beds in boudoirs turn me off.)

I tried Scalzi’s and changed from relieved interest — hate to think that I like the blog writings but not the fiction — to annoyance at clumsy phrasing all within the first page. I really, really want to like the book so even though I closed the window one minute after my negative reaction — I have less patience for fiction on screen than on paper — I had already decided to try again at some future date.

Wilson got me on board from the first sentence. His is the first honest-to-goodness full-length SF novel I’ve ever been enthused about (or likely to read to the end, for that matter). Yes, Sarah Hall’s latest is “dystopian” and it is set in a future world but the dystopian setting worked as mere trappings, presented and dispensed with for most of the novel. Most of the technology Hall uses for her story is decidedly retro: centuries old farming techniques and tools. It’s easily the sort of novel persons uninclined to SF could enjoy without feeling any curiosity about the rest of the genre because none of the novel’s offered pleasures rests in any significant way on the dystopian elements. Not really. This is not a mark against Hall just the way it fits into my limited ideas about SF.

Never Let Me Go by Kazuo Ishiguro doesn’t count for me either, perhaps more inexplicably. The cloning plot line played a central role so I cannot convincingly persuade myself that he only used it as a launching pad. But, again, he focuses on the effects of the cloning and little (or nothing?) on the science behind it. I need it to be obvious. Give me labs and aliens! The fantastical fabrications! Global warming and cloning is so now — spice it up a bit, damn it. (Maybe this is because of my fantasy background.) Anyway, I liked the novel as I read it but it left nothing behind but a blank white mental space.

There was The Chrysalids in boarding school but all I remember is something about kids and a spaceship.

Wilson writes about the stars disappearing, the earth suddenly covered in a protective shield put in place by some unknown intelligence to protect the earth’s inhabitants from a “temporal velocity” that’s occurring beyond its barrier. The beings, so speculation goes, slowed down earth’s time relative to time beyond its sphere; millions of years transpire in what for earth is only a decade (for example). Without the shield sun light would reach the earth’s atmosphere at speeds beyond the filtering capacity of ozone layer and we’d all fry. Conversely, without a sun we’d freeze so the (probably) aliens put up a fake sun and moon.

Here’s the science that was rumoured to exist in the genre. Being a SF there has to be, I suppose, some smug pronouncements on most people’s “pre-Newtonian” understanding of astrophysics — the smugness does fit in with the character’s personality — and, of course, the only reason our narrator has a clue what his genius pal is discussing is because he reads SF novels. I forgive the earnestness since everything is going well, so far.

*****

Finding a Girl in America, the story collection by Andre Dubus is proving to be a mixed offering. Or not mixed so much as not the transcendent experience I expected but author’s must find it difficult to produce uniformly magnificent fiction with each new publication. One or two stories have weak spots but a less-than-awesome Dubus is still an excellent affair, more rewarding than what most authors could manage.

The familiar subjects are here. Couples or families are disrupted by death or divorce. Military men and their families or loved ones deal with the occupational stresses. Dubus never writes of them in battle, at least I’ve never come across it, it’s always the before and after. Baseball. I get the impression that Dubus is a huuuuge baseball fan. :) I’m not one but he makes it compelling. If any writer is North American, specifically of the United States, who crafts stories that embody the people and the landscape, who captures the text, taste, rhythm and essence of their life, it’s Dubus. That’s one of the things that always struck me about his writing and what I find attractive about it.

I’m fascinated by war stories too, specifically the actions and reactions of the soldiers’ and their family, even of their home community. Nations gung ho about their military are, I think, at the core pretty ambivalent about it (how can they not be?) and I’ve always been curious about how soldiers function when they know that combat guarantees psychological damage of some sort. And we require it of them. Or just the problems of distance, months and months away from the spouse, fiancé, girlfriend. Sometimes it’s about the widows or the children left behind. Sometimes it’s not particularly about the man’s military life (always a man, never woman). Dubus’ soldiers tend to have fought in the Korean or Vietnam war.

Nagging works! and other items

In Books, Fiction, General, Literature, Poetry on March 11, 2008 at 9:54 am

The local Chapters has finally condescended to restock the London Review of Books! I started nagging them about it a year ago and gave up after 6 months — perhaps it takes them a long, long time to process requests. Likelier is that the move had nothing to do with me. I bought a copy today even though I’m a subscriber as a way to encourage them to keep it up. They should view selling them as a public service move if The Great British Press Disaster has any bearing on newspapers on this side of the Atlantic.

One interesting article (only available to subscribers) is Tobias Gregory’s review of Why Milton Matters: A New Preface to His Writings by Joseph Wittreich. If one listened to Quentin Skinner’s Lady Margaret’s lecture on Milton’s political writings one got a pretty good sense of how his opinions on government, liberty and religion coincided, diverged or were directly relevant to present times. One thing he was cautious to highlight that although Milton has a sexy rebellious image that some historians may be tempted to airbrush his less attractive views in order to make him more superficially appealing. But although Milton was a proponent for religious freedom he wasn’t magnanimous enough to think that Roman Catholics deserved such a right; he may have espoused equality principles but it was only for gentlemen of a certain class and did not include women of any; nor was he wholly against censorship but thought it necessary that printing presses should have the right to publish papers without pre-approval or special licenses.

Going by Gregory’s review Wittreich should have been required to attend that lecture. The more curious thing I’ve come to learn this year and was ignorant of because Milton did not figure at all in my Jamaican high school education is how fusty Milton’s academic image is. Apparently, modernists like Virginia Woolf and Eliot are partly to blame for the situation, one that is dire enough for Gregory to make what I found to be a suspicious, exaggerated statement:

Milton is the greatest English poet whom it is possible for serious readers to dislike. There are no fans of Marlowe, Jonson or Webster who cannot also find pleasure in Shakespeare; there are no admirers of Piers Plowman or Sir Gawain and the Green Knight who cannot also appreciate The Canterbury Tales. But it is not hard to find enthusiastic readers of Marvell or Spenser or Dryden or Donne who cannot warm to Milton, and make no apology for it.

O RLY? I felt an urge to try some Chaucer to prove him wrong. Maybe I hate Marlowe’s plays with an unprecedented fervour yet uncovered because I haven’t read them (yet?). I’m not even sure why he grouped folks like Marvell or Donne with Milton — the first two’s style don’t strike me as being similar to Milton’s at all. Just grouping all same century writers then? I guess I’ve become a bit sensitive about it because every single piece of media coverage I’ve seen on Milton so far first establishes how nobody likes him any more. Eh.

For more popular poetry hop on over to Blog Meridian where John B. blogs about his classroom experiences in teaching “Stopping By Woods on a Snow Evening”: A Thank You. The most intriguing bits for me were the interpretations John and his students discussed in class. That Robert Frost poem is one I first encountered on my own — I wriggled in my chair in glee during a high school English exam (CXC aka ‘O’ levels) once because it appeared on the paper, along with The Wild Swans at Coole by Yeats and no, I don’t know why I remember this — and until now only ever appreciated the visual picture created in my mind. The lines’ rhythm stand out too, especially in the last stanza, but really my first response to the poem whenever I think or read about it it is a mental picture of a man (hazily outlined) on a horse in a forest in the evening with the snow falling softly. John provides a bonus poem too of another Frost poem about someone wandering in the forest: The Wood-pile (which was new to me). For an oldie but goodie posted around this time last year consider lotusgreen’s visual accompaniment to “Stopping By Woods…” at Japonisme.

As an aside, I did not remember the title of the Yeats poem when I composed this post or any lines of it. What I retained was an image, too, of birds (I first thought of geese but that was a different poem) by a lake, by a tree, at evening about to take flight. I also remember having more difficulty with the Yeats poem questions than the Frost. :P

We move on from mental to actual pictures. Sara at A Different Stripe, the NYRB classics blog, is asking for photos of reader’s “Classics in the wild: at a bookstore, arranged on your bookshelf, propping up an uneven table, anything.” I sent two year old photos in and I know that Stefanie at So Many Books took a picture of one of her book shelves, once, which had some classics. One of the internet’s many pleasures is book shelf ogling so I hope all you classics owners with cameras hop to it.

Sunday Salon: Complementary readings

In Books, Fiction, Literature, Sunday Salon on March 10, 2008 at 10:59 am

Yeah, yeah, my entry is late, what’s it to ya? ;) This weekend I was entirely snowed in. I devoted my time to eating, sleeping and…on work, I’m afraid, but it was relaxing if not idyllic.

Sarah Hall’s latest successful effort fired me up to cram in two other books before I completed the review’s first draft. I went looking for her first novel, Haweswater and, despite the dreaded adjectives “lyrical” and “poetic” — isn’t that what they thought 0f Electric Michelangelo? I shuddered — placed a hold on a library copy.

I don’t know what use the aforementioned adjectives have any more. They’re used to describe so many writers of different styles and often the reviewer uses it without expanding upon what she means in it’s relation to a particular writer. But in their other worn out pronouncements the (largely British) reviewers were on target: Haweswater did declare the presence of a gifted new novelist worth watching and her attention to her character’s natural surroundings is strongly reminiscent of Thomas Hardy’s own writings. (This marks one of the few times I’ve ever been able to detect a classic writer’s influence in a reviewed author’s prose.)

Haweswater also explained why Electric Michelangelo turned out the way it did. Sarah Hall loves the fictional worlds she creates. There is a strong sympathy and devotion to every sentence to every nature or character portrait, to every dramatic scene or quiet moment. It reminded me of a computer nerd’s obsessive dedication to her past time. Brand new, fully accessorized hardware is passed over in favour of customizing one’s own system, for only she could give it the kind of minute attention it deserved. In Haweswater each word carefully holds each unit of that enthusiastic passion; in Electric Michelangelo Hall doled out more and more words to try and contain it but they all went to waste.

Occasionally Hall’s hand slips and you get the sort of saccharine, overly reverential scenes of northern England rural life that (sorry Hall) remind me of Nora Roberts similar tactic when writing about Ireland or things in relation to it. Hall also has a bad incomplete sentence habit (again, like Nora Roberts) which, rather than placing an idea or image in stark relief, just forces me to rescan lines in confusion. Break the rules, by all means, but make it feel necessary. I could only find this minor example with the time I have:

At first she will not let him touch her. She bangs her head back off the bark of the tree trunk when his hand reaches for her waist. Her scalp is cut on the sharp wood, as if she is demented, trapped in an asylum with walls of precipitation….Her banging head damaging the seduction that she cannot otherwise articulate no to. He waits for her. Rigid with anticipation as she calms.

It’s not a terribly bad example but to me, that period between “her” and “Rigid” doesn’t do anything that a simple comma (or no punctuation mark at all) couldn’t have managed. The word “rigid” alone, I feel, works wonderfully to convey his body’s extreme tension, especially since he is a character who is almost never so, who excels at appearing and being comfortable, settled, capable, relaxed yet alert in whatever situation he finds himself in. Even the word’s pronunciation, the sound of the “g” followed by the hard “d” helps to evoke the meaning of the word and conjure the image. That break there is the kind of faux poetics I can’t stand and helps to ruin it for other authors. I tend to be really suspicious of “poetic” novelists: if I’m not familiar with your work chances are I read two pages of that and throw you under the bed (or look for my receipt).

Everything else about the novel is so good, though, that I was able to pass over such instances without too much trouble. I read it, as I said, for the strict purpose of situating it in relation to The Carhullan Army so, in an effort not to write out my review here, I can’t say much more on it, except that I do think it’s worth your time, especially if you appreciate writers able to infuse their natural settings with as much vitality as their human characters without indulging in a lot of sappy, grandiose nonsense.

I also read V for Vendetta by Alan Moore and David Lloyd because I noticed the similarity in how Hall and Moore envisioned the response to an authoritarian state. But first, could we get rid of that silly “graphic novel” misnomer? I turned the first page of the Moore book and laughed aloud because it was clearly, and unashamedly, a damn comic book. Everything, from its structure to the visual style, points to it. I know it’s more sophisticated than an Archie strip but then, so is a Sorrentino book over a Dean Koontz and no one’s clamouring to give the latter populist fare a new name. I feel silly when I use it to describe a book I’m reading to someone — I smile sheepishly, with lowered eyelids, as if I were sporting one of those stupid (and uninspired) adult Harry Potter editions. But, damn it, whenever I say comic book, the person assumes I’m reading Betty & Veronica and when I reply with, “No, it’s Maus by Spiegelman” they roar, “But that’s not a comic book then it’s a graphic novel.” Mofo, please.

That over with I say…this Moore doesn’t pull punches does he? The beginning starts out in a conservative, fairly uninteresting fashion: Neo-Nazi govt is ruining Britain and our intrepid hero goes around saving damsels and blowing up buildings, hurrah freedom. Moore admits in the introduction that his story writing abilities were a bit shaky when he started out so one should pardon the weakness of the beginning and anticipate the story coalescing better as it went on, for it was written over a number of years. The story and themes did get stronger but they also became more…I don’t know. Incomprehensible? No. Absurd, maybe. Abstruse, although not obstructively so. Denser, certainly, woven with political philosophy and literary references, some of which I could identify, some I couldn’t. I definitely did not take it all in on a first reading which I could not say even for Spiegelman’s respected Maus. (That, in part, may because I’m still adjusting to comics and can’t read them as closely or as insightfully as prose.)

It didn’t fit in as neatly with Carhullan as I had expected, not on a story-line level anyway, a notion I had based on the film adaptation. What does it mean when a movie has to simplify a comic book to take it to the big screen? (Not a complimentary assumption there about comic books but just go with me for a minute.) In the film Natalie Portman’s character Evey is a journalist, I think, or has some job in the media world, anyway. In the comic book Evey is a 16 year old reduced to factory work for minuscule pay and is forced to prostitute herself. On her first awkward attempt she offers herself to an undercover vice cop and he and his goonies are about to rape her and then, so they promise, kill her when V swoops in to save the day.

The book’s a lot bleaker, as you can see, and its characters a little more ruined, more twisted, and less easily admirable or hateful, even the Hitler stand-in, Mr. Susan. V is crazier. I mean the movie V is rather dashing, even while espousing worrisome rhetoric, and fabulous more of a gallant figure and, because of his background in the resettlement camps where he was used as a human guinea pig, more sympathetic. In the comic Moore gives more room to the possible interpretation that V’s genius — his elaborate, fool-proof stratagems, his copious artistic knowledge — bends too close to fucking mental territory for one’s comfort. And perhaps that view is also tied into how seriously one regards anarchist philosophy, of which V is an emphatic promoter.

The two books though — V for Vendetta and The Carhullan Army — do raise the important question for authoritarian countries with a recent democratic past: in such situations is the most effective anti-government resistance one that doesn’t fit a democratic vision at all? Must it be violent and to what extremes? And — oh crap, I’m writing out my review again. See you. ;)

How did she do it?

In Books, Excerpts, Fiction, Literature on March 5, 2008 at 10:09 pm

Within minutes I found myself back inside the iron enclosure, scratching at the knots of rope securing my wrists, trying to move oxygen smoothly into my chest, trying to calm myself. The ground was pliant and warm under my bare feet. A smell of fresh shit rose from the floor, as if it had been spread there for my arrival.

[...]

Despair rose up in me, sick as bile, but I swallowed it back down. I concentrated, repeating the instructions I had been given. Talk to yourself. Sleep, even shallowly. Sing. Find patterns on the walls: flowers, birds, faces.

For three days it worked. I saw letters drawn in the darkness in front of me. The words floated like red flares on the black. Then the water ran out and dehydration started to make me unstable. The same terrible images came walking back towards me, like prodigal ghosts, as if they had been waiting in the darkness of the corrugated coffin for me to reanimate them.

[...]

On the seventh day I was dragged back across the courtyard to one of the small stone pens. The women from the unit interrogating me were dressed in dark clothing, masked. I thought I recognised Corky but I was weak and disoriented and could not be sure of anything. There were no apologies given. I was stripped, hit in the kidneys, and burned. One of them pushed a pipe a little way into me and told me I was a whore. They left me locked inside the pen, curled up and moaning on the floor, and another four women entered. Jackie was with them.

She smiled down at me, a gentle, sympathetic smile, and I saw in her blue eyes that the love she had for me was that of a mother. In her hand was a plate of cooked breakfast: bacon, eggs and bread. The yolks bloomed. She crouched down, set the meal on the floor at her feet and sniffed loudly. ‘That smells so good,’ she said. Then she took a rasher of bacon and waved it in front of my face. I lurched for it but the others pulled me back. She put the crisp silver back on the plate and licked the grease from her fingers. ‘Mmm.’ Her voice was soft and compassionate. ‘What’s my name, Sister?’ I looked up at her, pleading with her to stop. ‘If you tell me my name you can eat this. If you tell me the names of all of us here, you are free to go, right now.’

It was no better and no worse than the treatment I gave the others, when the roles were reversed. It was no better and no worse than the treatment soldiers had always undergone in preparation for deployment. And Jackie saw to it that we were no different from them.

She did not make monsters of us. She simply gave us the power to remake ourselves into those inviolable creatures the God of Equality had intended us to be. We knew she was deconstructing the old disabled versions of our sex, and that her ruthlessness was adopted because those constructs were built to endure. She broke down the walls that had kept us contained. There was a fresh red field on the other side, and in its rich soil were growing all the flowers of war that history had never let us gather. It was beautiful to walk in. As beautiful as the fells that autumn.

From The Carhullan Army aka Daughters of the North by Sarah Hall

How did she do it? I don’t recognise this new Sarah Hall but she kicks ass. She kicks ass so much I’m damn disappointed in the US title change. (I bought the UK edition — about the only advantage of being Commonwealth.) That whole “daughters” thing gives a false, far softer impression of what’s actually on the book’s pages. It’s not even a matter of the book lending a tougher, hardier imaged of motherhood and daughters; it’s that the human figurehead who could feasibly stand in as the “North” is not in the least bit maternal. What she is is a gifted military commander. The single moment in which you could describe her as “maternal” in the book is up in that torture scene excerpted above — in a bloody torture scene. It’s fake.

Not that I want to write out my review here. I officially forgive Sarah Hall for the abomination that was Electric Michelangelo. May you never write such flowery, saccharine horse shit again. Cheers!

Two things

In Books, Fiction, General, What I'm Reading on March 4, 2008 at 7:47 pm

It’s Small Press Month! In the USA, at any rate, but I’m not aware of a similar Canadian celebration so I’ll co-opt this one. I am only giving much of a hoot because Dan Pritch’s announcement coincided with my reading of another devastating Andre Dubus story collection (excerpt in previous post) published by David R. Godine, with which Mr. Pritch is associated. So why not take a look at the shelves and see which small press books were patiently waiting for me?

NYRB Classics may technically be an imprint rather than a press but I’m going to ignore that because it’s my blog. I may march on with Gallant for a story or two more but if it doesn’t make me pause for several minutes the way the Andre Dubus did I’ll probably switch to Tropic Moon by Simenon.

Other possible choices:

How I Became a NunCesar Aira, translated by Chris Andrews

New Directions

Bad Imaginings  -  Caroline Adderson and/or Walking in ParadiseLibby Creelman

I heard about Porcupine’s Quill from Nigel Beale’s interview with John Metcalf. I’m interested to see whether the editor’s boast about the quality of the press’ fiction will bear out.

The Wizard SwamiCyril Dabydeen

One of my Peepal Tree Press books.

And I have a few other stuff by Graywolf, New Directions and Serpent’s Tail. I’ll see how it goes.

*****

Readers, it’s a miracle. Sarah Hall managed to impress me with her latest novel. She’s not a genius, it’s not a masterpiece, but it’s actually asking some interesting questions here. It’s engaging! and not populated with drunken metaphors and promiscuous adjectives. I wasn’t at all impressed with the dystopian elements at all, but once she left all that description work behind and focused on the feminist community living out in the boonies, well, things picked up. I appreciated the situation the dystopian elements created but am too used to the global warming – oppressive police force – mindless drone work etc. scenario to be even mildly shocked.

I’m kinda interested in her first novel. Maybe Electric Michelangelo was just a phase.

Killings

In Books, Excerpts, Fiction, Literature on March 4, 2008 at 6:59 pm

Richard Strout shot Frank in front of the boys. They were sitting on the living room floor watching television, Frank sitting on the couch, and Mary Ann just returning from the kitchen with a tray of sandwiches. Strout came in the front door and shot Frank twice in the chest and once in the face with a 9 mm automatic. Then he looked at the boys and Mary Ann, and went home to wait for the police.

It seemed to Matt that from the time Mary Ann called weeping to tell him until now, a Saturday night in September, sitting in the car with Willis, parked beside Strout’s car, waiting for the bar to close, that he had not so much moved through his life as wandered through it, his spirit like a dazed body bumping into furniture and corners. He had always been a fearful father: when his children were young, at the start of each summer he thought of them drowning in a pond or the sea, and he was relieved when he came home in the evenings and they were there; usually that relief was his only acknowledgment of his fear, which he never spoke of, and which he controlled within his heart. As he had when they were very young and all of them in turn, Cathleen too, were drawn to the high oak in the backyard, and had to climb it. Smiling, he watched them, imagining the fall: and he was poised to catch the small body before it hit the earth. Or his legs were poised; his hands were in his pockets or his arms were folded and, for the child looking down, he appeared relaxed and confident while his heart beat with the two words he wanted to call out but did not: Don’t fall. In winter he was less afraid: he made sure the ice would hold him before they skated, and he brought or sent them to places where they could sled without ending in the street. So he and his children had survived their childhood, and he only worried about them when he knew they were driving a long distance, and then he lost Frank in a way no father expected to lose his son, and he felt that all the fears he had borne while they were growing up, and all the grief he had been afraid of, had backed up like a huge wave and struck him on the beach and swept him out to sea. Each day he felt the same and when he was able to forget how he felt, when he was able to force himself not to feel that way, the eyes of his clerks and customers defeated him. He wished those eyes were oblivious, even cold; he felt he was withering in their tenderness. And beneath his listless wandering, every day in his soul he shot Richard Strout in the face; while Ruth, going about town on errands, kept seeing him. And at nights in bed she would hold Matt and cry, or sometimes she was silent and Matt would touch her tightening arm, her clenched fist.

From “Killings” a short story from Finding a Girl in America by Andre Dubus, published by David R. Godine.

I have to say…

In WTF on March 3, 2008 at 8:49 pm

…that I’m really tired of print editors in allegedly reputable periodicals accepting anti-feminist screeds. If a black journalist submitted an article arguing that black people evolved into a stupider race compared to Caucasians with similar selective and faulty analysis of statistical data — not to mention phrenology and evolutionary psychology, ffs! — would The Washington Post eagerly scoop up the tripe and make it their top Sunday op-ed? And you wonder why so many think journalists are simple hacks? Yet I am told all the time that feminism’s heyday is over and we should all sit back and relax.

For more read Up with your blood pressure! and The Stupidest Thing You Ever Read on this Blog (And Maybe the Whole Wide Internet).

Edit: This is too much. A technorati search turned up this gem at Laura Rozen’s blog.

John Pomfret writes me:

… I ran Charlotte Allen’s piece to provoke, but not to offend. I thought the parallel she drew between fainting Obama followers and Beatlemania was an interesting frame with which to analyze the Obama phenomenon. She went further, of course, to draw broader conclusions about the state of her gender highlighting women’s interest in Gray’s Anatomy and Eat, Pray, Love. But my reading of it was more a tongue-in-cheek screed borne from exasperation with her sisters than a mysoginist rant from a self-hating woman. Yes, she engaged in massive hyperbole but she did it to try to make a point. That said the piece obviously offended you and others and I regret that. But it was an opinion piece and that is what they sometimes do. …

You know what I think this points to? The asinine idea that no matter how weak, fallacious, unfounded and erroneous one’s argument is, it’s an opinion and therefore worth listening to. There was absolutely nothing she attacked in her op-ed piece worthy of particular exasperation. Not “fainting” Obama groupies (I thought that described all of his supporters?), or an interest in a harmless sappy tv show or a memoir. (That book is a memoir, right?) Tongue-in-cheek, my arse. And again newspapers almost never try this crap on men, and wouldn’t dare do a similar satire on Mexicans, Jews or African-Americans. That alone should give him pause for thought but that would be presuming too much. (Ha ha! Don’t worry Pomfret. I’m just being tongue-in-cheek about all the space wasted in that bigger brain of yours.)

Next time Pomfret should solicit a piece from a writer who’s actually in on the joke.

The latest lit ‘zines & matters of history, race and art

In Art, Caribbean, Jamaica, Literature, literary journals on March 3, 2008 at 3:19 pm

It’s a new month and close to spring which means new updates from favourite literary websites. The Quarterly Conversation released its Spring issue with major features alongside the usual reviews. I zoomed in on the article about the French author, of course. François Monti reviews the latest from Eric Chevillard, and author who followed in the wake of the Noveau Roman movement and proved that there were still more ways to subvert convention. Monti also assesses the apparently dismal state of French literary criticism where page length, thumb-up-thumb-down analysis dominates. Huh.

Scott Esposito reviews Elizabeth Ladenson’s Dirt for Art’s Sake, one of my more notable non-fiction reads from last year, although I’m a bit disappointed that he didn’t touch on her point that the academy played a role in taming and obscuring of some controversial classics’ objectionable elements. Sam J. Miller does a corrective autopsy on short stories’ alleged corpse, shifting the fatal assessment to the format not the content. And the contributors get to share with us what they consider to be underrated and overrated novels. One dares to put a Borges work in the latter (and I agree with him in regard to the merits of the book’s arrangement). Lee Rourke’s choices were my favourite, although Richard Grayson’s take on Leviticus is amusing. There’s lots more, of course, do go and have a look around.

Open Letters Monthly opens with a header image that reminds me of a Gabriella Dellosso painting. (Creeeeeeepy.) Anyway, OLM’s March 2008 must be one of the biggest issues they’ve offered so far. I haven’t read even half of the selections yet I can vouch for Adam Golaski’s third installment in his translation of Sir Gawain and the Green Knight. I printed out the first three and handed it over to my English major roommate he took one skim through the pages and had about the same initial reaction I did: “Whoa.” (Include a questioning lilt when you read that.) Sam Sacks chides two debut authors who were absent minded enough to forget that the assumption behind publishing a book is that it will have readers. I own one via the limited free download of Charles Bock’s Beautiful Children which I would have ignored otherwise because of all the hype. Garth Risk Hallberg verifies whether The Last Samurai by Helen DeWitt really was the “cult classic” the publisher’s marketing department said it was and I took a look at whether print reviewers provide the excellence they claim to in a Peer Review for Diary of a Bad Year by J.M. Coetzee. Giles Harvey did a review of the Coetzee too but, lawks, I don’t want to have anything to do with that book for at least a year. (I’m sure it’s a good piece though!.)

Judging by the clicks it received I may not need to point many to Brother Man – Part I an old post I did from last year. Steven Augustine revived the comments section and what ensued was a dialogue on whether writers “of colour”, specifically those of predominant African descent, can or should produce art that leans more towards an “art for art’s sake” ideal. Geoffrey Philp gave a response on his blog: Art for Art’s Sake & the Reggae Aesthetic. Augustine replied in comments.

Sunday Salon: The triumphant return

In Books, Fiction, Literature, Short Stories, Sunday Salon on March 2, 2008 at 1:01 pm

Or is it? I intended to give my attention to only two books today — Varieties of Exile by Mavis Gallant and The Carhullan Army by Sarah Hall — but now I’m looking at the shelves and wondering if I shouldn’t bother with something else. I do have two lovely LRB issues to look forward to.

I’m a bit horrified at myself for not feeling more enthusiastic about the Gallant. It was that Russell Banks guy who wrote the introduction. He started off with a lot of daft declarations about what makes the short story, many of which I didn’t even understand, but I had a very good time out last night, so maybe I’m the daft one this morning.

The tension — and sometimes outright conflict — between remembered and felt experience on the one hand and, on the other, the known truth of what happened lies at the heart of all the great short stories. It’s the argument that generates plot and structure, which, finally, gives a story meaning.

What? Are we talking about fiction here or awesome memoirs? Is he describing the characters’ experiences or the authors? And why is this the basic composition — between memory and experience — of a masterpiece short story? Is that what made Kafka great? Andre Dubus is the writer who legitimized and justified the entire form for me and that’s not the aspect of his writing that bowled me over. His skill was in rendering complex, dire emotion in a simple prose. He balanced the every day with the inner turmoil, in some instances as mundane as anything else, and gave his ordinary characters experience the weight and potency of Greek tragedies. His writing voice was as clear as a bell. And although his stories could be wrenching — I was sobbing, outright sobbing at the end of “Rose” in his collection The Last Worthless Evening — I’d never say they were depressing. They just felt….real, honest, true, whatever that means, not in a documentary-like sense but just the emotional experience he created, the spirit of his work, of his characters, of every sentence felt…authentic. And…I’m getting ahead of myself because I was thinking none of these things at this point as I hadn’t read any of Gallant stories, yet.

I love Derek McCormack’s, absurd, violent, horrific, comedic work and I’m telling you, he’s not so much interested in exploring the tension between recollection and “the known truth”. (Which how do you know if you can only depend on memory? The omniscient narrator? That’s easy, isn’t it.)

Banks name checked Gogol and Chekhov and since I haven’t read their work yet, who’s to say. What I will say is that even if that’s the remarkable quality of their work I don’t see why that has to be the specific standard that all must work up to.

The other odd thing about Banks’ introduction was that he seemed determined to present Gallant to me, a first time reader, as the literary equivalent of a handmade quilt — of the absolute highest quality! — with which I could cover myself and revel in its comfort and familiar sensation, maybe from childhood. Seriously! Don’t worry, he assures me, she’s not obscure, or esoteric for everything, “characters, settings, situations, and language are always instantly familiar, intimate, and homegrown, whether planted in Montreal an Eastern Township village, Paris, Moscow, Florida, or the French Mediterranean”. That sounds exciting. I don’t mind a bit of strangeness in my fiction and, considering the book’s title, I was kind of betting on…at least one story element being strange. I wonder, though, if it’s not that he expects the typical NYRB classics reader to have already travelled to such marvellous places. It reminds me of Hilary Mantel’s review of Coetzee’s latest in the NYRB where she suggested that the book might nudge readers to “reread” Brothers Karamazov. (Of course.)

Then he makes possibly the most ridiculous statement in the entire essay. After giving brief descriptions of a few of the stories in the book he writes

None of these characters has money or property or much education; none of them is secure in society. Characters and situations like these seem peculiarly American, North American. (ed: I wonder if that includes Mexico?) It’s not easy to imagine them in the hands of a British or European or Latin American writer. I fear they would be treated far less kindly.

What’s THAT supposed to mean? I ask you. Those foreign writers have it in for America’s poor and dispossessed? Or are they all too busy writing about lords and ladies and rich oligarchs and wouldn’t know what to do, bless their hearts,with a poor ol’ American high school drop out or –

He continues his paean to “North” America (minus that pesky country that speaks that funny language hanging off the bottom there), proclaims that the New Yorker’s regular printing of Gallant’s stories justifies it existence (I thought that was Munro? Or is it vice versa in her case?) then graciously allows that Gallant is only a “writers’ writer” in the sense that she “honours in every sentence…the deepest, most time-honored principles of composition: honesty, clarity, and concision” not because her work is highfalutin’ and exotic.

So one good thing out of this is that I now know how a “writers’ writer” is defined. Hitherto, I thought it denoted a writer popular among other writers but not well-known in the reading public. I didn’t know they also attached on to it a reason for the status ie too complex for regular folks. If I like a “writers’ writer” can I become an honorary writer in recognition of my superior taste? Let’s see…I think I saw Steve Stern given that description once. Donald Harington, definitely. Lydia Davis probably counts, so if I enjoy her book, I can mark her off too.

I started “The Fenton Child”, first story in the collection, prepared to be stripped bare by Gallant’s greatness. (Or bundled up in it’s fuzzy wuzziness.) After all, Banks had declared her one of the greatest living “story writers” in English, with only maybe William Trevor and Alice Munro deserving similar accolades — Americans, you’re up for zero. What I got was…an ok story. Pretty good! It’s about the life of two middle-class families in Quebec and they’re depicted with a tender, quirky kind of humour that makes you laugh for a bit, which is nice. I enjoy a writer with a good sense of humour and I’m always puzzled at why many critics never mention this in their commentary unless their subject has a comedic rep.

The story’s corner stone was its narrative structure which Gallant cleverly handled. The beginning of the story starts at an orphanage run by nuns at which a doctor, his friend an upper-middle class Anglo, Mr. Fenton, and a young Quebecois girl, Nora, who is supposed to take care of the baby for a week or so before a foreign nursemaid arrives. The child’s mother is not well, it seems, suffers from “depression” and cannot come for the babe herself. It’s something of a mystery as to why they’re there to pick it up an orphanage if they were the birth parents. Gallant interspersed tiny scenes from Nora’s memory as we follow the small group to Fenton’s house and then she halts that story line to write the scenes that directly lead to that moment and then we get the finish.

I’m sure I could uncover more if I dug a little deeper but I’m not interested. Nothing has any weight for me. I read and it’s as though the wind could blow the words off the page and what was left would hold as much substance and be as interesting. Oh, that poor Anglo’s introverted outlook is funny ha ha, and oh that Quebecois family shunted their daughter off to some convent because she had tuberculosis, the poor man’s disease, and forgot about her, ho hum. Oh, that’s how this baby came about, oh dear. Turn the page. Shrug.

Now I’m in the middle of “The End of the World” and, so far, it’s as unpromising. Here we have the story of a father who abandoned his wife and three sons, the oldest was 12, after WWII, ended up in France, and his son was called for to be there with him in his last days. This should be bitter, possibly farcical, poignant, tempestuous, tragic, something, but I’m kind of just reading along. Maybe Paris Stories is better? Or do I have to be North American to appreciate Gallant’s grandeur?

I shall have to reread the Dubus collections I’ve already read and buy the rest. Whenever I read articles about American short story writers I never see his name mentioned and I’m always railing my fist in frustration and wondering if I dreamt up my intense reaction to his prose.

Sunday Salon

Fiction about old age

In Books, Fiction on March 1, 2008 at 8:25 pm

All the discussion about Margaret Laurence’s The Stone Angel has me wondering about fiction that dealt with old age, in general. Are there any other notable examples? I don’t mean the sort where the guy/gal is on death’s bed about to croak and they wheeze out the great adventure that was his/her life, or we get to read their journal, or some such. Fiction that focuses as much, if not primarily, on the character’s experience as an elderly in comparison to any flashbacks on the old days.

I know that the movie Away From Her was based on an Alice Munro short story but I wouldn’t mind some novel recommendations.

Eerily accurate

In Books, quizzes/memes on March 1, 2008 at 2:22 pm

Wow. This blog quiz, like, totally knows me.


You Are a Question Mark


You seek knowledge and insight in every form possible. You love learning.
And while you know a lot, you don’t act like a know it all. You’re open to learning you’re wrong.You ask a lot of questions, collect a lot of data, and always dig deep to find out more.You’re naturally curious and inquisitive. You jump to ask a question when the opportunity arises.Your friends see you as interesting, insightful, and thought provoking.(But they’re not always up for the intense inquisitions that you love!)

You excel in: Higher education

You get along best with: The Comma

via Charlotte’s Web and loose baggy monster.

*****

Here’s my February book haul. Being ill is good for something — there purchases experienced a downturn.

My ÀntoniaWilla Cather

The Mill on the FlossGeorge Eliot

This may be the exact same edition that’s in Jamaica — one of my first classics purchases. I think it was bought along with The Lord of the Rings and Nicholas Nickleyby all of which appealed to me because they were nice and thick. This time around it was the A.S. Byatt editorial role that got me excited. I have this mental list of writers whose brains I’d like to have preserved in a personal collection and she’s on it. Is that weird?

 Rogue MaleGeoffrey Household

Sarah Weinman said it was great and she’s never steered me wrong so far. Btw, NYRB Classics is having a ridiculously good moving sale, offering up to 60% off. Do your part to help bolster the US economy by March 9th!

Book of a Thousand DaysShannon Hale

I know, I know. But I don’t have to read it this year. In any case, what with Sarah Hall’s The Carhullan Army currently on my plate I’ve already broken my year-long moratorium against F/SF books. I even considered getting that “free” copy of Neil Gaiman’s book American Gods.

He’s an author that millions have recommended to me and I’ve accepted them graciously but with silent scepticism. So, I thought the HarperCollins freebie would be an opportunity to try him out. Until I went to its website and saw the horrible monstrosity they expected me to sit down at my computer all day and read because I couldn’t download it. Didn’t even read the first page; I mentally flipped the bird and went on my way.

Tor, on the other hand, was kind enough to give me a spankin’ mobile copy of John Scalzi’s Old Man’s War. Tor: 1 HarperCollins: don’t make me laugh.

 Old Man’s WarJohn Scalzi

Well, this is it. An honest to god novel with a spaceship on the cover. How do you think I’ll do?

Muriella PentRussell Smith

Thank god for campus book sales. Picked this one up for four bucks and a song. I ignored the “columnist” (writer) and “post-colonial” (book) label and allowed myself to be taken in by the “Caribbean-born” protagonist. It’s a Canadian novel but it isn’t about an outsider stuck out into the prairies or a typical “immigrant” narrative (yawn). Most importantly, the first page made me smile. Although the front cover proclaims its “National Bestseller” status, only 20 copies appear on LibraryThing. Weird.

The Carhullan Army – Sarah Hall

Well. I don’t want to shoot the book out of my hands (yet?). That must count for something.

A holy terror

In Books, Fiction, Literature, Reviews on February 29, 2008 at 11:52 pm

For more discussion on this book check out the Slaves of Golconda blog and forum.

Rereading The Stone Angel was a repetitive experience. My reactions moved along a similar trajectory to the first time when I knew nothing about the novel. The beginning, I thought, was nice enough but it did not promise much excitement. Doubt lingered as to whether this Canadian classic would prove to be much more than a decent read. Over time I became more aware of how the Hagar Shipley character had completely won me over. As I turned the last page my stomach was tense and filled with awe, anxiety, painful pleasure and the knowledge that I had reached another personal literary touchstone. My last had been William Blake and Ayi Kwei Armah in 6th form.

My other rereading experiences last year, for pleasure, held a wholly different quality, in part because they were 3rd or 4th rereads unlike The Stone Angel, my first. Lines in Jane Eyre and The Lord of the Rings echoed like old friends as I read along; and though my LOTR reread corrected me on or reminded me of several story details obscured by repeated viewings of the extended DVD editions, my sojourn was a comfortable one of familiarity. With the Laurence novel it was as though I had opened a new book.

That impression can also be explained by the fact that I am a different reader now, post-blog, compared to the early ’00s. I was not such an actively critical reader, keenly aware of the possibility of patterns and connections, or noticing prose style.

One response that carried over from the first read was my intense reaction to Hagar’s vulnerability as an elderly person dependent on others. She is 90 years old at the start of the novel. As the first person narrator, we are privy to each painful humiliation when her mind or body fails her — she who is a human realisation of her Scottish ancestor’s family motto “Gainsay who dare” — and she is forced to depend on her daughter-in-law Doris to dress her for bed, to take her to the bathroom, sometimes to remind her of where they are. When she accidentally falls it takes both Doris and Marvin, Hagar’s son, to lift her up, and then they speak in front of her, about her, “as though I weren’t here, as though it were a full gunnysack they dragged from the floor”. I don’t often come across such old protagonists in fiction, especially one whose elderly life the author gives as much attention to as the earlier past.

What struck me as new were the notable moments in the novel when Hagar recalls a hymn. They provoke the reader to consider how she lived her life in strict opposition to the reverent sentiments the hymns conveyed, the novel’s overall tragic irony.

The first came in Hagar’s first long recollection about her childhood. She was 8 and at church with her father who just heard his name called out in a list of major church donors. He remarked to Hagar “with modestly bowed head” that he, Jason Currie, and the lawyer Luck McVitie (called out first) must have given the highest amounts. Then they sang a hymn adapted from Psalm 121:

Unto the hills around do I lift up
My longing eyes.
O when for me shall my salvation come,
From when arise?
From GOD the LORD doth come my certain aid,
From GOD the LORD, who heaven and earth hath made.

Currie was one of the many Scots who travelled to Canada in the 19th century to make a new life for themselves and family in the prairies. He stressed his success in the merchant business as a self-made one to his family both to buttress his ego and to pass on that pioneering spirit to his children. He coached Hagar and her two older brothers, Matt and Dan, in their family history and exhorted them to expect no one but themselves to help achieve their own success. In any case, as one of the prominent town families in Manawaka, Manitoba, there weren’t that many others around who were fit company. Whatever religious ritual he indulged in was for tradition and public appearances. In childish trust Hagar described her father thusly:

Auntie Doll was always telling us that Father was a God-fearing man. I never for a moment believed it, of course. I couldn’t imagine Father fearing anyone, God included, especially when he didn’t even owe his existence to the Almighty. God might have created heaven and earth and the majority of people, but Father was a self-made man, as he himself had told us often enough.

Hagar took to that stubborn, ambitious egotism wholesale and in some moments it is clear that her father regrets that the two older sons were less dynamic and outgoing or that she had the misfortune of being born a girl. Her mother died in childbirth and, curiously, Hagar fixated on her as symbol of everything she did not want to be — passive, meek, weak and amenable — for look how she ended up. Instead, Hagar was haughty, proud, and loathed to humble herself to anyone whether it was to apologize for a mistake, for impulsively inflicted pain, to admit to a fear or to face such a weakness in others. Her constant refrain throughout the novel is “I never could.” She said it as if, for her, it was physically impossible.

Her older brothers, in physique and manner, were more similar to her mother. Dan, especially, was a sickly child but Hagar believed he faked illness more often than not in order to be pampered. It took unfortunately drastic circumstances to convince her otherwise. One day while playing with friends out on the ice Dan falls into an unseen hole and catches pneumonia. Hagar and Matt, conscious of their father’s acute sensitivity to public exposure, never think of taking Dan to the nearest house but bundle him straight home. Their father lectures and Auntie Doll tends to him and all seems well until the next day when his fever gets much worse and he becomes delirious. No adult is there with them so Hagar runs to get the doctor but he is out of town and, due to the weather, won’t be back soon. Their father is working late. Matt, probably recognising how serious things are, does not send for their father, for that isn’t who Dan wants. Apparently Dan had been calling out for his mother, who died when he was four. He still kept one of her old plaid shawls. Matt asks Hagar if she could wear it and pretend for a while that she’s their mother for Dan’s comfort. But she could not bring herself to do it. To even imagine herself as that frail, weak spectre, everything she rejected as wrong, to someone who had “inherited” that frailty “was beyond me”. She cried but she refused.

Matt does it for Dan and holds him as he dies. Through that and other hardships Hagar learned that there was no indomitable God keeping her and her family “preserv[ing] you from all evil”. And even if he was offering a helping hand she would refuse it for that would place her in submission.

In many scenes she rejects God and his expectations in favour of her own will. When, in old age, Doris called over Reverend Troy to talk with Hagar, her thoughts are dismissive and condescending, with the odd moment of pity for the intimidated minister.

“Sometimes, you know, Mrs. Shipley, when we accept the things which we can’t change in this life, we find they’re not half as bad as we thought.”

“It’s easy enough for you to say.”

“Oh yes, indeed.” His smooth face goes pink as a Mother’s Day carnation.

[…]

“Have you tried asking God’s help? Prayer can do wonders, sometimes, in easing the mind.”

So wistful is his voice that I’m on the verge of promising I’ll try. Then the lie seems not inexpensive but merely cheap.

“I’ve never had much use for prayer, Mr. Troy. Nothing I prayed for ever came to anything.”

“Perhaps you didn’t pray for the right things.”

“Well who’s to know? If God’s a crossword puzzle, or a secret code, it’s hardly worth the bother, it seems to me.”

“I only meant we should pray for strength,” he says, “not for our own wishes.”

“Oh well, I’ve prayed for that too, in my time, but I never thought it made much difference…I prayed like sixty when trouble came, as every person does…But nothing ever came of it.”

As her name suggested she is not counted among the tribe of Israel, God’s chosen.

The second hymn occurred later in the novel, this time in her old age, and she is the one who sang it. She learned, after noting the meaningful glances Doris and Marvin exchanged, and subtle hints from Doris’ pastor, that she was to be sent to a nursing home. To regain a moment of freedom she plans and successfully executes an escape to a beach where she spends two nights in two different abandoned buildings with only a small bag of provisions and a bucket of rain water. During this time she slips in and out of lucidity, mentally chiding Doris for keeping the heater too low. When she is cognizant she reproves Marvin for his tardiness in locating her. In an awkward, unsure moment at sunset she looks at how the sun’s rays hit the abandoned fishing equipment that surrounds her “filled with shadows” and sings a verse of “Abide with me”. (Full lyrics here.)

Abide with me; fast falls the eventide;
The darkness deepens; Lord with me abide.
When other helpers fail and comforts flee,
Help of the helpless, O abide with me.

She gains no comfort from it, in fact, is bit embarrassed that she bothered at all. “I might as well be singing the directions from a knitting book, for all the good it’s doing me.” Hagar is no longer that “czarina” young girl secure in her place in the world and of her future. The hymn moves away from the triumphalism of Psalm 121’s “My help comes from the LORD/Who made heaven and earth” for the anxious plea behind “O Thou who changest not abide with me”. J.R. Watson’s commentary on the hymn that he wrote in The English Hymn: A Critical and Historical Study highlights almost too perfectly how it related to Hagar’s last days and how she and Henry Francis Lyte, the hymn writer, approached the circumstances in different ways.

Lyte was Scottish too and lived without a mother, in his case because his father separated from her and moved to Ireland with his son. Lyte never saw her again. His father also enacted a sort of separation from his son, only visiting him occasionally, and eventually presenting himself as his uncle and his new wife as Henry’s aunt. Watson asserts that this influenced Lyte’s work, coming through in his sensitive use of parental imagery with tender, protective overtones. “The Spirit of the Psalms” is considered Lyte’s best work, a collection which includes “Abide with me”. On that hymn Watson writes that

¹It is a reminder of the coming of darkness, of human loneliness and helplessness. In this situation, human beings become dependent on God, as a child looks to its mother or father when faced with the coming dark….The first lines signal to the reader that this is more than an evening hymn: it is a meditation on life, on its transience and its anxieties.

The bitter irony is that, even “with the coming dark”, Hagar strove to remain as independent as she could from everyone around her. And during her life she tried to wrangle those in whom she invested her affection into her ideas of them rather than make much effort to see who they truly were and wanted to be. She separated from her husband, Brampton Shirley, after about two decades and whisked her favourite son Johnny away to the coast in pursuit of the better life she thought he deserved, a move she never considered doing for her obedient, manageable Marvin who did all that she asked but was passed over. Johnny grew and went his own path which led him right back home to the old farm, wiped out by drought and depression, and his father. When Bram is near death Johnny tells her and she returns to confront an old, bowed man in whom little of Brampton Shirley remains. In a lucid moment in which he reveals feelings for her, feelings she somehow never discerned in all her years with him, she’s filled with a rage “not at anyone, at God, perhaps, for giving us eyes but almost never sight”.

What she did know and see was the “transience of life” but, although she seems to believe in heaven and hell, she fully expects to be sent to hell and one suspects that if God offered to forgive her she’d spit in his eye and reject his pity. Like Milton’s Lucifer — a comparison Laurence made in the novel — “To bow and sue for grace/With suppliant knee…/…that were low indeed,/That were an ignominy and shame beneath/This downfall”.

The last hymn occurs near the novel’s and Hagar’s end. Marvin and Doris find her and although she is relieved she cannot admit it and suggests with grim knowledge that no doubt they’re shipping her straight off to the prison of a nursing home. (A whole other essay could be done on the novel’s theme of imprisonment.) Marvin tells her that the doctor advised that it was too late for that she needed to be taken to the hospital. Hagar automatically complains about this prison change so Marvin, to end her complaints, reveals the (apparently dire) test results from the hospital that, from her reaction, are not unlike a death sentence.

In the hospital Reverend Trevor visits her for the last time while she is alive and, under pressure from her request, sings “All people that on earth do dwell”, (one of my favourites) based on Psalm 100. (Full lyrics here.)

All people that on earth do dwell,
Sing to the Lord with joyful voice.
Him serve with mirth, His praise forth tell;
Come ye before Him and rejoice.

At this moment Hagar has a kind of epiphany. She realises that, after everything, this is all that she had truly wanted “–simply to rejoice”. But because of her demonic pride it led her to a “wilderness” from which she never escaped. Her husband and favourite son Johnny had died, both of them not knowing how much she cared for them, how she was sorry, after all this time. And now she is alone.

One result of this is that she lies for the sake of her Marvin, bestowing a favour on him that she does not think, even now, that he deserves — as she likes to say, no one ever changes after any single moment of revelation — but the reader, with a clearer eye, knows is the simple truth. When he leaves the room a nurse says to him

“She’s got an amazing constitution, your mother. One of those hearts that just keeps on working, whatever else is gone.”

A pause, and then Marvin replies.

“She’s a holy terror,” he says.

For Hagar there is no better description. Even in her last moments she struggles to assert her will, her independence, her singularity, never giving, challenging everyone in so many ways to Gainsay who dare! Dylan Thomas’ famous poem that Margaret Laurence quoted at the beginning of the novel, seemed to have been written for Hagar Shipley.

Do not go gentle into that good night,
Old age should burn and rave at close of day;
Rage, rage against the dying of the light.

¹Watson, J.R. The English Hymn: A Critical and Historical Study. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999.

God’s jests

In Books, Excerpts, Fiction, Literature on February 27, 2008 at 7:05 pm

Back she goes to the kitchen, and I’m alone. My things are all around me. Marvin and Doris think of them as theirs, theirs to keep or sell, as they choose, just as they regard the house as theirs, squatters’ rights after these years of occupation. With Doris its greed. She never had much as a child, I know, and when they first came here, to be with me, she eyed the furniture and bric-à-brac like a pouch-faced gopher eyeing acorns, eager to nibble. But it is not greed, I think, with Marvin. Such a stolid soul. His dreams are not of gold and silver, if he dreams at all. Or is it the reverse — does he ever waken? He lives in a dreamless sleep. He sees my things as his only through long acquaintance.

But they are mine. How could I leave them? They support and comfort me. On the mantelpiece is the knobbled jug of blue and milky glass that was my mother’s and beside it, in a small oval frame of gilt, backed with black velvet, a daguerrotype of her, a spindly and anxious girl, rather plain, ringleted stiffly. She looks so worried that she will not know what to do, although she came of good family and ought not to have had a moment’s hesitation about the propriety of her ways. But she still seems perplexed out of her little frame, wondering how on earth to please. Father gave me the jug and picture when I was a child, and even then it seemed so puzzling to me that she’d not died when either of the boys was born, but saved her death for me. When he said “your poor mother,” the moisture would squeeze out from the shaggy eyelid, and I marveled that he could achieve it at will, so suitable and infinitely touching to the matrons of the town, who found a tear for the female dead a reassuring tribute to thankless motherhood. Even should they die in childbed, some male soul would weep years after. Wonderful consolation. I used to wonder at her weakness and my awful strength. Father didn’t hold it against me that it had happened so. I know, because he told me. Perhaps he thought it was a fair exchange, her life for mine.

[...]

Yet there’s the picture of me at twenty. Doris wanted to take it down, but Marvin wouldn’t let her — that was a curious thing, now I come to think of it. I was a handsome girl, a handsome girl, no doubt of that. A pity I didn’t know it then. Not beautiful, I admit, not that china figurine look some women have, all gold and pink fragility, a wonder their corsets don’t snap their sparrow bones. Handsomeness lasts longer, I will say that.

Sometimes these delicate-seeming women can turn out to be quite robust after all, though. Matt’s wife Mavis was one of those whose health had always been precarious. She had rheumatic fever as a child, and was thought to have a weak heart. Yet that winter when the influenza was so bad, she nursed Matt and never caught it herself. She stayed by him, I’ll say that for her. I no longer went in to town very often, so I didn’t even know Matt was ill until Aunt Dolly came out to the farm one day to tell me he had died the night before.

“He went quietly,” she said. “He didn’t fight his death, as some do. They only make it harder for themselves. Matt seemed to know there was no help for it, Mavis said. He didn’t struggle to breathe, or try to hang on. He let himself slip away.”

I found this harder to bear than his death, even. Why hadn’t he writhed, cursed, at least grappled with the thing? We talked of Matt, then, Aunt Dolly and myself, and it was then she told me why he’d saved his money as a child. I’ve often wondered why one discovers so many things too late. The jokes of God.

From  The Stone Angel by Margaret Laurence

Trivial Camelot

In Books, Literary Criticism, Literature, Personal, Poetry on February 26, 2008 at 3:06 pm

The most terrible irony in all the Idylls is that there is no real cause for this loss of humanity. As Northrop Frye says, “Tragedy’s ‘this must be’ becomes irony’s ‘this at least is’ ” (p. 285). Jacob Korg also argues that there is no real cause, that the kingdom “unaccountably” (p. 10) dissolves. He goes on, however, to ascribe this causelessness to an overriding “fatalism,” a tragic principle, I would suggest, that is unrelated to ironic action. Instead of the convincing reasons given in tragedy we have a multiplicity of reasons, all inadequate. There are no resounding causes for the fall and no important forces at work against Arthur; he is defeated by triviality. His greatest enemy, in fact, is the natural process of oversimplification, The balance he tries to maintain between the physical and the spiritual, for instance, is destroyed on one side by Tristram and the naturalists, and on the other by the well-meaning search for the Grail. The failure is not one of morality but a pathetic failure of understanding; the world is lost not because it is evil but because it is stupid. [154/155]

Arthur is magnificently heroic, but there is about him the ironic shadow of the relentless and ludicrously ineffective pedagogue whose star pupils misunderstand: the king’s grandest and simplest words are presented by a good-hearted reporter, Percivale, whose only comment is, “So spake the King: I knew not all he meant” (“The Holy Grail,” l. 916). The entire poem mixes the heroic and the preposterous, the grand and the trivial. The final effect is not to deny the importance of Arthur and Camelot, but rather to insist on both the greatness and the impossibility – even the absurdity – of this dream. The dream is shattered for no particular, or at least no important, reason; most men did not even realize what it was: “the wholesome madness of an hour,” according to Tristram (“The Last Tournament,” l. 670).

Kincaid, James R. “Introduction to Idylls of the King.” Tennyson’s Major Poems: The Comic and Ironic Patterns. 1975 Yale University Press. 28 Mar. 2001 http://www.victorianweb.org/authors/tennyson/kincaid/ch8.html

See, that’s exactly what I was getting at with far less eloquence.

On a completely unrelated note I think I finally got rid of a pesky undergrad who’d picked up the annoying habit of following me everywhere since early February. He was ok looking with a great German accent and all but he was always hanging around my regular haunting spots all the time and we always had to meet up every day and even when I was sick he kept texting me with soup-making offers which was sweet but I can’t even escape you when I’m locked in my room, jesus, am I your first real live girl or what? And now when I was in the middle of juggling work and personal interests in about a million Firefox tabs he couldn’t seem to get that I was busy and would make the most pathetic attempts to subtly get my attention and write stupid notes in garbled Jamaican patois. So I gave him the glare and ignored him for 2 hours (that’s right! that’s how long he sat there idling–doesn’t he have work to do?). I think he finally got it.

Just wanted to get that off my chest.

Celebrating Milton’s 400

In Authors, Literature, Poetry on February 25, 2008 at 9:59 pm

While Dorothy W.’s post Reading biographically reminded how little use I have for biographers and their books I do enjoy a nice, short interview that gives me the highlights. Sarah Crown interviews Anna Beer, the latest Milton biographer, and Beer tries to keep the focus as much as she can on Milton’s other writings outside of Paradise Lost, which I liked. I’ve developed a growing curiosity about his political writings and Beer stresses that Milton’s poetry, like his sonnets, are often exceptional. She’d like to do her part to knock down the tower the academy has erected around Milton, a situation that apparently started very soon after his death in the 17th century.

Can you believe that most people skip Boks V & VI in Paradise Lost because they’re about the battle in heaven? But I thought it was awesome! Am I really so strange? :/

Anna Beer on John Milton

The latest TLS “Commentary” included a review of Milton exhibitions being held at Oxford and Cambridge. Every time I read of another great exhibition being held at either school I sigh and moan about my decision not to apply to either of them (as if I would have gotten in anyway :P ) until I chat with friends at various British universities.

Err…I’d love to link to the appropriate TLS article but I have no idea if it’s available online (probably not) because the website is acting up. But! I’ve found better. Oxford has put up podcasts of speeches and readings from the opening night at the Bodleian library! Look! Readings from Paradise Lost! Holy mackerel. There’s an online exhibition too.

Christ College at Cambridge has taken a different approach. The school’s annual Lady Margaret Lectures focuses on Milton this year and it looks as though each one will be made available as a podcast. They’re spread out throughout the year though so one must be patient. Happily, one of my favourite literary critics, Colin Burrow, will deliver his lecture on “Milton’s Singularity” on February 27. Can’t wait! In the meantime Quentin Skinner spoke about John Milton as a Theorist of Liberty. (I’ve since discovered that there’s a problem with the mp3 as the sound only travels to one side of the headphone — a situation I find too annoying to tolerate for a 51 mins lecture. Ugh.)

Various Christ College members have also created “a resource for studying Milton’s Paradise Lost” called Darkness Visible. I have not really poked around but it looks pretty. Instead I poked around the main page and found the actual exhibition websites. Here is Living at this Hour: John Milton 1608-2008 and Milton in the Old Library, which includes a catalogue (PDF) that offers a preview of the exhibition.

The “Problem of Evil” in Postwar Europe

In History, Literature, Non-fiction, literary journals on February 25, 2008 at 8:59 pm

This is the first in a looooong time that a New York Review of Books article excited me, that directly addressed matters I thought about but aren’t pulled directly from some BBC headline. And I only bring it up for discussion among one or two friends because I’m concerned that I’ll be misinterpreted and perceived differently before the end of the first sentence.

In the latest TLS Geoffrey Wheatcroft wrote a *gem of an article in which he pulled from various recently published books on Zionism to give an overview of its history and turn the spotlight on the movement’s influential figures who many may not know about. “Zionism” was a term I often saw used but never defined.

So when I saw the Tony Judt article one could say I was inclined to give it a chance when my typical reaction to anything that could even be theoretically linked to Jews and the Israeli-Palestine conflict is an eye glazed over in defensive inattention. (Also, I’m always good for an article that promises substantial engagement with any of Hannah Arendt’s writings…and I’ve read some of Judt’s stuff before and his name did not carry any negative connotations.)

For a second or two I rethought my decision when it seemed as if this was just going to be another rehash of the Holocaust…but was rewarded when Judt’s adapted essay addressed that very same reaction. Here’s an informed view that ought to get more play, especially the difference between Western and Eastern Europe’s attitude to WWII of which I had not been aware. (Or maybe everyone knew all ready and I’m the only dunce — it’s happened before.) It wasn’t as clear to me, either, that there was a period after WWII where everyone wasn’t undergoing painful introspection about the Holocaust — for as long as I can remember it was given due attention. I never covered WWII in my history classes but, somehow, I still managed to absorb basic information about what happened, with the Shoah at its centre.

…in recent years the relationship between Israel and the Holocaust has changed. Today, when Israel is exposed to international criticism for its mistreatment of Palestinians and its occupation of territory conquered in 1967, its defenders prefer to emphasize the memory of the Holocaust. If you criticize Israel too forcefully, they warn, you will awaken the demons of anti-Semitism; indeed, they suggest, robust criticism of Israel doesn’t just arouse anti-Semitism. It is anti-Semitism. And with anti-Semitism the route forward —or back—is open: to 1938, to Kristallnacht, and from there to Treblinka and Auschwitz. If you want to know where it leads, they say, you have only to visit Yad Vashem in Jerusalem, the Holocaust Museum in Washington, or any number of memorials and museums across Europe.

I understand the emotions behind such claims. But the claims themselves are extraordinarily dangerous. When people chide me and others for criticizing Israel too forcefully, lest we rouse the ghosts of prejudice, I tell them that they have the problem exactly the wrong way around. It is just such a taboo that may itself stimulate anti-Semitism. For some years now I have visited colleges and high schools in the US and elsewhere, lecturing on postwar European history and the memory of the Shoah. I also teach these topics in my university. And I can report on my findings.

Students today do not need to be reminded of the genocide of the Jews, the historical consequences of anti-Semitism, or the problem of evil. They know all about these—in ways their parents never did. And that is as it should be. But I have been struck lately by the frequency with which new questions are surfacing: “Why do we focus so on the Holocaust?” “Why is it illegal [in certain countries] to deny the Holocaust but not other genocides?” “Is the threat of anti-Semitism not exaggerated?” And, increasingly, “Doesn’t Israel use the Holocaust as an excuse?” I do not recall hearing those questions in the past.

My fear is that two things have happened. By emphasizing the historical uniqueness of the Holocaust while at the same time invoking it constantly with reference to contemporary affairs, we have confused young people. And by shouting “anti-Semitism” every time someone attacks Israel or defends the Palestinians, we are breeding cynics.

You’ve gotta read the adapted speech from start to finish.

*Thank you, TLS, for offering me another opportunity to tear my hair out again. Why make the width of the article so narrow that I have to click through so many pages? It’s an annoyance because it’s a bloody book review but I have to click click click click to reach the end before I can find…the reviewed book titles! Yes, that make sense. But comments from random dudes who manage to drop by? Right there, up front and centre! Who the ^&#$#% designed your website? I’d like to…buy him a beer.

It’s been a long time

In Books, Fiction, Literature, Poetry on February 24, 2008 at 2:54 pm

Hello, hello, hello! I have missed you, my blog and even the silly spammers trying to sell a hundred hot dvds. I’m more or less recovered: puked out what I’d barely eaten, lost a few pounds — lovely! After I tried so damn hard to gain a few — and have decided not to worry about any mysterious chest/shoulder/neck pains (until the test results return). I’ll try to catch up on your blogs but this will take some time, especially since I have a lot of school work to catch up on.

All my serious readings were shot to hell for the most part. I don’t count that Sarah Hall book because it was hysterical pap from start to finish, bless her. I finally received her latest in the mail so I plan to get to it ASAP…along with that short stories collection I got for the Librarything ARC last year. Another one from the February batch is on its way to me as we speak. It’s one by Reginald Shepherd Orpheus in the Bronx: Essays on Identity, Politics, and the Freedom of Poetry. I wanted the book but did not expect to get it, especially when I compared my library to other members who mentioned they’d gotten it too. They had hundreds and hundreds of contemporary American poetry books and I…did not.

Somehow, I shall also manage to start and finish the Slaves of Golconda read before March 1st. Ahem.

What did I read? Lots and lots of Nora Roberts: her mysteries and romances. Three to be exact and all audiobooks because I had a hard time dealing with print while I was ill. It was a mix of new ones like Angels Fall which was surprisingly fresh because her heroine didn’t feel as if she was taken out of the Roberts Heroine Assembly box. Different kind of voice, rhythm, character — took some time getting used to but I loved it. The mystery, Innocent in Death, was good too, primarily because I’d taken a long break from the series and so was able to enjoy the familiar characters, problems, and procedure without becoming irritated at its predictability. The main couple, Eve and Roarke, also experienced some marital trouble — a story line I always enjoy because that kind of conflict has a different energy and context than what you get in the typical romances where everything is new.

Finished Idylls of the King. It really wasn’t as simplistic or quaint as I had expected. I’ll have to read a bit more than about Tennyson and the political situation at the time he wrote it before I mess with my ideas but I picked up on a similarity to Milton’s Paradise Lost. (I’m itching to do more posts on that as well.) Tennyson appeared to be saying this on one level and that on another. Guinevere was supposedly a weak, wicked harlot who brought about Camelot’s ruin. Yet it was hard to see how it could have worked out any other way because Tennyson wrote Arthur as a symbol, not a man, one wholly taken with chivalry, chastity, chasing out heathens, but who seemed to have forgotten about other kingly, Christian duties like screwing the wife, at least until she has a son.

In “Guinevere“, the only poem in the cycle where Arthur became something of a character at last, given a voice, feelings, thoughts and so on…he lost his Christ-like veneer. Entirely. In his long rampage against Guinevere there was not one moment of humility, of self-reflection, self-doubt, thoughtfulness, not even of the pity, love or mercy he professed to feel for her. He cursed her at the beginning

Well is it that no child is born of thee.
The children born of thee are sword and fire,
Red ruin, and the breaking up of laws,
The craft of kindred and the Godless hosts
Of heathen swarming o’er the Northern Sea

then magnanimously announced that he’d refrain from doing so stanzas later, though I suppose he meant he wouldn’t try to damn her future. (How kind!) He minutely set out how she managed to be responsible for everyone’s errors — no one except Arthur has a full-fledged adult consciousness — emphasized how his skin loathed her, then claimed that he still loved her. Basically, he acted like a right human bastard, and I simply couldn’t go back to my former benign opinion of him as a dummy Jesus substitute. As God made a path for Satan after he rebelled which provided him with no other choice but to become the Bad Guy, Arthur created a path for Guinevere that led to her betrayal with Lancelot. And, unlike in Paradise Lost where God was aware of this and so tried to justify the move Arthur exhibited no similar sign of higher brain function.

The whole Camelot set up was rigged for failure. I don’t mean that in a reasonable sense where men and women were asked to live as good, peaceable, God-fearing citizens but something inevitably went wrong. I mean the whole system was set up by a schizo loon. I assumed that I wasn’t to take the whole “worship the King” business quite so literally, that it just indicated proper royal reverence, but someone clearly forgot to tell the poor roundtable knights. And Arthur. When he reminisced about the good ol’ days in “Guinevere” he remembered asking the knights to swear

To reverence the King, as if he were
Their conscience, and their conscience as their King,

God complex anyone? Christ got mentioned ever so often but basically Arthur was supposed to be centre of their world except that, well, being partly human (there’s always lots of fairy talk about him) he would inevitably mess that up. No one had a bible or a priest to consult when Arthur’s marital problems became public knowledge — priests seemed only good for heading ceremonies — so the knights went tits up so easily it was laughable. (Sometimes sad, most times laughable.)

Camelot also came off very Roman Catholic like. King Arthur’s enemies called him an eunuch and, well, he was rather monkish and admonished his knights to adopt a similar monkish attitude. If they did marry, sure, be loyal to that one maiden, but the heavy emphasis on the monkish lifestyle would surely colour their intimate relationships. Arthur practically set himself up as Pope. Although it was Vivien and Tristram, harlot and partner-in-adulterous-affair–because-Guinny-is-unfaithful respectively, who pointed out that they were all flesh and some allowance must be made for that, well, the argument made sense. It was all pretty confusing. Tennyson wasn’t Catholic (right?) and England wasn’t particularly warm to the denomination at the time (right?) so if I wanted to be cute I could interpret the whole thing as a clever anti-Catholic piece. Except that Tennyson did his best to clothe the enterprise in noble robes, so I go back to the schizo-loon argument.

Finally, Tennyson appeared to have written the Idylls in part as a response to political events happening during his time. In his closing dedication to Queen Victoria he mentioned some disorderly problems that were plaguing the poor British empire and how the islanders just didn’t realise the greatness of their own country and stuff, but if men remained loyal and true, this too shall pass blah blah etc.

So loyal is too costly! friends–your love
Is but a burthen: loose the bond, and go.’
Is this the tone of empire? here the faith
That made us rulers? this, indeed, her voice
And meaning, whom the roar of Hougoumont
Left mightiest of all peoples under heaven?
What shock has fooled her since, that she should speak
So feebly? wealthier–wealthier–hour by hour!
The voice of Britain, or a sinking land,
Some third-rate isle half-lost among her seas?
There rang her voice, when the full city pealed
Thee and thy Prince! The loyal to their crown
Are loyal to their own far sons, who love
Our ocean-empire with her boundless homes
For ever-broadening England, and her throne
In our vast Orient, and one isle, one isle,
That knows not her own greatness

Not sure who ticked him off. The first two lines are part of a speech he attributes to those from “that true North”. Was Scotland telling England to fuck off or what? Not sure, shall check, but I’m a bit tired now after typing all of this out so I’ll take a nap and then look over various assignments that I have to take care of.

Pardon my jumbled thoughts. Thank you all for your well wishes while I was indisposed.

Sick

In Personal on February 17, 2008 at 4:28 pm

Deadlines.

Will re-emerge soon.

On the up side

In General, Literature, literary blogs, literary journals on February 13, 2008 at 6:55 pm

One can always depend on some form of mindless entertainment to shake its sequined figure in an effort to distract and amuse. First a “Lori Gottlieb” — I’m convinced she’s an escapee from a different dimension — wrote a most bewildering article for a supposedly respected political magazine called The Atlantic. I’m not sure how to seriously respond to her piece because…it’s as if she were speaking Sanskrit.

To the outside world, of course, we still call ourselves feminists and insist—vehemently, even—that we’re independent and self-sufficient and don’t believe in any of that damsel-in-distress stuff, but in reality, we aren’t fish who can do without a bicycle, we’re women who want a traditional family. And despite growing up in an era when the centuries-old mantra to get married young was finally (and, it seemed, refreshingly) replaced by encouragement to postpone that milestone in pursuit of high ideals (education! career! but also true love!), every woman I know—no matter how successful and ambitious, how financially and emotionally secure—feels panic, occasionally coupled with desperation, if she hits 30 and finds herself unmarried.

Oh, I know—I’m guessing there are single 30-year-old women reading this right now who will be writing letters to the editor to say that the women I know aren’t widely representative, that I’ve been co-opted by the cult of the feminist backlash, and basically, that I have no idea what I’m talking about. And all I can say is, if you say you’re not worried, either you’re in denial or you’re lying. In fact, take a good look in the mirror and try to convince yourself that you’re not worried, because you’ll see how silly your face looks when you’re being disingenuous.

I don’t know. Was this printed in the comedy section? Is it like the New Yorker’s “Shouts and Murmers”? I read Ed’s take on the article first, rather confused and concerned that he had come a little undone again, which happens occasionally, but I was soon set aright. But I first came across it at Old Hag; only read the title before I slammed on the backspace key, then. But I dutifully went through some of the other questionable articles, mostly book reviews, that The Atlantic published in the past and…well.

Things don’t take a turn for straightforward hilarity until one reads the comment section over at Charlottesville. One struggling rebel writer/martyr used the opportunity to make an irrelevant remark on the female hegemony today in publishing. The marginalization of male writers writing about real manly issues like “manhood” was deemed “progress” but resulted in nothing but the proliferation of chick lit! These narrow-minded female editors just don’t get the male point-of-view.

I wish to seek this isolated isle of literary matriarchy that is so resistant, even incapable of understanding the male mind. It sounds so wonderful when one considers the fact that women, for centuries, have by default been dealing with the masculine point of view in oral and written literature. I wonder which schools they went to…?

Sadness

In Politics, WTF on February 13, 2008 at 10:11 am

I am too depressed this morning to attempt any light hearted or serious posts on literature. Some may think it’s none of my business to be so worried about American affairs except that a great deal of my family is there (including my mother and closest aunts and cousins) and who is left in Jamaica is mostly anxious to get there, except my grandfather who has no interests in leaving his plot of land. This makes me obliged to at least have to visit there except that current and upcoming US legislation is making this an increasingly unattractive venture, where even being a green card holder does not mean much. (All that wonderful fingerprinting and general hustle.) This should make me anxious to become a citizen except that, well, that’s not coming to mean much either as far as benefits and protections go.

Treating the Constitution as a Doormat – Scott Horton

If things proceed on the course now set by the Bush Administration and its shortsighted collaborators, and the national surveillance state is achieved in short order, then future generations looking back and tracing the destruction of the grand design of our Constitution may settle on yesterday, February 12, 2008, as the date of the decisive breach. It hardly got a mention in the media, obsessed as it was with reports on the primary elections, the use of drugs in sporting events, and that unfailing topic, the weather. Yesterday the Senate voted down the resolution offered by Senator Dodd to block retroactive immunity for the telecoms and it voted for a measure which guts the Constitution’s ban on warrantless searches by extending blanket authority to the Executive to snoop on the nation’s citizens in a wide variety of circumstances, subject to no independent checks. On the key vote, the Republicans in the Senate continued to function in lock-step, as they have on almost all significant issues for the last seven years, while the Democrats fragmented. Their vote summed up everything that’s wrong with Washington politics today. Fear and hard campaign cash rule the roost, and the Constitution is regarded as a meaningless scrap of parchment, indeed, a nuisance.

The issue in focus was a retroactive grant of immunity to telecommunications giants which violated the rights of millions of Americans by facilitating warrantless surveillance by the Bush Administration. With the exception of Qwest, they were knowingly complicit in criminal acts. And in a touch worthy of a totalitarian state, Qwest quickly found its CEO under criminal investigation and prosecuted. In fact the White House’s own arguments smack of the mentality of totalitarianism. Here’s the leading argument that the White House offers up in favor of the legislation:

“Companies should not be held responsible for verifying the government’s determination that requested assistance was necessary and lawful — and such an impossible requirement would hurt our ability to keep the Nation safe.”

But as Dan Froomkin notes at the Washington Post, “Isn’t that the very definition of a police state: that companies should do whatever the government asks, even if they know it’s illegal?” Indeed it is.

Senator John McCain voted against the amendments to remove the retroactive immunity clause. Clinton was absent. According to the New York Times report, Obama did not vote either contrary to other media reports, he “did oppose immunity on a key earlier motion to end debate”.

I ordered some French books today and will look in to how I can get some French lessons. I think I’ve decided, now, that my life belongs in Canada.

Sunday Salon: “Jesus loves you.”

In Fiction, Literature, Poetry, Short Stories, Sunday Salon, What I'm Reading on February 10, 2008 at 2:22 pm

“But he isn’t in love with you.” – Garret in “Love is a Thing…”

I started Tao Lin’s Bed: Stories this morning because I needed a burst of some contemporary fiction that wouldn’t annoy me. You know how I feel about Hall but Sobert’s weird, self-involved, circular, constant commentary on his own every move, word and thought is getting on top of my nerves.

After finishing “Love is a Thing on Sale for More Money Than There Exists”, the first story in the collection, I decided that this is kind of post-911 fiction I prefer. If you set a tale in Manhattan and mention terrorists you automatically get dropped into that category, right? I haven’t tried any of the other stuff out there and only hold interest in Mohsin Hamid’s latest (which I didn’t know belonged to that category until the reviews came out) but, for the most part, they sound either dull or trite. Mostly dull.

Lin, on the other hand, had me chuckling from page one.

This was the month that people began to suspect that terrorists had infiltrated Middle America, set up underground tunnels in the rural areas, like gophers. During any moment, it was feared, a terrorist might tunnel up into your house and replace your dog with something that resembled your dog but was actually a bomb. This was a new era in terrorism. The terrorists were now quicker, wittier, and more streetwise. They spoke the vernacular, and claimed to be philosophically sound. They would whisper into the wind something mordant and culturally damning about McDonald’s, Jesus, and America — and then, if they wanted to, if the situation eschatologically called for it, they would slice your face off with a KFC spork.

Other ways the terrorists might be out to get you?

  • Pipes: Entire terrorist families are hiding within the walls of your house, scrambling up pipes ready to…errr…ruin your plumbing without warning. That sounds familiar.
  • Free cruise: They could attach “outboard motors” to Manhattan island and take the inhabitants on a free world cruise with virgin piña coladas and, I’m assuming, indoctrination classes.

That and the vibrant anti war supporters — whose most profound statement so far has been, “Fuck war, fuck, war” — are side trimmings for the main story which centres on Garret and Kristy, a college aged couple who live in Brooklyn and aren’t having the time of their lives, partly because Kristy is always late for everything. I didn’t really know what to make of it and I expect that will be my reaction to a lot of Lin’s stories, but I don’t mind being stumped as along as I think I’m getting something out of it.

*****

As I read more of the Idylls I discover that it’s potentially a little more interesting than fun chivalric tales espousing a predominantly Christian and patriarchal perspective (although there’s a lot of that). The things that make this so may not count much for others if they have more than a passing knowledge of the Arthurian myths. All of my knowledge has been gained through Hollywood and a couple of fantasy authors, one of whom had used it in such a way that was actually closer to the myths literary sources than I thought.

As I read the two poems about Geraint and Enid I noticed a sprinkling of Welsh mythological references here and there, thanks to Alan Garner’s The Owl Service. Their presence struck me as odd, particularly since it seemed to limited to their story, and it added to the epic’s crazy mishmash of Christian and pagan elements. I figured that the couple had some specific ties to Wales that Tennyson was acknowledging.

It turns out that the whole darn Arthurian myth came out of Welsh mythology. Wtf? I thought it had something to do with the French? It appears that Arthur’s incredibly jumbled literary history started from when Christian monks wrote down his story from a variety of different sources and was swollen “by the confluence of rivers of romantic Euro-drivel“. It’s a bit difficult to decipher from internet resources how the tales truly differ (websites one after the other present it in such different ways) and I don’t know that I’m intrigued enough to borrow a hefty academic text to wade through. I’ve decided to simply enjoy the bizarre product.

There were also sombre elements at work that stood out prominently amongst the more fantastical elements. Two of Arthur’s knights, so far, have been depressed to the point of contemplating and courting suicide and in both cases Tennyson wrote of their situations with pathos rather than just romantic flourish.

Edyrn, son of Nodd, is the dastardly figure in “The Marriage of Geraint” who harboured affections for his cousin Enid which she did not return. Rejected and hurt he turns the entire town against her family, stealing most of their fortune and encouraging the residents to loot the rest. Geraint comes to save the day as Edyrn had the fortune of offending Queen Guinevere via her maid, who, in a friendly manner, tried to discover Edyrn’s identity from his rude and ugly dwarf servant. (Poor dwarfs. They rarely catch a break in these sort of tales.) As any Don Quixote reader should know the victor always orders the defeated foe to return to the offended lady to seek pardon (and stuff) and so Edyrn willingly does as, if there’s anything he understands it’s brute strength.

Naturally, he converts into a good God-fearing knight and dies in battle, so one is tempted to write him off. But he returns in returns in part two, “Geraint and Enid“, to tell Enid and therefore the reader what happened to him when he went to Camelot. As is characteristic of Tennyson (and needful in a poem, perhaps) he did not spend a lot of words on the matter but it was enough to provoke my sympathy and to bring in a darkness that, for a modern reader, is more general than Camelot’s inevitable doom because its apogee was wholly idealised and symbolic anyway.

But once you came,–and with your own true eyes
Beheld the man you loved (I speak as one
Speaks of a service done him) overthrow
My proud self, and my purpose three years old,
And set his foot upon me, and give me life.
There was I broken down; there was I saved:
Though thence I rode all-shamed, hating the life
He gave me, meaning to be rid of it.
And all the penance the Queen laid upon me
Was but to rest awhile within her court;
Where first as sullen as a beast new-caged,
And waiting to be treated like a wolf,
Because I knew my deeds were known, I found,
Instead of scornful pity or pure scorn,
Such fine reserve and noble reticence,
Manners so kind, yet stately, such a grace
Of tenderest courtesy, that I began
To glance behind me at my former life,
And find that it had been the wolf’s indeed

Enyrd’s frank acknowledgement of his past madness, as he called it, and present contentment is delivered in a matter-of-fact manner that made his situation more poignant and sympathetic. I was not so much focused on the lesson parcelled up in the Queen’s Christ-like, forgiving attitude but on Enyrd’s understandable shame and wretchedness in the face of such magnanimity. The chance to get to hear his side of things also gives his glorious death, as predicted in the previous poem, more resonance and saps some of its eye rolling cheesiness.

The next Roundtable Poem, “Balin and Balan“, features another suicidal knight, Balin “the Savage”. He had been exiled for 3 years from Camelot for killing a dude who had badmouthed him. You mess with Balin in a bad mood at your peril. Unlike Enyrd, Balin is less a predatory sparrow-hark — Enyrd’s nickname in his town — and more of a violent depressive fuck up, which I found to be pretty modern too. No evil fairies cursed him at birth or anything like that, Balin just seemed to suffer from a chemical imbalance that plagued him since birth and which grew into a paranoia; it’s a rare day, during his bad periods, when he doesn’t think everyone except his brother has a problem with him. (That bit of info, revealed by Balan, invites speculation that Balin’s first victim’s worst crime could have been looking at Balin a little too hard.)

Unfortunately for Balin there are no pills in Camelot. In its stead Tennyson offers weak-willed women. After a judicious test in which Arthur, disguised, defeats both brothers in single combat — a scene which Tennyson short changed two (two!) lines to the whole thing — he accepts both into Camelot and Balan to the Order of the Roundtable. Balin is resolved to cure himself of his self-destructive behaviour and “learn what Arthur meant by courtesy,/ Manhood, and knighthood”. Tennyson loves to set up terribly ironic situations so he has Balin look to Lancelot and Guinevere’s wonderfully devoted but entirely chaste relationship which inspires Lancelot to perform all kinds of magnificent deeds. Surely Guinevere, “the sunshine that hath given the man/A growth, a name that branches o’er the rest,/And strength against all odds, and what the King/So prizes–overprizes–gentleness” was the fitting symbol which he could use as a calming, restorative influence. In lieu of having a similar relationship with her he requests that she and the King only allow him to put her heraldry on his shield in place of the more savage one he sported.

One can’t help but think that Camelot, for all its glory, was populated with a lot of stupid men. They worship and place all their hope and ideals in men and women who are then raised to an impossible height from which they inevitably fall. (Arthur has yet to reveal any flaws but my theory is that he’s precursor of that alien the Raelians like to talk about. More on that later.) Balian is excused, for obvious reasons, but to me the whole lot of were just a set of blasphemous idol worshippers who God couldn’t wait to screw with. What does it mean when the eeeeeevil Vivien in the next poem is the one who offers the most sensible commentary on their hierarchy?

“This Arthur pure!
Great Nature through the flesh herself hath made
Gives him the lie! There is no being pure,
My cherub; saith not Holy Writ the same?”

Makes sense to me. More on Balin and the awesomeness of “Merlin and Vivien” later. Maybe. I might nap first and who knows how long that could take.

Assorted gods of literature are hard at work

In Books, General, Literature on February 9, 2008 at 1:02 pm

I’ve recounted here and there, and no doubt you’ve experienced it too, of instances when one is considering to read a book and all of a sudden one’s readings across magazines, blogs and books are pulling out the relevant references in order to distract from the pile of 4, 5, 6 books one is already reading.

That’s been happening to me a lot, recently. The latest incidence is of Flann O’Brien. Never heard of the gent before until I scooped up Bookforum’s Summer 2001 issue. In a column in which I thought William Monaham was supposed to be reviewing Martin Amis’ War Against Cliché — the book cover was smack in the middle of the page after all — but was instead to pontificate on “the culture of book reviewing”, per Bookforum’s more accurate description — he complained about how all the critics he read missed how his and Egger’s novels were, in part, homages to Flann O’Brien’s fiction, and linked this to the pitiful state of literary criticism. (Which of their novels? I forget. For Egger I think it was the Staggering Genius bit.) Actually, for Monaham, literary criticism no longer existed and reviews were limping along.

I squirmed uncomfortably on the sofa. I never saw myself as in league with reviewers of any stripe until all that useless fuss was made last year. But despite my firm stance that I was not trying to be a proper reviewer, I could not help but feel that I was implicitly included in those accusations of damaging ignorance. So what a wonderful surprise it was to hop on to the New Yorker website and see John Updike’s long column on, well, Flann O’Brien and his novels!

Updike starts off by assessing O’Brien’s “best know and most rigorously confusing” novel At Swim-Two-Birds. In trying his best to describe the plot hitherto unknown references made in another novel became clear. Why, there’s frickin Anthony Lamont from Sorrentino’s Mulligan Stew! O’Brien’s novel turns out to be a similar metafictional excavation down the rabbit hole in which a writer impregnates a character from one of his stories, produces a child who is then coached to be a writer by three “idlers”, all fictional characters, one of whom is Lamont. Both Sorrentino’s and O’Brien’s also seemed to be similar in that they “beggar our sense of delight”.

Then I learnt something else: The Dalkey Archive is the name of O’Brien’s last novel. Which of course sent me googling to see if perhaps O’Brien was referring back to something else. As it turns out Dalkey is the name of a town in southern Dublin but even better than that was the bounteous Dalkey Archive Press page for Flann O’Brien. There one spies, among other things, a Sorrentino essay on O’Brien and an O’Brien essay on Joyce and, well, those are the sorts of discoveries that makes a bookish girl’s heart beat a little faster.

Bless you Mr. Updike. I’m still not the least bit interested in any of your novels but…err… I hope they sell well and that the New Yorker is paying you scads of money.

Interviews galore

In Authors, Books, General, Literature, Publishing on February 8, 2008 at 11:45 am

I am always on the look out for more worthwhile literary sites that take me to places I always wanted to go to or make me think about things I’d yet to consider. And to find out about more books, of course.

If you enjoy interviews with a variety of figures involved in publishing from authors to designers and publishing heads do take a hop and skip over to Nigel Beale’s Nota Bene Books. I’ve seen it pop up in Metaxucafe’s headlines and visited occasionally but it wasn’t until Mr. Beale came along and put the interviews right in front of me (I didn’t know that he conducted interviews) that I really started to dig around.

His interviews are notable for a laconic, unscripted style that has everyone settling in nicely as gets around to tougher questions that provoke thoughtful (or sceptical) pauses or slightly uncomfortable laugh before they dig into an interesting point. I imagine that Beale starts out looking very much as he does in his site picture: slightly reclining, pencil cocked, quite harmless before a stray remark prompts to stiffen, lean forward slightly, eyes trained on the author as he says, Wait a minute, you can’t tell the readers that they read a scene incorrectly. When you’re writing it, it’s yours, when I buy it becomes mine.

Favourites so far are the ones he conducted with Kathyrn Court, President of Penguin Paperbacks and Plume for the Penguin USA division, and Nobel Laureate Derek Walcott. She talked about getting Chris Ware for Candide:Or, Optimism, a selection from the Penguin Classic Deluxe editions (of which I have several including the Voltaire, plus a few from the Great Ideas Series). Walcott? It won’t matter for he will win you with his potent affability and warm sense of humour. His interview was like the audio version of a hot chocolate with a touch or two of Jamaican rum. Real good stuff.

Among other literary figures Walcott mentioned in that interview was Joseph Brodsky, a very good friend of his. I don’t know much about Brodsky at all but, as now happens so regularly with the occasional book or new author I “discover”, his name started to pop up everywhere. Scott Horton posted a short piece on him over at his Harper’s Magazine blog.

Have I praised Harper’s Magazine lately? In addition to sharp, vibrant, cogent and passionate political commentary it publishes poetry and excerpts from unfailingly interesting books, new and old, whether it’s a parable published by an Argentinian worker’s co-op or a story from Marguerite Duras’ latest collection of hitherto unpublished notebooks.

*****

I changed things up a bit. The old theme was boring me to tears. It will be easier to navigate among posts, especially those I did in parts. That’s for you anonymous searcher looking for analysis on “The Wanderer”.

Travel writing?

In Books, Education, Literature, WTF on February 7, 2008 at 1:21 pm

At least I got my A-level English when it meant something.

(At that stage aren’t students taking the subject because they want to, with the knowledge that it’s gonna be about Conrad, Hawthorne and Achebe and not bloody McEwan? Do you really need to be wheedling them with tv book club approved texts?)

Update: John Sutherland states that reports have been misleading and that the book club was only used as an example of what sources students could use to get ideas about what books to select for the modules in which they’re given that choice. I’m only slightly appeased — I still protest against making any post-1990 category compulsory.  It looks fairly stupid to me when educators, who presumably don’t believe that classics are “dull or boring”, constantly link anything exciting, thrilling and revelatory to the new and recent. I don’t know what to think when an evil Penguin USA executive is wholly taken with ways to repackage and reintroduce older works to newer generations while Oxford and Cambridge examiners are more concerned about getting in on the fabulously new. And this move is aimed at 6th form students (working at taking the Oxbridge A-levels for they are different versions) who, again I must stress, are typically the sort of students who are perfectly satisfied, even, my word, excited about Conrad and Eliot. What’s going on in the UK? What am I missing here?

Travel writing, FFS. You want to mark bloody papers with analyses of Bill Bryson walking about in Brighton?

Is it too early for lunch?

In Books, Fiction, General, Literature, literary journals on February 7, 2008 at 11:33 am

Shall I have to add poor ol’ Alfred, Lord Tennyson to the next Outmoded authors list? Yesterday, an English professor’s shocked inquiry revealed that I was not in a course that required me to read Idylls of the King, no, not even an English grad student, but a social sciences scoundrel reading it of her own free will. What is the world coming to? Especially when the professor was kind enough to inform me that Tennyson is too dated to bother with, why don’t I try some Ezra Pound? I’ll show you Ezra Pound.

A chance meander into one of the religious affiliated college’s library resulted in my departure with a bag full of free books. This is the same library that gave away a prime, clearly-never-read copy of Paulina 1880. (Have I linked to this book often enough? You know you want to buy it.)

The Last Chronicle of Barset (Riverside editions) – Anthony Trollope
Only a few inked scribbles. Broken spine but still looking good.

Adam Bede (New American Library) – George Eliot
One loose page but otherwise fair. Amusing Mills & Boonesque cover. Reminds me of some of my older Margaret Laurence books.

Joseph Andrews (New American Library) – Henry Fielding
Rather worse for wear but it’s free so I’m not complaining. Not even sure what the book is about, too excited to prevent my eyes from jittering all over the book before stuffing it into my bag. Both NAL books are labeled “Signet Classics” so I’m guessing they were published pre-Penguin ownership.

Point Counter Point (Penguin Modern Classics) – Aldous Huxley
Another old edition. The cover art moves more into artsy Harlequin territory. I remember litlove saying that Huxley is arguably outmoded because no one reads anything except Brave New World (if that).

The Confessions of Nat Turner (Signet novel) – William Styron
Something about either the title or the author clicked a bell so I picked it up. On closer inspection I see that is, horrors, a historical novel on slavery in the American south (two of my major Things to Avoid). However, the cover proclaims it is not only a Pulitzer prize winner but an “all-time best seller” with quotes from The New Republic and The New York Times hailing it as ” the most profound fictional treatment of slavery in our literature” and “A TRIUMPH“, respectively. Who could resist? (Well, I could quite easily but we’ll see.)

Wild Geese (New Canadian Library) – Martha Ostenso
Here is an author and book I’ve never heard of before but the cover describes it as “A brilliant study of human cruelty and human love” and the back promises a female character “as wild as a broncho and as vivid as a tigress”, which was something timid Canadian readers in 1925 were not used to at all, at all. It made me the think of The Stone Angel by Margaret Laurence which is probably what made me pick it up.

Selected Works of John Dryden (Rinehart editions)
I’m not familiar with his work at all, outside of a few poems, and he’s not someone whose books I would seek out so this was a nice catch. There’s everything here from poetry to “prologues and epilogues” to verse essays and criticisms. Not sure what the prologues and epilogues are about.

This edition sports a previous owner’s doodle of two birds — ducks? penguins? ducguins? — one of whom has stretched out his neck to give a loud…bird noise of some kind. Bird call. You know.

Checked my stats this morning and saw a Paris Review webmail referral peeking at me. Well. *shuffles* I know that I have often been rather…liberal when quoting material from your marvellous, marvellous publication. *twists fingers* Hopefully, you’re not composing any horrid Take-it-down-or-we’ll-SUE emails. (Incidentally, did you really have to add that ad of a girl peeking over her shoulder in some old-timey bikini on your bookmarks? Couldn’t you get another entity more bookish interested in that spot? Something artsier than a damn hotel (one I’m sure that is lovely)?)

The Paris Review, Winter 2007: Fiction

In Fiction, Literature, Short Stories, literary journals on February 6, 2008 at 4:31 pm

As you probably know by now the winter issue of good ol’ PR arrived on my doorstep. I was most excited about the Oe Kenzaburo interview and the Liao Yiwu feature initially, but a second look at the cover a couple of days later made me squee and flip through the pages to sample a Louise Glück poem. If there’s one thing I prefer about Gourevitch’s editorship it’s the shift to including a few poems from a few writers rather than one or two from a gazillion. There’s also a short story by Jesse Ball (whose latest novel Open Letters Monthly reviewed for February).

I still miss the frontispiece of a Paris street. I miss it even more when it appears that each opening selection for some time will have a Powell’s book store ad on the facing page. The frontispiece would make this easier to tolerate.

Under Gourevitch the staff has also shown a knack for picking memorable fiction to open issues. I can only recall two of those now — Mohsin Hamid’s “Focus on the Fundamentals” (Fall 2006) and Alessandro Barrico’s “Overture to the Twentieth Century” (Spring 2006) — but at the time I read the others I was impressed. Winter 2007’s was a massive fail.

OK, it’s not awful at all. It falls rather nicely with the average quality of the fiction the magazine publishes, based on my limited experience: competent, even accomplished prose, fair stab at interesting, imperfect characters struggling with some moral dilemma and/or troubled relationship, whether familial, platonic or romantic. In Alistair Morgan’s “Icebergs” a white South African, upper-middle class widow, Dennis Moorcraft, becomes acquainted with a mysterious black businessman who goes by “Bradshaw” and who moved into one of the luxurious vacation homes next door. They become cautiously friendly, Bradshaw’s bodyguard notwithstanding, until Moorcraft’s artist daughter Melissa arrives and worst news follows not too long after about Bradshaw’s “import and export” business.

The story marks Morgan’s print debut so I do not mean to be too hard on him. I thought his prose captured Moorcraft’s voice very well, though written in third person, and I could “hear” him clearly. The mystery surrounding how things with Bradshaw turn out, especially with Melissa involved (which one could see coming from a mile away), did pique my curiosity. Everyone knows that the “import and export” line is international code for lucrative, illegal dealings. (So much so that it looks a bit odd that Moorcraft was barely suspicious. But that’s a nitpick.) And I’m…ah…sure that his isolation in that tourist town — placed on him by his dying wife who made him promise to live in the retirement home they had built together — with all his children not only physically but, it appears, emotionally distant from him, offspring who he does not really understand because he spent most of their youth working hard at the office for early retirement, probably has something to do with the story title. (Heck, it’s pluralised, throw in the constantly wary and private Bradshaw in there, too.) But I know it’s going to be one of those stories I’ll have to work to remember three months from now; and those memories will only contain one or two scenes, title and author out-of-reach.

The choice to include “Icebergs” in this issue at all, much less as the opener, seems especially cruel when one considers that the three other stories are killer. I mean who-is-this-author-when-can-I-get-his-book-ooo-pre-order killer. Graham Joyce twisted my innards a bit, György Dragomán eviscerated them and Jesse Ball, seeing as there was nothing left, settled on befuddling my brain and messing a bit with my emotions. (I also can’t help but compare Morgan to another South African author featured in PR, Damon Galgut, who knew how to lend such regular ol’ kind of stories an urgency and weight that lifted the proceedings above the mundane.)

I’m a sucker for war stories (in short fiction) that engage with more recent conflicts from the Vietnam war onwards. Graham Joyce goes full out in the first person with his British vet narrator, Seamus Todd, who relates his war experience from conflicts in Northern Ireland and the Falklands to the first Gulf war. If you’re familiar with Joyce you know that he’s won a few British fantasy awards so “An Ordinary Soldier of the Queen” does not develop in a perfectly ordinary way. Todd manages to escape a dangerous and potentially fatal situation in the Iraqi desert but a consequence of this is that he acquires a winking, good humoured Arab, his supposed rescuer, as a life long companion that only he can see. He routinely reveals his presence to Seamus by briefly possessing whoever he is talking to at the time, dropping a sly wink or making veiled references that only the two of them would get.

It is no surprise that Todd is soon (honourably) discharged. What is the reader to think of his situation? One could assume that Todd’s genie, as he once called him, is a hallucination induced by post-traumatic stress disorder or whatever sort of psychological stress one could expect to find in an experienced soldier. The Gulf war was also notable for the very long periods during which soldiers were constantly on alert and being trained for anything from chemical attacks to battle with the elite Revolutionary Guards, but in actuality meeting nothing but desert. (Jarhead portrayed the exact same experience in that respect.) But this Iraqi (or maybe not, one doesn’t know for sure) is very real to Seamus, is on his mind constantly and at what point caused him to lose his job and serve jail time. The story ends in this uncomfortable space that’s both farcical and depressing.

György Dragomán story…that one was rough. I won’t spend much time on it except to say that it centres on two young boys, age 11 or 12, who are the goalies for a local football (soccer) team (in a Hungarian town, I assume, although it’s not specified). Their coach is a deranged man who had no business being anywhere near children but so it goes. He used to teach the adult team but he was so hard on them they ganged up on him one night. So he got demoted to the children.

The prose moves steadily along in the voice of the young narrator, in long sentences marked with frequent commas, not many periods, so a paragraph is often one sentence. If you have a younger sibling or spent some time with children it apes very nicely the way their sentences can rush along picking up scenes and feelings if they’re eager to tell you about their day or some memorable event. It’s unfortunate that Dragomán goes for that here since I wanted to dig in my feet and delay all the bad things I knew were going to happen while hoping I’d get some kind of Disney sports movie climax.

Ack! Still writing about it. It’s called “The End of the World”. My sense of time certainly rushed, slowed, then stopped for a terrible scene near the end and it took some time for me to even attempt finishing the rest of my chicken stir fry pita. Ugh. I feel queasy thinking about it even now. (And actually felt a bit sick for part of the evening after I read it, although that was probably due to me overeating some hours after, the logic going that food would sop up my dull mood.) That story and “Jump” from the Fall 2006 issue (which I don’t remember but you can bet I’m going back to reread) are excerpts from his second novel, The White King, in April 2008, the first of his to be published in English, I think.

One would wish for Jesse Ball to provide relief. No sir, nothin’ doing. Instead we get a revenge tale involving mistaken identity, a miscarriage and four old-timey gun duels that end in four murders. It’s written in an odd fashion, or rather to an odd effect. The parts read…detached somehow ie there are strange…gaps that separate the lines of dialogue from the ones about the action and even the characters’ thoughts seem strangely distant from the figures themselves with the exception of Carr. His thoughts seem a little more connected to him and finally coalesce into what I suppose one would call a more realistic, breathing character, whereas before they all are more obviously constructions. Hmm. Did that make any sense.

Well, for one thing the dialogue is shown by dashes rather than the more interconnected apostrophes and commas that can help to make lines flow into each other. But that’s only a part of it. Ball also starts the story’s actions immediately and doesn’t work in any background details, doesn’t flesh things out, just has his characters interact in brief sentences and you have to trust that you won’t be lost. The plot itself is also rather bizarre which highlights the story’s artificiality somewhat…and then you get plunged into what looks like a morality play, or something, but really isn’t.

I was never, ever bored though and it got to me in the end. It’s one ripe for rereading and I never reread lit mag stories so that should be saying something. No idea if it’s an excerpt of his Samedi the Deafness but “The Early Deaths of Lubeck, Brennan, Harp, and Carr” definitely bumped it up my TBR pile.

What’s on the plate

In Books, Caribbean, Fiction, Jamaica, Literature, Poetry, What I'm Reading on February 4, 2008 at 4:47 pm

I started Tennyson’s Idylls of the King. It’s a much noisier reading this second time. I cannot recall how I was led to “Lancelot and Elaine” on the internet but it made my 14 years old heart twist with painful pleasure as I surrendered to the poem’s story of faithful, unrequited love. I printed the entire thing which took up several pages, later blown away through the window during a 5th form class; a punishment for choosing to stay with Elaine in the tower guarding Lancelot’s shield rather than listening to the teacher.

A book was a heavier, safer option so I bought a second hand copy and revelled in quests, fights, “forsooths” and the parade of angry, selfish, petulant women. Except that I didn’t remember them being quite so passive and awful when I was younger. Now, I don’t know how I got through “Gareth and Lynette” without crossing out her name in black ink or some other equally childish gesture. In that company of new insights and associations are scenes from Monty Python’s “The Holy Grail” — black night, eh? I suppose it’s fitting that Tennyson’s version wasn’t all that threatening either — and, funniest of all, one of Dan Green’s criticisms of conservative literary critics who wish to return to a time when every verse had a steady plinkity plonk rhythm and Tennyson lee/sea rhymes. (I liberally restated his position, btw, because I can’t find the specific line. Technorati search sucks.) I did not wish for similar time reversal but, at that time, I certainly felt more comfortable and held more regard for the plinkity plonk ababs.

I can no longer read Idylls innocently. I’m now aware of feminist scholarship on the poems, of the oft-scrutinised confrontation between Merline and Vivien. (I think A.S. Byatt’s Possession led me to it.) Guy Gavriel Kay’s King Arthur and Lancelot appear in my mind in flashes. At other times it’s Clive Owen’s Arthur. Most of all it is Tennyson’s Arthurian women that has created an alienating distance between me and the text. I am wearier, reading askance, mildly trustful of what he’s up to. All these noble youths are besotted with Arthur and his precious ideals while the women (so far) are strangling maternal figures, meek and mild, injured wives, or shrill harpies (who had some reason for protest, mind, but Tennyson works hard to rob Lynette of sympathy).

I miss the comparatively purer of that 14 year old who had no trouble in switching from Elaine’s poignant moments down the river, to a young titled lad on the fence dying to stick someone with a lance. But I am too curious to see how things will end with me and Tennyson now to stop reading. And the fighting scenes still provide thrills.

Besides all that the Idylls of the King struck me as having a bizarre mixture of out-of-control Christian symbolism, particularly in the figure of Arthur as Christ, and prominent fantastical elements out of fairyland, given benevolent and sinister elements depending on which character is talking about it. Perhaps it would help to read the introduction but that’s another thing that hasn’t changed: I can’t read more than a few paragraphs of George Baker’s life-draining foreword.

*****

Andrew Salkey’s Escape to an Autumn Pavement is a very different creature from his first novel, A Quality of Violence, in many respects. He’s moved from the rural Jamaican parish of St. Thomas at the turn of the 20th century to post-WWII London, England. The move is accompanied with a whole change in his prose style, the apocalyptic, prophetic tone of the first novel’s prologue and cosmic significance of the plot development left for the brash, prickly, judgemental, defensive, often short phrases of “Sobert. Johnnie Sobert. Jamaican. R.C. Middle class. Or so I’ve been made to think.”

It’s a little difficult to get through at first because there are two codes to decipher. Johnnie has nicknames for all of the persons he regularly comes into contact with at home or work (none of whom could be called “friends”). The names act as a line of defence between him and them and are often derogatory if humorous. The other code is the swingin’ 60s lingo. All of it so far occurs during club scenes for Johnnie is a water a West Indian night club. The slang seems to be a part of the fake, debauched night scene in which Johnnie feels obligated to play up a snazzy “nig” persona as he fields requests to help sell drugs or find prostitutes for clients, all while carefully counting the tips.

I’ve only got an inkling so far about what has made him bitter, something that goes beyond the usual colonial issues and is tied specifically to his (apparently important) image of himself as middle class, which crumbled when he faced higher living standards in England. It also looks as if he may be gay or bisexual, a detail hinted at in the book’s description but which I glanced over, oblivious. Then I came across a more explicit reference to it online. A Jamaican novel about a gay guy first published in the 60s? I didn’t know such a thing was possible. Our culture is rather homophobic.

Still can’t get over the prose. Salkey wrote it in the first person so one gets a number of incomplete sentences; it reads as if one were in Johnnie’s head, looking out behind his eyes, privy to his every thought, shallow or complex, mean or sympathetic. It’s just so different from A Quality of Violence….Anyway, the libary copy is a first edition, a beautiful hardcover. It doesn’t look faded at all, nor does the design or font choice look dated — it could have been published today. If I could purchase it from the library I would. Hopefully, I can find an equally good copy online.

*****

The Life and Opinions of Tristram Shandy, Gentleman is an anti-novel. It must be. I don’t know what it is. As I read I am simultaneously amused and delightfully frustrated as I feel my brain slowly breaking off into shreds of humming material trying to cling to all the meandering pathways Sterne blithely takes with a mocking wink and beckoning hand before leading you back to a main road whose existence you begin to doubt. Really, what is he up to?

When an edited excerpt from a speech Gabriel Josipovici gave was printed in the Times Literary Supplement there was some online discussion on how fiction and literary criticism carries on as if modernism had never occurred. Well, it seems as astonishing me that Laurence Sterne’s novel, published near the end of the 18th century, could have been followed by novels of the sort Austen, Dickens and Eliot wrote. It thumbs its nose at plot, syntax, language, character…Sterne dutifully places them on the game board only to knock them down again, repeating the process. His characters are flat, I suppose, given one dominant characteristic which is then developed — or such an attempt is made before Sterne yanks out of the present in order to read a Latin document (translated too, thank goodness) on the theological validity of christening babies still in the womb, or on cursing, or the maid barges in, or Shandy has a memory about Uncle Toby or his father that must be explained in order to put current circumstances in proper context — or simply to have a laugh by writing a dutifully flattering book’s dedication which is then offered to the highest bidder reading his wonderful book.

That’s another thing. Although, if I understand aright, Tristram Shandy is the one narrating the story, he feels more like Sterne to me, his personality, his opinions, his own little grudges worked out into the book. Not that I mind this at all, in fact, and I may be biased by the footnotes which are constantly relating certain little items to Sterne’s life. And sometimes Shandy and his concerns about his name and nose come to the fore.

It’s a daft book. You should read it.

An obsessive intellectual project

In Authors, Excerpts, Literature, literary journals on February 2, 2008 at 8:19 pm

INTERVIEWER

For some of your novels, you’ve adopted an intellectual project — usually a poet whose work you read obsessively and integrate into the book. In Rouse Up O Young Men of the New Age! it’s Blake, in Somersault it’s R.S. Thomas, and in An Echo of Heaven it’s Kim Chi Ha. What purpose does this serve?

OE

The ideas in my novels are fused with the ideas of the poets and philosophers I am reading at the time. This method has also enabled me to tell people about the writers I think are important.

When I was in my twenties, my mentor Jazuo Watanabe told me that because I was not going to be a teacher or a professor of literature, I would need to study by myself. I have two cycles: a five-year rotation, which centers on  a specific writer or thinker; and a three-year rotation on a particular theme. I have been doing that since I was twenty-five. I have had more than a dozen of the three-year periods. When I am working on a single theme, I often spend from morning to evening reading. I read everything written by that writer and all of the scholarship on that writer’s work.

If I am reading something in another language, say Eliot’s Four Quartets, I spend the first three months reading a section such as “East Coker” over and over again in English until I have it memorized. Then I find a good translation in Japanese and memorize that. Then I go back and forth between the two — the original in English and the Japanese translation — until I feel I am in a spiral that consists of the English text, the Japanese text, and myself. From there Eliot emerges.

INTERVIEWER

It’s interesting that you include academic scholarship and literary theory in your reading cycles. In America, literary criticism and creative writing are, for the most part, mutually exclusive.

OE

I respect scholars most of all. Although they struggle in a narrow space, they find truly creative ways of reading certain authors. To a novelist who thinks broadly, such insight gives a sharper way of comprehending an author’s work.

When I read scholarship on Blake or Yeats or Dante, I read it all and I pay attention to the accumulation of differences between scholars. That’s where I learn the most. Every few years a new scholar puts out a book on Dante, and each scholar has his or her own approach or method. I follow each scholar and study that way for a year. Then I follow another scholar for about a year, and so on.

INTERVIEWER

How do you choose whom to study?

OE

Sometimes it’s a natural consequence of what I have been reading. For instance, Blake led me to Yeats, which led me to Dane. Other times it’s pure coincidence. I was on a promotional tour in Great Britain, and I stopped in Wales. I was there for three days and I ran out of books to read. I went to a local bookstore and asked the person working there to recommend some books in English. He suggested a collection by a poet who was from the area but warned that the book wasn’t selling very well. The poet was R.S. Thomas, and I bought everything they had. As I read him, I realized that he was the most important poet I could be reading at that point in my life. I felt that he had a lot in common with Walter Benjamin, although they seem very different. Both are concerned with the threshold between the secular and the mystical. And then I begin to think of myself as being in a triangular relationship with Thomas and Benjamin.

INTERVIEWER

It sounds like when you travel you spend most of your time in your hotel room reading.

OE

Yes, that’s right. I do some sightseeing, but I have no interest in good food. I like drinking, but I don’t like going to bars because I get in fights.

From “The Art of Fiction” interview no. 195 with Oe Kenzaburo, The Paris Review, Winter 2007

Shut the borders!

In Books, Fiction, Literature on January 31, 2008 at 10:19 pm

Sometimes I find my brain annoying. First it went off on an Italian tangent which made me read an Albert Moravia novel when I hadn’t intended to try him for at least a few years, and now I’ve stumbled into a little nest of information about Tim Parks. First he popped up as a panelist in that Paris Review 2000 Como Conversazione: On Translation roundtable and then he popped in one or two of the litjournals I usually read. Then, what do you know, I raise my head from a water fountain in the library and my eyes land on his name gracing a few book spines.

To my astonishment one was called Understanding Tim Parks. Goodness! I thought to myself. His writing is as important as all that that we need a tour guide. That’s interesting. I picked up two of his novels — Home Thoughts and Europa which was shortlisted for a Booker Prize — and the guide book and settled down to see what’s what.

Apparently the guide book is one in a series called Understanding Contemporary British literature, aimed at students and “good nonacademic readers”. Not the bad ones, eh? It’s odd, you’d think they’d need it more than the good ones but who am I to bicker. I was told that “Uninitiated readers encounter difficulty in approaching works that depart from traditional forms and techniques of prose and poetry.” Hmmm. All right, but what has that to do with contemporary literature? I could be wrong but…well, let’s have a look at the other authors in the series. Kingsley Amis, Alan Bennett, Graham Greene, Ian McEwan, Kazuo Ishiguro…yes, their writing is definitely known for departing from traditional prose in such a manner (or at all?) as to befuddle the uninitiated. They do have Pinter who strikes me as a justifiable inclusion not least because one is not used to reading scripts in general.

La! Time to browse chapter one. First sentence: “Tim Parks is a writer”. Yes. Yes, he is. From a bit more skimming it’s not bad so much as rather dull — I deliberately stopped after a few skims in case the book dissuaded me from taking a look at Parks’ fiction.

One result in a google search turned up an interview Parks had with 3:00 AM magazine. Parks espoused some intriguing points of view that I’d like you to take a look at since I know that many of you have probably read Gabriel García Márquez and/or José Saramago and are in a better position to assess his remarks. (I’ve left out the bold formatting from the original interview because I found it annoying.)

3:00 AM: Do you have any other examples of today’s false literature?

Tim Parks: Almost all of it. In different proportions. A great deal of what passes for literature is basically this kind of self-congratulation that we’re interested in, declaring injustice and changing all that. Look at the Nobel Prize for Saramango. Saramango is a writer of absolutely no importance. Maybe his book Blindness was a good book. The rest is socialism and magic realism.

Magical realism is a fascinating development in this department, because if you look at the magical realists, without exception, they are disappointed socialists. You’ve engaged in the belief that the world can be improved, and of course it can, to a certain extent, you can always improve things a bit, and then they’re disappointed, right. You don’t want to switch to a right-wing position and so what you do is move into this world where the creative and imaginative powers of the people are celebrated in this rather bizarre way and where your plot can work out more positively because you’re no longer obeying the dictates of realism, and realism is now presented as some kind of monster that prevents the world from being the way it should be.

It is interesting that almost all the magical realists celebrate the fact that the mind and the imagination are more than reality and claim to be unorthodox in this regard, but if you look at the politics of magical realism, they’re all totally orthodox left-wing politics. Marquez, Saramango, the whole lot of them, it’s all left-wing politics. I’ve got no argument with left-wing politics, but it’s fascinating that things that pretend to be unorthodox are in fact totally orthodox. It’s a provocative stance, but that’s how I feel about it: I can’t read magical realists, they’re utterly boring.