Eshkol Nevo’s Homesick

Homesick So pleased to see this interview Michael Orthofer of The Complete Review did with Eshkol Nevo for World Literature in Translation (link via Three Percent). I read Homesick after hearing Nevo read at Shakespeare & Company when he was in town for the Salon du Livre (Israel was the country of honor in 2008, read my report on it here and here) and was very moved by it. 

It takes place in and around a house in a town in Israel that is equidistant between Tel Aviv and Jerusalem; there are about 5 or 6 different narrators, including a young Israeli couple who rent a flat in the house from an older Israeli couple, who also live in the house; a Palestinian construction worker who used to live in the house, and an Israeli student backpacking in South America, writing letters home to his best friend.  Nevo weaves with insight and sensitivity between the public and the private, the political and the personal, between spaces and between lovers.

It's now available in the US from Dalkey Archive, and if I could buy you all a copy I would.

Working

Yesterday afternoon, out of curiosity and disbelief, I stopped by Bryant Park to witness James Wood play the bongos with John Jeremiah Sullivan's band Fayaway. It was a sight to see! But no one else in the audience seemed to find it as incongruous as I did. Wood acquitted himself well, with much concentration and the occasional tympanic flourish. He has quite the ear for a triplet, something you can't say about just anyone, which made me appreciate his criticism all the more. [Update: via Mark Sarvas, I learn that Wood suffered a tambourine-inflicted wound during one song. Let it be said that the injury did not in any perceptible way affect his performance.]

After the set, Peter Terzian took the mic and led a panel of writers (Joshua Ferris, Stacey D'Erasmo, Clifford Chase, Asali Solomon) in a set of readings from the new collection he's edited, Heavy Rotation– in which these and other writers (Wood, Sullivan, Benjamin Kunkel, Kate Christensen, etc.) discuss the albums which had the greatest formational impact on their lives.  The collection sounds great– you can read more about it here.  Caleb Crain has some photos up on his blog, here.  (I did see some people filming in the front row– I wonder if there's video available anywhere?)

Speaking of Caleb Crain, I came across his face-off with Alain de Botton today. Though I'm usually a fan of ADB (his Proust book and his architecture book to be more precise), this one– on the pleasures and sorrows of work– sounds deadly boring. In case you missed it, here's what happened: Crain reviewed ADB in the New York Times. ADB freaked out on Crain's blog, writing “I will hate you till the day I die and wish you nothing but ill will
in every career move you make. I will be watching with interest and
schadenfreude." People took note and wondered how ADB could make such a blunder in the same week as Alice Hoffman.  (Ed Champion did an interview with ADB in which he claims to have been unaware of L'Affaire Hoffman.) Then, ADB revealed that he intended his comments to be for Crain's eyes only, which begs the question of why he would leave a private message on a website, where– I know this is tough to comprehend but stay with me– other people can see it.

This hullabaloo over Alain de Botton’s comments is more interesting than the book, which seems to will itself to be a lyrical-philosophical-britannical updating of Studs Terkel. If you want to read about work, I recommend instead Joshua Ferris’s Then We Came To the End, which I picked up yesterday after hearing him read at Bryant Park. It’s so good–  a pitch perfect of the way we (i.e. contemporary, everyday, Joe Schmoe Americans) tell stories, tell jokes, and misunderstand each other.  Ferris captures the sense of quiet desperation in the work environment of a group of people working for a Chicago advertising firm– but he doesn’t condescend or push the pathos envelope.  He achieves this through the use of a choral narrator, a loose narrative structure, and a relentless determination to find the humor in absolutely everything, which is occasionally cruel, until you realize they’re laughing for their lives.

And now, if you'll excuse me, I have to get back to work.

Happy Bloomsday!

JoyceUlysses2  On June 16, 1904, a fictional character called Leopold Bloom– a Jewish ad man– walked around Dublin, saw some friends, went to a funeral, went to a brothel, and went home.  This day (which was also, in real life, the day Joyce met his wife, Nora Barnacle) was immortalized by Bloom's creator, James Joyce, in a novel called Ulysses, published by Sylvia Beach at Shakespeare & Co in Paris in 1922.*  And ever since, every June 16th, we celebrate Bloomsday. Throngs of Joyce fans head to Dublin to recreate Bloom's day (I went for the centennial in 2004), and Irish people who've never even read the book** hold forth to tourists about the great James Joyce.

This section is taken from the third chapter, Proteus, and this is Stephen Dedalus thinktalking.

Ineluctable modality of the visible: at least that if no more, thought
through my eyes. Signatures of all things I am here to read, seaspawn
and seawrack, the nearing tide, that rusty boot. Snotgreen, bluesilver,
rust: coloured signs. Limits of the diaphane. But he adds: in bodies.
Then he was aware of them bodies before of them coloured. How? By
knocking his sconce against them, sure. Go easy. Bald he was and a
millionaire, maestro di colour che sanno. Limit of the diaphane in. Why
in? Diaphane, adiaphane. If you can put your five fingers through it,
it's a gate, if not a door. Shut your eyes and see.
Stephen closed
his eyes to hear his boots crush crackling wrack and shells. You are
walking through it howsomever. I am, a stride at a time. A very short
space of time through very short times of space. Five, six: the
nacheinander. Exactly: and that is the ineluctable modality of the
audible. Open your eyes. No. Jesus! If I fell over a cliff that beetles
o'er his base, fell through the nebeneinander ineluctably. I am getting
on nicely in the dark. My ash sword hangs at my side. Tap with it: they
do. My two feet in his boots are at the end of his legs, nebeneinander.
Sounds solid: made by the mallet of Los Demiurgos. Am I walking into
eternity along Sandymount strand? Crush, crack, crick crick. Wild sea
money. Dominic Deasy kens them 'a.
Won't you come to Sandymount,
Madeline the mare?
Rhythm begins, you see. I hear. A catalectic tetrameter of iambs march ing. No, agallop: deline the mare.
Open
your eyes now. I will. One moment. Has all vanished since? If I open
and am for ever in the black adiaphane. Basta! I will see if I can see.
See now. There all the time without you: and ever shall be, world without end.
They
came down the steps from Leahey's terrace prudently, Frauenzimmer: and
down the shelving shore flabbily their splayed feet sinking in the
silted sand. Like me, like Algy, coming down to our mighty mother.
Number one swung lourdily her midwife's bag, the others gamp poked in
the beach. From liberties, out for the day. Mrs Florence MacCabe,
relict of the late Patk MacCabe, deeply lamented, of Bride Street. One
of her sisterhood lugged me squealing into life. Creation from nothing.
What has she in the bag? A misbirth with a trailing navelcord, hushed
in ruddy wool. The cords of all link back, strandentwining cable of all
flesh. That is why mystic monks. Will you be as gods? Gaze into your
omphalos. Hello. Kinch here. Put me on to Edenville. Aleph, alpha:
nought, nought, one.
Spouse and helpmate of Adam Kadmon: Heva, naked
Eve. She had no navel. Gaze. Belly without blemish, bulging big, a
buckler of taut vellum, no, whiteheaped corn, orient and immortal,
standing from everlasting to everlasting. Womb of sin.
Wombed in sin darkness I was too, made not begotten.

*It seems very appropriate therefore that I have a meeting with Sylvia Whitman at Shakespeare & Co this afternoon!

**To be fair, I didn't finish it either

Pachinko

High point of my time in Tokyo: tonight I'm having dinner with the wonderful, the fabulous, the talented, Min Jin Lee. I think it was Lauren Cerand who called Min Jin a unicorn.  (Or maybe it was Min Jin who called Lauren a unicorn.  In any case, they're both rare breeds and I feel lucky to know them.) Min Jin is the author of the novel Free Food for Millionaires, and her second novel, Pachinko, is about ethnic Koreans living in Tokyo.  It goes a little something like this:

Two years after the divorce, when Hana was eleven, she'd asked if they could
talk to each other like peers, and Etsuko had agreed because she was grateful
that her daughter continued to talk to her at all. Also, she agreed because
when she'd been a girl she had lied to her mother and father about everything.
But Etsuko found that being detached as a mother had its own burdens. She wasn't
allowed to ask any prying questions, and if she sounded too concerned (something
Hana hated), her daughter hung up the phone and didn't call for weeks.

Etsuko had many regrets about her life in Nagano, but what she was most sorry
about was what her reputation had done to her children. Her grown sons still
refused to talk to her unless it was absolutely necessary. And she had only
worsened things by continuing to see Moses Choi, an ethnic Korean who owned
pachinko parlors. Her sister Mari and her mother urged her to end it; they believed
that his pinball business, however lucrative, was not respectable. But she couldn't.
He had been a good friend to her; he had changed her life. And he was the only
man she had never cheated on-something Etsuko had never believed could be possible
for herself.

The spring before her thirty-sixth birthday, when she was still married and
living in Nagano, Etsuko had seduced another one of her high school boyfriends.
She had been having a series of affairs for almost three years with various
men from her adolescence. What amazed her was how difficult it was the first
time but how effortless it was to have all the others that followed. Married
men wanted invitations from married women. It was no trouble to phone a man
she had slept with twenty years ago and invite him to her house for lunch when
her children were at school.

That spring, she began sleeping with an old boyfriend from her freshman year
in high school. He'd grown up into a handsome, married playboy who still had
the tendency to talk too much. One afternoon in her tiny Nagano living room,
as the playboy was getting dressed to return to his office, he bemoaned the
fact that she wouldn't leave her dull husband, who preferred the company of
his work colleagues to hers. He laid his head between her small breasts and
said, "But I can leave her. Tell me to do it." To this, she said nothing.
Etsuko had no intention of leaving Nori and the children. Her complaint about
her husband was not that he was boring or that he wasn't home enough. Nori was
not a bad person. It was just that she didn't feel like she knew him in any
clear sense after nineteen years of marriage, and she doubted that she ever
would. Her husband didn't seem to need her except to be a wife in name and a
mother to his children. For Nori, this was enough.

I can't wait to read the rest of it.  Read the full excerpt here

Q&A with Anne Marsella

Marsella
Native Californian Anne Marsella's debut novel Remedy (Portobello Books) is set in a Pariscape peopled by odd, intriguing, and enthusiastic characters. The resulting novel is more than the sum of its eccentricities: it is a joyous romp, and an endearing read.

At the center of this very funny and highly original work is a young lady called Remedy O'Riley de Valdez, originally of Florida, USA and lately of Paris, France.  The chapters mirror the Calendar of Saints, and Remedy, a "devout, if unorthodox" Catholic, lets the saint-of-the-day's hagiography infuse her esprit du jour.  Remedy spends her weekdays as an assistant at a fashion website, and her
weekends learning to belly dance; nights she entertains (acrobats and
cowboys, mostly) and dreams of meeting her "man o' the moon," "one with
some free time but not too much. Preferable one who dances the cha-cha
and who can recite Emily Dickinson's poems on command."

Marsella was kind enough to answer some questions for us about life in Paris, the role of Catholicism in the novel, her love of language, and writing in general.

1. Many of the stories in your collection, The Lost and Found, as well as your first novel, Remedy, have been set in Paris. What is it about Paris
that has made it your setting of choice? Will you continue to set your
stories here?

Yes, most of my writing thus
far has been set in Paris.  Clearly it is a city that has captured
me – I’ve been here for twenty years! – and my imagination. 
When I first arrived as a student, I wandered a great deal, gazed at
the faces in the metro, made encounters – gallant and other - 
in the Luxembourg gardens.  Paris seemed to be teeming with possibilities
and oddities beckoning to be explored through narrative; it was a playground
of the unexpected and I remember feeling both exhilarated and lonely,
though the loneliness was a catalyst for writing, a fertile ground for
planting my little seeds.  At the time I was reading a great deal
of Rilke, held The Notebooks of Malte Laurids Brigge
as my spiritual guide to Paris and saw the city through his melancholic
yet romantic lens.   I also remember reading Djuna Barnes
and loving her peculiar and incantatory use of language, her manner
of peopling Paris with such singularly mad characters. 

I still marvel at the fabric of this
city, its weave of multiple worlds that convergence in surprising ways. 
I like to spend the morning working in my local Belleville café before
skipping down to the very bourgeois  7th arrondissement
to teach at The American University.  The differences between these
two neighborhoods are significant but not extreme – this is France
after all – and both are equally fascinating for me to explore. 
My writing is so much about sensibility, about expressing a particular
and singular way of being in the world. And Paris has been a
city that lends itself to this kind of exploration.  Why? 
Perhaps because it is slow to move, more concerned with how it feels
and looks than how rapidly it can thrust itself into action.  
It is not bold like New York or London but  intimate, human, more
feminine. I probably will continue setting my stories and novels in
Paris, though I do hope to write about America one day.  I’ve
been here so long,  I now find the United States rather exotic
and thoroughly bizarre even if familiar; perhaps I will eventually feel
impelled to write about the greed and collective insouciance that has
turned the San Joaquin valley where I am from into a unsustainable sprawl
of strip malls and housing developments.  Now that would be an
American story!

What do you make of the particular linguistic situation of the
expatriate writer: how does writing in English and living in French
affect what you produce?

I find this linguistic situation
particularly propitious.  To have two or more languages at one’s
disposal can only enrich one’s writing; it is like experiencing several
consciousnesses, several points of view and writers often try to create
this level of complexity in their work.  Speaking French has made
me all the more aware of the English language, of is pliancy, it syntactic
musculature and formidable concision, its ability to accommodate and
absorb otherness without feeling threatened by it (so unlike the French
language with its gun-pointing Académie!).   The experience
of living here has also made me aware of how indebted the English language
is to the French.  English is teeming, of course, with French and
Latinate words and if you go back to Shakespeare you find that his syntax
often perfectly mirrors French syntax.  Instances of this in English
literature are too numerous to enumerate here.  To some extent
I think the English language considers itself married to the French,
even if it does, after years of conjugality, take its spouse for granted. 
But it is strange to assume one is married to a woman – I assume French
plays the bride -  who has never officially given her hand. 
This is the way it is between English and French, the former being almost
childlike in its absorbency, the latter, resistant and a tad scornful. 
However, it is because the French resists that playing on its Latiny
register in English creates a kind of shock, much like an unexpected
encounter.  I love shifting from the Latin to the Saxon just for
the surprise of it, just for the jolt of sound it creates. In the arts,
particularly the visual arts and fiction, we speak a great deal about
discovering new ways of seeing.  But what about hearing? 
How do we hear the world?   How might the way we hear language
make us feel more alive, more connected, or less so?   I write
from my ear, almost like a composer, to achieve certain rhythms, rhymes,
alliterations, syncopations and, as in music, the ensuing sound both
creates a particular world and suggests how to navigate its music. 
To use Freud’s term, Remedy’s relationship to language is somewhat
polymorphous perverse; she alliterates and rhymes with unabashed pleasure
as if living in France, in this great fishbowl of the French language,
has lead her to rediscover something of her childhood tongue and the
experience of finding words full of wonder, ripe with mystery as if
by their very sound, on the cusp of meaning, they have the power to
transport us and awaken feeling.

How would you qualify the role Catholicism plays in the novel? Remedy
unravels in a sequence of chapters each dedicated to a (usually
idiosyncratic saint); she attends Mass every afternoon with the blind
Sister Dagobert and her tumor-laden dog; she baptizes her neighbor, Jeronimo,
raises his cat from the dead, ordains herself as a priest and performs
a gay marriage ceremony. Clearly this is not your mother's Catholicism!

Let’s just say that Remedy is
a faithful but very unorthodox Catholic!  She rewrites the rules
to her taste and becomes a self-ordained priestess,   She
knows better than to butt heads with one of the most unshakeable hierarchies
in the history of the western world!  But her choice to “reform”
from within rather than to slam St. Joe’s door is significant. I think
you noticed that Remedy does not shuck or reject; she accumulates. 
She records the daily details of life, fashion trends, her favorite
foods, rituals, lovers, and as she does so, her odd collection gains
meaning or takes on new meanings.  For example when Remedy first
mentions her former lover’s stove top espresso maker, it might seem
like a random detail, but when she continues to talk about it, to worry
and fuss over it, to take it to Djamila, her “fairy godmother,”
for a de-tarter treatment, we see that the coffee maker comes to symbolize
what she desires deep down, namely the stimulant that the love connection
is, the feeling of being fully incarnated, nerves aflutter because of
love!  But why does Remedy evoke (and provoke!) all these minor,
plus a few major,  saints?    First of all, she
is fascinated by their excesses, by their striking fortitude born of
the single-mindedness of their mission.   But she is also
raising a fundamental question about spirituality as she converses with
them: Might one also achieve spiritual fulfillment by embracing presence? 
Are suffering and renouncing the sole means by which we advance the
soul?  There is a poem by Mary Oliver that goes You do not have
to be good.  You do not have to walk on your knees for a hundred
miles through the desert, repenting.  You only have to let the
soft animal part of your body love what it loves. 

This is similar to the spirituality Remedy embraces, which has to do
with a quality of presence, receptivity, an attentiveness to the world
that suspends judgment.

What's the function of the chick lit format– girl works at a magazine,
has kooky sidekicks, and practices "Adult Sex," all in the pursuit of True Love?

My intention was to subvert
the chick lit format.  I wanted the novel to be its antidote
Remedy
, though it does play with chick-lit-like figures early on,
quickly spins off into something of its own, something very singular.  
I set the novel in the fashion world because at the time I was working
for a press syndicate and next to me, behind a thin partition, was a
fashion web site run by couture junkies who talked non-stop about bee
striped boxers and the size of Angelina Jolie’s mouth . Whether I
wanted to or not – and I didn’t – I had to listen to their chatter
all day long  (not even earplugs availed me). To sublimate the
situation – and to take revenge! – I came up with the idea to use
(and mock) the world of couture as the backdrop of a narrative. 
And so I started reading fashion copy, picking up articles left in the
photocopy machine or in the recycle bin, and, to my surprise, began
to revel in the depictions of Fashion Week’s offerings.  I didn’t
experience any kind of conversion; it was not fashion that interested
me as such, but the language that represents it.  I found it lush,
funny, absurd and completely mad, and I loved the energy of it, the
rush it created.  Writing about fashion was a wonderful way of
talking about something else, I found, namely the economy of excess
I already mentioned.  As I read fashion descriptions (and wrote
them!) I felt something akin to the marvel I feel at the Galérie de
l’Evolution when looking at the rows and rows of butterfly displays. 
Butterflies!  Beautiful, of course, but what is the point? 
Why so many patterns and colors of wing?  Why all this insane variety? 
And yet we know that as we kill off such “pointless” species we
are reducing the possibility of continuing life on this planet. 
So there is something about this excess that is essential and at the
heart of life.  I find that the Catholic Church, to return to your
earlier question, with its nimiety of rituals, saints, mystics, hierarchies,
and art is a perfect playground for celebrating this dimension of existence.

What is your favorite Emily Dickinson poem?

Without a doubt her poem “Wild
Nights – Wild Nights!” which Remedy recites for inspiration.  
There is so much passion condensed in this short poem and it shoots
out with Dickinson’s dashes and exclamation points.  It suggests
the kind of internalized eroticism usually associated with mystic marriage. 
And I love the strange image of rowing in Eden.  Her “Ah, the
Sea!”  It really is a very erotically charged poem!  The
eroticism is sublimated and yet remains quite explicit: “Might I but
moor – Tonight – In Thee!”  Goodness!

WILD nights! Wild nights!
Were I with thee,
Wild nights should be
Our luxury!
  
Futile the winds
To a heart in port,—
Done with the compass,
Done with the chart.
  
Rowing in Eden!
Ah! the sea!
Might I but moor
To-night in thee!

On Claude Cahun and “Modernist Remaking” (I)

Let's talk about modernism, shall we?

“Make it new,” Ezra Pound famously enjoined his fellow modernists.

Although this phrase is often taken as an urging to create something new (that is, something which did not previously exist), the inclusion of the pronoun "it" clearly implies the existence of something old that is being made new– this element of "remaking" characterizes much of modernist literature. Pound, Eliot, Yeats, Joyce, Woolf, Lawrence, Barnes and many other modernists delighted in incorporating classical, primitive, medieval, and Renaissance references, among many others, into their work.

Myth is incorporated into the modern novel on a structural level. The meter and language of modern poetry is infused with archaic and exotic languages. Examining these influences has always been an important part of studying modernism, but an analysis of the inherently intertextual energies operating within the heart of this movement-that-is-not-a-movement ought perhaps to take account of this remaking as a theoretical problem.

Cahun1
Claude Cahun (1894-1954) is one artist who answered Pound’s call.  Cahun is a slippery artist to categorize –is she a writer? Photographer? Installationist? Performance artist?—but any familiarity with her work will reveal that this is entirely due to her refusal to allow herself to be placed in any one category.  Her biographer, François Leperlier, characterizes her strategies as "inversion and deviation, reversals and hijackings";  Cahun adopts these in her writing, her photography, her object-making, as well as in her attire and her personal relationships, in order to elude classification in any of these areas. 

Cahun, who lived in Paris from 1922 to 1938 with her partner (and step-sister) Suzanne Malherbe, had a similarly unsettled relationship to the avant-garde groups with whom she was associated, notably the Surrealists, as well as the expatriate circle of lesbians in Paris who gathered around Nathalie Clifford Barney’s salon. 

The different facets of Cahun, public and private, artistic, literary, and personal, conspire to create the portrait of a fully-engaged artist whose work indicates a conception of gender as a construction, an idea which places her way ahead of her time. Cahun’s work anticipates Simone de Beauvoir, Cindy Sherman, and Judith Butler; however, given that Cahun’s work was lost to us after her death and only rediscovered by Leperlier in the late 1980s, and only begun to appear in museum exhibitions in 1992, we cannot claim Cahun as a forebear for these women. She is so ahead of her time and ours that she must be characterized as being at the avant-garde even of the avant-garde. 

Cahun2
Which is fitting, considering Cahun wrote that she wished always to remain “at the prow of myself,” au proue de moi-même. I have argued elsewhere that Cahun exercised an avant-garde du moi: an avant-garde of the self. The self, for Cahun, is inherently multiple and mobile, recreated and reinvented from moment to moment, and gender is a mask which can be put on or taken off according to whim or necessity.  We try to “delineate our roles,” she writes, “according to our changing moods.  It is only after many attempts […] that we can firm up the moulds of our masks” (119).

But it is not her relationship to those writers who came after, but rather, those who came before, that I wish to explore: the intertextual echoes which inform this refusal to let herself be categorized on the basis of her gender, sexuality, ethnicity, or artistic production. Recently, critics have begun to sift through Cahun’s writing for echoes of other writers.  Gayle Zachmann has written on echoes of Mallarmé in Cahun’s work, as well as the impact of the Dreyfus Affair; Lizzie Thynne is currently working on the influence of Wilde on Cahun’s work, which is most explicit in her rewriting of Salomé; Mary Ann Caws reads Cahun within the context of other "eccentric" women artists such as Judith Gautier, Dora Carrington, and Emily Carr.

For our purposes, we will concentrate first on Cahun’s collection of short narratives, Héroïnes, which first appeared in 1925 in the Mercure de France and the Journal littéraire, and then in Aveux non avenus (“Disavaowed Confessions,” 1928), her longest published work, which in spite of its autobiographical nature is unclassifiable as such (the closest genre for it could perhaps be Lynda Barry’s "autobificionalography").  We will examine in particular the influence of Marcel Schwob, Cahun’s uncle, and look twice at Cahun’s response to Ovid and Swinburne in “Sappho l’incomprise” and “Salmacis the Suffragette.” Cahun found in their work the themes and motifs which would allow her to pose questions concerning autobiography and perspective, creation, reproduction, virginity, and gender, stealing form from Schwob and Ovid, and content from all three. We will examine in more depth the way the theme of childhood serves for Cahun as a conduit to the power of the primitive and archaic, and which gave her access to Surrealist ideals and themes.

But all that for another day.

Who said there’d be cake?

Crosleycake2
I Was Told There’d be Cake
, Essays by Sloane Crosley. Riverhead Books, $14.

When this book was published last month, the general buzz around the internet was about how nice and well-liked its author was ("the Most Popular Publicist in New York," according to the New York Observer)  and what a cool a website she had for her book.   I  rolled my eyes at the coverage, but the author’s name struck me.  I racked my brain trying to figure out why. Then it hit me: she went to a very small New England college with one of my best friends.  You don’t forget a name like "Sloane."*

So I picked up the book at McNally Robinson last week, read it in one sitting, and find I have only good things to say about it! I’m as shocked as you are.

Through all that buzz (and this episode of Titlepage) I had heard there was a "bit" about My Little Ponies, I had heard there was an essay in which someone takes a dump on her bathroom floor; but the essays are about so much more than 80s references and scatological mishaps.  What I like– really like– is that Crosley’s writing goes a step beyond hipster referentiality.  She’s admirably self-aware.  She knows the pony thing is a weird, un-funny tick, and she spends some time thinking about why she does it and how to move on from it.

The funniest moment, for me, is when her boss throws a manuscript at
her head– all the more so because in my first job out of college (in PR, ironically) I too had a boss throw something large at my head (an office phone).  But it isn’t only the relate-ability of the scrapes
she gets into, or the randomness of them, or  Crosley’s way with
sarcastic commentary.  What’s appealing in these essays is their mix of the specific and the
universal– the reflexive reference to pop culture (from Travelocity to
Tamagotchi) are cradled in narratives that evoke weird rituals from out of another era
altogether (the all-girls Christian summer camp she attended in New Hampshire, to which she is fiercely loyal today) or those which are intensely of our era (being asked to be a bridesmaid for a friend she hasn’t seen from high school; Bridezilla hijinks ensue).

She’s not out to postulate, to theorize, or to wax emotional, but to entertain; she is the kind of person who consoles her roommate when his bike is
stolen from their 5th floor fire escape that "if thieves had found a
way to take it, they probably deserved it: Plus they had left his
helmet, which I found to be a kind gesture."  And that is funny, and quirky. I wouldn’t go so far as to say there is a questioning of the self here, a frequent attribute of the memoir genre, but rather the self on display as a very particular self.  The essays take you somewhere that feels familiar– but there is always a bit of unique Sloane-ness that is a reminder of why we read other people’s personal writing. Because they ask themselves the same questions that we do, but they sometimes come up with better answers.

For what it’s worth, I’d say that the essays do seem to be so rooted in the now looking back at the past that it misses the feeling of what it felt like then. The memories  seem not to be valued so much for their own sake but for the present moment’s sake.  An attempt to understand the me-now without really coming to terms with the me-then.  The me-then seems like a performance to shore up the me-now: another variation of the pony tick.

She is acutely aware of her readers’ expectations and levels of incredulity (on one page she mentions
she had a job interview on Sept 12 2001 and got the job; on the next
page she says "most people don’t believe it when I tell them I had a
job interview that day").  Perhaps this anticipation is the key to what makes Sloane Crosley so
well-liked– you can’t accuse her of anything she hasn’t already
accused herself of.  The key to success,
Sloane-style: "Nothing was beneath me but the sidewalk." This may well be the case.  But what makes her a good writer– and far more worthy of our interest than if she were simply likable, down-to-earth, and entertaining (not in themselves inherently literary attributes)– is her sense of language. 

Her chapter on being a lapsed vegetarian, or a pescatarian, or whatever you want to call it, calls for an end to such labels: "The words are secondary to the sentiment." It is precisely this idea that makes middlebrow writing so tiresome, the privilege of the sentiment over the word, the plot over the language. But Crosley’s next sentence belies her previous statement: "Praise be to wheatgrass.  Artichoke me with okra and baptize me in beet juice. Juices saves." Ok, it’s a bit cutesy– purposely so–but it has bite.  We are far from Carrie Bradshaw-style punning, with its desperation to make pedestrian language sound witty.  In Crosley’s domain the words are the things that carry the jokes.  It’s not just about the obscurity of the details, or the out-of-left-field references. It’s not about the cheap laugh. There is a certain eccentricity at work here, and it will be interesting to see what she comes up with next.

* (So that’s a disclosure. In case one were needed.)

Paris to London and back

I’m back in town after a long weekend in London visiting relatives, and have much to tell of what I saw in that magical place, from Sissinghurst Castle, where I swooned before Vita Sackville-West’s library, to the Tate Modern’s Duchamp/Man Ray/Picabia exhibit, where my cousin, an artist, had a religious experience in front of "Nude Descending a Staircase."

I would also like to tell you about Anne Marsella’s whimsical, fabulous book, Remedy, from which she will read tonight at the Village Voice (7 pm sharp, duckies!). It’s set in a Paris that will make you feel like you’re seeing in technicolor for the first time.

But I must read a pile of library books that are due back this afternoon, so storytime will have to wait til tomorrow or the day after…

tuesday links

The 2008 Pulitzer Prizes have been announced. The winners include Junot Diaz for  The Brief Wondrous Life of Oscar Wao (Fiction), Tracy Letts for "August: Osage County" (Drama) and a special citation for Bob Dylan.

*
We’re officially in the middle of a Picabia moment: with exhibits at the Tate Modern and the Passage de Retz,  and an MIT Press publication, The Artwork Caught by the Tail: Francis Picabia and Dada in Paris, by George Baker, which is the occasion for an article on Bookslut encouraging us to see the Dada artist as a poet as well. Why not.  Read the article and learn why "Dada is an artichoke doorknob."

*

More on Virago Press from The Guardian; this time a meditation on Novel on Yellow Paper (which I still recommend you read, it’s so kooky and out there) and on the thirtieth anniversary of the press, which is next month.

*

The Sydney Morning Herald looks at how weird and out there travel guides are getting in order to capture a share of the market. But there’s also a strong desire not to say the same things over and over that I think motivates this kind of narrative… and that’s how you end up with women walking from London to Africa.

*

My dear Pierre Assouline looks up from his espresso to remark that the commemorations of May 1968 are really starting to bore him, but that in spite of the "avalanche of memoirs, documents, photo collections, novels, and narratives" there are some good books to read on the subject. He recommends  Le jour où mon père s’est tu (Seuil), by Virginie Linhart, the daughter of Robert Linhart (the communist and now sociologist who literally slept through May ’68); Tigre en papier (2002), by Olivier Rolin, and Génération (1987), by Patrick Rotman et Hervé Hamon.

And I counted precisely one semi-colon.

Paris: Cafés and Shopping

…two of my favorite things to do in Paris, when I have time and money.

Researching this piece for Gridskipper, "Strong Fashion, Weak Dollar," I think I went a little overboard. But there was present-buying involved, and I even had a little company on one of my research excursions, so it wasn’t a completely selfish endeavor. Besides, it was all in the interest of bringing affordable Paris fashion to you, dear readers. Go forth and spend in small increments.

For this nostalgic review of Noel Riley Fitch and Rick Tulka’s Paris Café: The Sélect Crowd (Soft Skull), for Huffington Post, I didn’t have to spend any money at all, unless you count years of café-going, plunking down hundreds of francs and euros, to be able to authoritatively write the thing.

So here I am, a little poorer in funds, a little richer in clips, Cacharel, and café lore.