November 29th, 2011
my kind of verbal humour
I’m reading Alan Bennett’s The Uncommon Reader as a way of decompressing after the push for class last night. I’ll have to start again on that poem/assignment, but not until tomorrow. Today is for pleasure reading. Hence The Uncommon Reader. I don’t need to tell you what the book is about because if you don’t know you can click on the amazon link and read the product description.
What I want to do is share with you part of a paragraph from the book.
To begin with, it’s true, she read with trepidation and some unease. The sheer endlessness of books outfaced her and she had no idea how to go on; there was no system to her reading, with one book leading to another, and often she had two or three on the go at the same time. The next stage had been when she started to make notes, after which she always read with a pencil in hand, not summarising what she read but simply transcribing passages that struck her. It was only after a year or so of reading and making notes that she tentatively ventured on the occasional thought of her own.
Howl. The Queen with a thought of her own. Goodness, I hope Elizabeth had the pleasure of reading Bennett’s book.
Also, glad to see I have so many things in common with Her Highness, although it took me considerably more than a year after beginning to read to have a thought at all, let alone one that could safely be described as “my own”.
July 10th, 2011
lean and beautiful story
I just finished The Blue Fox. It’s an Icelandic story about a priest, a naturalist and a woman with Down’s syndrome that takes place primarily in 1883. It’s quick read because it’s only 112 pages and many of the pages have very little text. In fact visually the text is rather like the snow crocus. There’s a brilliant patch of linguistic shape and colour surrounded by a snowy field of paper. The set up suits.
The author, Sjón, is a poet and a story teller. Not much is available in English, but his 2008 book, The Marvels of Twilight, is being released next month as From the Mouth of the Whale. I will be purchasing it. I would love to read his poetry but there appears to be only one book translated into English and that (so far) appears to be very hard to find. It’s called Night of the Lemon and was published back in 1993. I’ll have to start a serious search. If his poetry is anything like his prose in The Blue Fox, I am going to love it.
Here are two bits from The Blue Fox.
Four years later Reverend Jakob died, greatly regretted by his flock; he was remembered as ugly and tedious, but good with children.
His successor was Reverend Baldur Skuggason, who introduced a new era in church manners to the Dale. Men sat quietly on the benches, holding their tongues while the parson preached the sermon, having learnt how he dealt with rowdies: he summoned them to meet him after the service, took them round the back of the church and beat the living daylights out of them. The women, meanwhile, turned holy from the first day and behaved as if they had never taken part in the teasing ‘the reverend with the pupil’. They said it served the louts to whom they were married or betrothed right, they should have been thrashed long ago; for the new parson was a childess widower.
- and the last -
The rim of daylight was fading.
In the halls of heaven it was now dark enough for the Aurora Borealis sisters to begin their lively dance of the veils. With an enchanting play of colours they flitted light and quick about the great stage of the heavens, in fluttering golden dresses, their tumbling pearl necklaces scattering here and there in their wild caperings. This spectacle is at its brightest shortly after sunset.
Then the curtain falls; night takes over.
Something huh.
June 15th, 2011
the bed time story for exasperated parents
The very best bedtime story I’ve ever heard.
via James (thanks, that was hilarious)
June 9th, 2011
the question of who one is
Over at Lilian’s place she mentioned that she might nominate Annie Proulx as one her heroes. That got me thinking, since I adored Proulx’s book Close Range. To make a longish story something more net-friendly, what I did was starting reading and came upon this rather telling interview.
The bit that really caught my attention was this:
I do feel that I have a fair idea of what we are writing about. We’re still in the grip of the interior novel — the first-person remembrance of a childhood in a difficult or coming-of-age situation — and the family novel. It will probably be many years before we’re done with them.
My first reaction was to think, so what other kinds of novels does she envision when she thinks of a post-interior/family story world?
And as I moved about my morning, thinking about it, it became clear that I see this fixation on the interior/family novel as saying something about the set of philosophical assumptions we make about what it means to be who one is. That is, those assumptions (the idea of what the self is, for example – or even that “a” self exists) come into play when one asks a question like “who am I”. The assumptions form the hills and valleys of our lives, and our familial conventions pave the roads over which we traverse the terrain. (Gives a whole new, and less exalted, meaning to the concept of being a maverick who takes the “road less traveled.” So what. It is still a road paved by convention on a terrain created out of the group’s sub-conscious and unquestioned assumptions.)
Of course we are obsessed by the idea that one explores one’s self through one’s interior. What other choice is there, one might ask. That is what we have been taught. We are all, in that sense, phenomenologists.
As an alternative, what if we had been trained through the assumptions inherent in geomancy? Then one would explore the question of who one is by exploring the land over which one actually moves and not the interior imaginative land created under the conditions of an operative spatial conceptual metaphor. And that got me thinking about Henry Real Bird’s poetry – he is what I would call a geomancer.
Another thing I’d like to know: how does a geomancer effectively communicate with a phenomenologist?
May 8th, 2011
art, short stories, and identity
I’m just reading The First Person and Other Stories by Ali Smith. I heard about it over at Lilian’s blog and since I enjoy condensed forms of narrative I thought I’d give it a go.
I picked it up yesterday and went to sit in the sunshine left over after the skies let go everything else – rain, hail, even an occasional flake. I got a hot chocolate and comfortable in the moderately dry seat, I read the first story.
To say I was I was impressed is so silly; it is such a namby-pamby word it makes me mad just looking at it. I mean “impressed”? Really? Can’t you come up with something that matches how you actually felt?
Smith’s first story is about a friend of hers named Kasia. They love each other, the way women can over decades, over both triumphs and horrors, over the many mountains there are to creating an identity that is both a woman’s and a person’s. Kasia has cancer. The narrator has the terror that comes with potential loss; she has a shared voice which she might lose. What Smith does with that is like wormwood tea after it has been filtered through a honeycomb.
And Smith is deeply literate; history, mythology, life peer through the lines and sometimes jump right out and say “BOO”. That very last set of lines!—I don’t get that feeling very often from fiction. I get it a good deal from life, but not from fiction. I think that might be a clue to how good Smith is at her art.
Of course the first story is not just about Kasia. It’s also about the short story, and about what it means to have a point of view, specifically a gendered one, and communication, the need to speak, and to be spoken to. Someone could see it as a meta-comment of Smith’s own art form. Someone could. I can. But it is also….
That’s the point I think, the “also…”.
And Smith’s got a wonderful sense of humor. Yes. Impressed.
March 29th, 2011
stories told far, far from the playing field
I was reading over at Litopia and someone had posted this article about Philip K Dick. The site itself – Cracked.com – is dedicated to humor, so the marriage between the PKD subject matter and the presentation made for a lively piece.
Sure the dude was nuts. And yes his odd experiences made for really interesting subject matter and scenes in his book, but did they make for the stellar quality of the books themselves? No, I don’t think so.
The fact that PKD told stories not even on the standard narrative playing field is great but unless we can play, they wouldn’t have become popular. So as far out as they are, they are still here. And way, way out there. At the same time.
What makes such a thing possible?
Apart from the problem of craft (aka the hard work of organizing language), there is the struggle PKD went through to sort fantasy (whether drug induced or by paranoid schizophrenia) from what was really going on. It’s this struggle — that he didn’t blindly accept the visions as literal truth — that provided the literary material for his craft to shape. What makes PKD books such good stories is not only the fact that there is a struggle with reality, but that one is never allowed to accept any one perceived reality at face value. No matter how much one wants to.
December 13th, 2010
valuing reason and narrative equally
Following up with Lilian’s value postings, I have also thought more about what it is I value and why. I do find it stimulating because along with my reading, such thinking has triggered a cascade of important and revealing dreams. This might not be a comfortable thing, because some are best classified as nightmares, but it is a healing and helpful thing. So thank you Lilian and litlove for getting this started.
In the first values-post I started with autonomy and I stick with that because, as someone who lives marginally, I know what domination feels like and looks like and I don’t like it. It is all too human of course, the desire to dominate, and as such needs to be recognized not as a “side effect” but as just one of the things it means to be human. We have a lot of bits and bobs that make us up. Some of them are for public use, some are best done alone and in the quiet. As we mature we learn what those things are and find ways to control our bodily functions as well as our mental ones to conform to the public standards and for the public good. We think about those things over time and some of them move from private-only to public display (such as men’s and women’s naked knees) and some stay rigorously private-only (such as defecation). Autonomy is one of those values that maintains its value over time. Everyone, pretty much, wants it. The question is what to do with it if you are lucky enough to have got you some.
This leads me to my second value. I think I have to say this feels like the ability to think, to reason, to seek verifiable narrative to explain how things happen. Despite the fact that my last posting on values had loyalty and social compassion prior to reason, I now think that the ability to reason and to think critically is fundamental to the capacity for social compassion that isn’t hiding some conversion agenda. For example, there have been some historical situations in which the religieux of the area had the monopoly on food and refused it to the starving if they wouldn’t first accept indoctrination into the faith. Not really a hidden agenda but I’m sure you can think of others. I have to say I despise this kind of thing and my habit of thinking is what got me there.
Thinking is what I do with my freedom. What I’ve discovered about the world through the (definitely arduous) process of thinking things through has led me to the place where I am and to the kinds of things I do. For example, thinking about what it means to be human has led me to my valuing of the practical responsibilities that social compassion dictates. One must realize, for example, that no matter how much a culture thinks of itself as the pinnacle of human development, cultures, groups, beliefs, nations rise and fall. What we are today, what we believe, espouse, are certain of and value, will, in time, seem archaic and, frankly, silly. What has enduring value is the thing that enables the species to thrive and this, in all cases, requires the moderation of desire and its mandible belief.
The problem is that there are so many competing stories about what it means to be human that one has to decide upon some system for evaluating the various narratives. This is where critical thinking becomes central. I mean one can make a judgment based on “this is what I was always told to believe” and many people do that and live completely comfortably with the results but I’m afraid I can’t do that. The reason for that is that these kinds of systems are often based on an “us” and “them” categorization of the universe and if you happen to be amongst the “them” group and the “us” group is in power, well, life can be hard and one’s personal good (or bad) luck seems not a very coherent way to decide on a human value .
These categorizations are natural of course, just as the desire to dominate is completely normal. But they are things that have to be moderated in society to enable the “them” a place with “us” at the table, so to speak. The only way to do this is to recognize that the “us” and “them” categorizations are a narrative and not really part of the way the world is. “Us” and “them” are a part of the way the human mind structures experience, and not representative of the world itself except in so far as the human being is part of (and a result of) the world. Categorization is a mental construction and it can be recognized as such. It can also be moderated. Critical thinking is the way to begin.
The real joy in this is that once narratives are recognized as distinct from what actually is true about the world, it makes narratives much more fun. No longer do we need to fight and die for one or another of them, but we can simply agree to play in the world of each others’ stories and not limit ourselves from the necessary analytical investigation that change, adaption and learning requires. It’s not that I think we can see outside narrative. Once we acquire language, I don’t think we can really. But what we can do, that is in the practical world just as good, is replay the facts of the case inside different story rubrics. This allow us to remember that all our stories have some truth value but none of them is to be mistaken for the truth itself. So essentially, I am saying we have to recognize narrative as equally of value with the capacity for reason, and this is largely the case because we can’t seem to live without narrative (and it is truly delightful) and we can’t seem to live decently with others without the application of reason to those same narratives.)
That ability, the capacity to think critically about our narratives, is central to living a valuable, moral and ethical life in the presence and midst of others.
October 1st, 2010
Pictures and fairy tales
Ellen Handler Spitz has a review at The Book featuring The Grimm Reader: The Classic Tales of the Brothers Grimm (trans Maria Tatar). I haven’t seen the Tatar book yet, although it is on order, but something in Spitz’s review caught my attention. The normal discussion about the needs of children and violence, sex, incest and other normal fairy tale content is there but there is another point to the review.
The Grimm Reader also stimulates interpretation and improvisation by eschewing illustrations. In so doing, it provokes serious reflection on the function of pictures in children’s books. The dearth in this text makes us weigh their role as enhancers or detractors. Arguments against them of course claim that they tend to fix a particular visualization and tamp down what should be left loose and free. After being exposed, say, to Gustave Doré’s haunting engravings of Little Red Riding Hood, it would be hard to imagine those scenes any other way. Here, by contrast, words are given license to perform their sorcery unaided. Pages are decorated only occasionally with delicate borders, medallions, or illuminated letters. This pleases me immensely: in a culture determined to flood itself with garish, sensational imagery to the detriment of the unaided word, this book reminds us that, as Tatar herself has written, the words of children’s stories are magic wands in and of themselves.
The first thing that provoked thought was a memory from my own time as a child-owner of a copy of Grimm’s. Along with Van Nostrand’s Scientific Encyclopedia, Grimm was my favourite. Given a copy by my grandmother when I was starting to read past the Seuss stage, I had to struggle at first with the words. The book had a black leather cover, which I loved to glide my fingers over, gilt edging and colour plates. I loved it. Some stories were read obsessively and some totally ignored, but I remember the pictures. I looked at all of those over and over and I remember wishing that instead of the people – the princess with the magic talking horse for example, I wanted to see pictures of the squirrels that lived in the forest. I wanted to see the birds, the little lakes where the ducks went, the song birds I just knew were hiding behind the garden walls. I wanted pictures of the badgers and crows. (It never occurred to me that some of them might not live there although it did occur to me that there might be animals there I didn’t know and it made me crazy that I couldn’t see them in the black bound book.)
I know that as adults readers tend to focus on people. Many people (in text and lecture) have made the point that readers read to get to know other people (whether made up or not), but that was not my experience of being a child. I wanted to know animals, and to some extent, plants. I didn’t have much interest in people. Perhaps that was fear, or just childlike inability to yet handle the complexity and apparent cruelty of big people, but whatever the reason, what I wanted was world-life not human-life.
Can you imagine? Children’s stories that come with the world embedded: what a delight that would be. You read a story about a Romanian witch and there are the Romanian flowers, Romanian mammals, Romanian trees, and, of course, Romanian witches’ houses. It would teach children something many of us already suspected, that the specifics of the material world matter to the story, to the reasons why someone would do the things they do.
This observation leads me to the last three sentences quoted above. The idea that words are magic and that they are somehow at odds with images – or at least threatened by the overwhelming power of image. I’m not sure I would speak to the relationship between text and image in that way. It seems more that they work together to create a space in which identity can frolic. When images are of people, especially well drafted images, our natural empathy is accessed. Our ability to read emotion in human faces (whether line drawing or sight-perceived) and feel the emotion being broadcast is not one we can turn off. We connect less with animals and plants except when their forms appear to mimic human attributes (Bambi’s big eyes, for example) so they are less emotional, less powerfully coercive of our behaviours and desires.
Text, as Mitchell points out, is illustrative; this “word” is an image as well as being a bit of text. Like pictures of world-life, text does not so easily connect with our emotions as do pictures of human faces and bodies. This allows us to have the illusion that text can be transparent to meaning. In one of his chapters Mitchell talks about the Romantics and their idea – best encapsulated by the symbols of mirror and lamp (thanks Abrams) – that imagination is something that reaches past the materially visual, which is a poor, not to mention primitive, substitute for the transcendent active imagination. While I love Keats and Wordsworth, I have to say that their assumptions about the world have always irritated me. Anyway, more of this later probably. I just find it interesting that this old battle between image and text shows up continually, like old WWII propaganda remade for a different kind of war. The thing is that it wasn’t true then, and, of course, still isn’t, but it still keeps going. Is that the power of image or text do you think?
Just a final point about Spitz’s delight in the minimal drawings: it may be that less evocative images allow a better balance between text and image – a better power relationship. When I see – say – a poem that speaks to a sunflower’s existence and it is illuminated by drawings of chickadees eating the seeds, even if that is not the substance of the poem, it supports the world the text creates. The image and the text are co-inspiriters. If, instead, it were a picture of Adonis with a sunflower as a breechcloth (or for that matter Venus in similar attire), the text is likely to suffer in comparison. I would be provided an experience in either case, but it would be (in the case of a human figure illustrated) one where inequity would be paramount.
May 14th, 2010
Dorion Woman and her interpreters
The last two days in the archives have furnished me with several treasures. One of them is a book published in 1930 called Red Heroines of the Northwest by Byron Defenbach. The second of three parts is dedicated to “The Dorion Woman.” Otherwise known as Marie Dorion, she was a 25 year old woman that traveled with 2 children from Oklahoma to Missouri to northern Wyoming all the way to the Pacific. Along the way she had another child – he died 2 days into his life. Madame Dorion ended up near Salem Oregon where she died in 1850 at the age of about 67.
If you read about this woman on the net and in the texts produced about her, what you get is often the bones of the Astoria trek to the mouth of the Columbia, and a lot about her apparently abusive husband, and the stuff about her bearing her third son on the trail, but mostly what you get is the author’s view of what all this means. “Marie” makes a perfect canvas for our views about women and the qualities we assign them because so little is known about who she, in fact, was. I mean we don’t even know her actual name. She is called Dorion Woman because her husband’s paternal name was “Dorion” and she was his woman.
We know this, at least in part, because of Washington Irving and his “Tragical Story Told by the Squaw of Pierre Dorion.” Much emphasis is given in Irving’s account to her “presence of mind and force of character” and certainly her survival seems, from the story, due in part to her attention to her household duties. This is why, for example, she had all the supplies that she would need in the near future if she and her children were to survive the winter. The story she tells, and that Irving would relay, about the fate of the Astoria party is what made her memorable to the public but no one, it seems, thought to ask her name.
Time tells much about women’s interpreters. Irving published his story in 1836. Defenbach published his in 1929 0r 30. Both accounts pay attention to Pierre Dorion, Irving calling him the “hybrid interpreter” as a way of describing his bi-racial heritage. Irving doesn’t mention the drunkenness as far as I know. There is a section when he is describing the French boatmen and how they lift their flagging spirits – by song, nary a drop of spirit is mentioned. But at that time alcohol might have been seen as a problem with respect to trading with Indians (their abode being the destination of the boatmen, trade goods being the cargo) and granted as a necessity to those water-haulers whose spirits needed lifting, but no one had come up with the idea of denying it to civilized white folk yet.
But by Defenbach’s time prohibition and its ideas had taken its toll on the interpretive mind of writers. In his story much attention is paid to Pierre Dorion’s use of alcohol. However, there is still a touch of admiration: “When sober,” Defenbach says “the stalwart young half-breed was a fellow of recognized ability as a trapper and trader. He had worked for Choteau and other Americans who were beginning to resist the monopoly of the fur trade by the Hudson’s Bay and other British concerns.” A drunk, yes, but he could hunt, trap, shoot and, on top of that, was on the right side politically. But when it comes to Marie…
(Pierre’s) proved himself faithful and serviceable. His occupation called for almost constant travel up and down the Big River, and in these journeyings he usually dragged the squaw with him. Nor was this his only encumbrance. The couple’s first son, the sturdy Baptiste, was born in 1806, and two or thee years later another lad arrived at the tepee. This latter was a frailer type of boy, with snake-like eyes and a mouth that extended from ear to ear; they named him “Paul.”
To these two children the Woman clung with the savage devotion of a mother-wolf, bringing them up after the Indian fashion. There was no discipline, the few instructions given having to do only with the children’s physical requirements. The only virtues inculcated were those of fortitude and courage, and even these traits were warped into ferocity and thirst for blood. Such ideals as those of morality, gratitude, truthfulness, unselfishness and honesty were not sought to be conveyed by the Woman to her children, primarily because she had no such ideals herself or any conception of them. The first precepts she instilled into those young hearts were those of cruelty, murder, and rapine.
Jeez.
Shortly after this little exploration of the Woman’s character and moral rectitude (compare Irving’s and Defenbach’s ideas about the ideal woman), he talks about Pierre’s accidental fall into the trip to the Pacific, which he would not survive but his wife and children would. This fall, the story leads us to believe, came because of alcohol.
The processes of evolution have never produced anything more averse to solitude than is whiskey, even a quart of it…Pierre found himself surrounded by, or perhaps one might better say surrounding, a whole flock of quarts. He passed through alternating stages of hilarity, amiability, deep melancholy, and extreme irritability. Several days and nights passed in the enjoyment or suffering of these various emotions.
(Aside: the use of the word “evolution” adds a nice little sparkle from the conceptual bounty that is Social Darwinism – also something alive and well during Defenbach’s time. I wonder if he was a eugenicist?)
What follows is a rendition of what Defenbach thinks happened when a drunk, angry and now without the salary due him by the Spaniard, Manuel Lisa, and includes an almost jovial boxing match between husband and wife. The outcome is that Pierre Dorion finds himself working for Lisa and having to cart his wife and two sons along for the ride.
Ultimately, Defenbach (nor Irving for that matter) doesn’t say much about Marie Dorion but what he inadvertently says about how he sees the world is enormous. Apart from the idea of what women are, there is the purchase place for blame. It’s not surprising that in the late 1920s when Defenbach was probably writing this text, that alcohol got much of it. Poor old Pierre, a noble sort with his rustic trade, but reduced to dragging his baggage around, getting hobbled by a treacherous Spaniard, a snake-eyed son and by that morally bankrupt Woman. Think what he could have made of himself if wasn’t for that demon rum!
meh
Would that there was someone who would haunt Oregon’s historical archives for a more accurate view of the woman. I haven’t had time for that yet, so perhaps it already exists. I’ll have to check into it.
January 5th, 2010
Writing war
I read The Guernsey Literary and Potato Peel Pie Society recently. I devoured it, which as lovely as it is, didn’t take very long. I felt comforted by the book, which is odd since it is about war and the effects it has on an occupied people. I’ve been thinking about it since and wanted just to give you some idea of how I’m thinking about it, since I haven’t come to any conclusions about this.
Read the rest of this entry »

