Friday, June 7, 2013

The Sense of a Memory

Julian Barnes' The Sense of an Ending wins Most Confusing Last-Minute Plot Twist, hands down.  Is that the point of the title?  To have the feeling of an ending but not understand it, and/or to suggest the lack of sense in the ending?  Strangely, the plot twist itself is inconsequential to the meat of the book.  This was my first experience with Julian Barnes and I'm pegging him as an author to revisit; I had plenty of "YES" moments during this book, though most of them were depressing or actually alarming.  If I would've read this book for the first time about 20 years from now, I'd be having a major case of the blues, so clearly does he crystallize regret of wasted youth.  On a lighter note, I also encountered a new word (susurrus; mumuring -- fun!).
Salvador Dali - The Persistence of Memory (1931)
Nutshell summary, the narrator is an older man, Tony, who is suddenly thrust into a situation involving an ex-girlfriend from his teen years and a long-dead friend.  The book begins by the narrator retelling his teen years, the fling with the girlfriend, his friend's suicide.  This is the kind of book where, once you know the ending, you need to return and read this first part again because foreshadowing is everywhere.  Underlying all of this is that the narrator is unreliable; if this isn't immediately apparent, it's okay because Barnes then beats you over the head with it:

"... the world existed in a state of perpetual chaos, and only some primitive storytelling instinct, itself doubtless a hangover from religion, retrospectively imposed meaning on what might or might not have happened." (p.12)  [** side note: consider Eros vs Thanatos as 'primitive storytelling', imposing meaning on the affair and pregnancy (Eros; life instinct) followed by the suicide (Thanatos; death instinct)]

"We need to know the history of the historian in order to understand the version that is being put in front of us." (p.13)

(A great movie with the same memory gist is Woody Allen's "Annie Hall" -- a story told retrospectively by a man who exaggerates and caricatures the past.) Towards the end of his narrative, Tony actually edits his memories, inserting people or situations that had previously been forgotten (or maybe really not there at all?).  How much do you trust your own memory, let alone Tony's?  These days it's probably easier to track the past just by scrolling through your Facebook feed, though even that you can delete and select memories for editing.

The two passages that really stuck with me long after I finished the book:

"But time ... how time first grounds us and then confounds us. We thought we were being mature when we were only being safe. We imagined we were being responsible but were only being cowardly. What we called realism turned out to be a way of avoiding things rather than facing them." (p.102)

"Had my life increased, or merely added to itself?" (p.97)

That's some heavy reflection right there.  For both Tony and I.

Bottom line?  Highly recommend.  Like I said at the top, I'm glad I read this book young; there's still time to not be so safe and cowardly.  Julian Barnes: endorser of YOLO.

Wednesday, May 8, 2013

DFW Random Bandwagon? On it.

David Foster Wallace's commencement speech to Kenyon back in 2005 is getting somewhat of a renaissance on the web this week thanks to The Glossary, and, being all about spreading/preserving the word of Wallace, here's the full transcript:

http://www.moreintelligentlife.com/story/david-foster-wallace-in-his-own-words

"The capital-T Truth is about life BEFORE death. It is about the real value of a real education, which has almost nothing to do with knowledge, and everything to do with simple awareness; awareness of what is so real and essential, so hidden in plain sight all around us, all the time, that we have to keep reminding ourselves over and over: This is water."

Sunday, March 17, 2013

Joyce's Selfie

Post-"Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man" thoughts on James Joyce --

1) I now realize I need to re-read "Dubliners" and "Portrait" with some sort of guide.

2) And definitely get a guide for "Ulysses", which is where all this mandatory Joyce reading is heading.

3) I am okay with never reading past page 7 of "Finnegan's Wake".

I don't have anything insightful or profound to say about "Portrait" except to say that the middle sermon section WILL KILL YOU.  So many naps.  And once you get past that, just wait for the end aesthetic argument.  The intro to my copy of the book (one Hugh Kenner) discusses how "Portrait" follows in writing the maturing of Stephen Dedalus (aka Joyce), with sections either mimicking his consciousness or as models of writing he would admire at a particular age.  The sermon then being his time of piousness and the philosophical argument when he's attending the university and agnostic.  There's a ton of other crafty information hidden away in the text and structure, like how odd-numbered chapters deal with father figures and even-numbered chapters with women, but this stuff is totally missed during a first naive reading (see thought #1 above).  On the ole' "experimental fiction and bildungsroman" scale, I will say that "Portait" > "The Bell Jar" and it's not even a fair comparison.  Reading Joyce always makes me feel like I'm missing half the pieces needed to comprehend the whole story (because I am), which is a nice humbling experience.

This book also left me wondering: did Joyce really sleep with that many women before he was 16?!  I always pictured him as this nerdy guy ... Pre-sermon section, things are pretty dark. 

Thursday, February 21, 2013

On Plagues

About halfway through Camus' The Plague I realized that the same disease had just cropped up in Death in Venice and I'd recently watched the AIDS documentary How to Survive a Plague, so clearly this was subconscious word association at work.  If you really want to extend the metaphor/relevance of this novel, substitute "AIDS" for "plague".  And check out my earlier entry on Karl Marlantes' Matterhorn because oh man, parallels.

Some background/context: I've written about Camus on here before (Notebooks & "Reflections on the Guillotine") and most of The Plague can --and should be-- read through the lens of "Reflections", no pun intended.  Also, at one point in the book Camus does this sneaky little allusion to his most famous work, The Stranger: "A young commercial employee had killed an Algerian on a beach," (51) and the whole rest of the novel I kept wondering if Cottard was somehow an escaped character from The Stranger.  I see what you did there.

Sprinkled throughout the book are heavy philosophical flavors -- Foucault's prison system and Sartre's existentialism jumped out (Camus' contemporaries).  The entire town of Oran, both before and during the plague, is a prison.  It just becomes more obvious when the plague hits and the gates to the town are sealed with guards.  A social prison becomes a real prison, where all the inhabitants are on a fast-track trial with a possible death sentence waiting.  The first few chapters establish the power of the status quo and a familiar exceptionalism: surely the plague can't happen here, surely I won't get the disease, horrible things like that happen to an "other" but not to me.  Even though piles of rats are dying in the streets, people still go about their habits and the city continues in its routine; menace is masked by normalcy.  This isn't a new concept and you can reliably find it in horror movies.  (I always think of the baby on the plane in the opening scene of Final Destination.)  Camus adds another layer to it with meaningless communication and menace masked by jargon: "We are to take the responsibility of acting as though the epidemic were plague" (47).

So now we're presented with the meat of the novel, which is the reaction of several townspeople to being trapped in this prison-city with a raging plague epidemic for a year.  Dr. Rieux fits the Camus character description offered up by Susan Sontag in her critical essay on Notebooks: "noble, stoical, at the same time detached and compassionate ... the attitude ... is a transcendence of the event [instead of a response or solution to it]."  At the height of the plague, Rieux compares his role to a judge: "To detect, to see, to describe, to register, and then condemn - that was his present function."  Here's where "Reflections on the Guillotine" comes in -- Camus' arguments against the death penalty fit into Rieux and company's decision to risk staying in the city and keep trying to help/heal, that he owes it to his fellow human beings.  (Matterhorn: "Dying this way was a better way to die because living this way was a better way to live.") His friend Tarrou tells a story about a defendent up for the death penalty:

"The only picture I carried away with me of that day's proceedings was a picture of the criminal.  I have little doubt he was guilty -- of what crime is no great matter ... You've understood -- he was a living human being."
(224)

In a similar vein, Rieux has this to say in response to a sermon that paints suffering as divine punishment and a path to salvation:

"He hasn't come in contact with death; that's why he can speak with such assurance of the truth -- with a capital T.  But every country priest who visits his parishioners and has heard a man gasping for breath on his deathbed thinks as I do.  He'd try to relieve human suffering before trying to point out its excellence."
(116)

A key scene in the novel involves the drawn-out death of a child, and the various characters grappling with how to come to terms with such a thing.  The issue of evil and human suffering really reminded me of Matterhorn's best moments and I think that novel actually found a better way of dealing with 'how can God exist when evil things happen to good people'. So, let's fuse the two books for a moment:

The Plague: "It was wrong to say: "This I understand, but that I cannot accept"; we must go straight to the heart of that which is unacceptable, precisely because it is thus that we are constrained to make our choice." (203)

Matterhorn: "I see my friend Broyer get his face ripped off by a mine. What you think I do all night, sit around thankin' Sweet Jesus? Raise my palms to sweet heaven and cry hallelujah? You know what I do? You know what I do?  I lose my heart. ... Then, the sky turn gray again in the east, and you know what I do? I choose all over to keep believin'. All along I know Jesus could maybe be just some fairy tale, and I could be just this one big fool.  I choose anyway. ... It ain't no easy thing."
(466)

It ain't no easy thing.

Tuesday, February 5, 2013

Somnolence in Venice & Mann's Boy

Translation woes strike again!  By my estimate, Kenneth Burke's translation of  Thomas Mann's Death in Venice caused me to start this book no less than four times and fall asleep approximately every five pages (in a 96-page novella).  The heavy allegorical aspect didn't help things.  "Should we not perish and be consumed with love, as Semele once was with Zeus?"  ... Yikes.  To each their own, but this didn't do much for me.

As per the usual, I had heard of the title and author but did this as a "naive reading".  So this whole 'OMG he's a homosexual pedophile!?' plot caught me off-guard.  It's as though Lolita got passed off as an extended mythological metaphor/allegory and was published in 1924.  That being said, it's more Victorian-esque with regard to the romanticism of the child (children are innocent and the ideal of pure beauty, etc, etc) and Mann uses Tadzio (the 'youthful beauty') as a symbol rather than an actual character.  The story can be interpreted six ways to Sunday, most obviously through the constant mythological name-dropping (Apollo to Dionysus transition -- discuss!) and the blatant autobiographical elements that weirdly combine Mann's vacation with the death of composer Gustav Mahler.  See:  Just How Gay is Death in Venice?

To be frank, I didn't enjoy this book.  The emphasis on classicism and 'cold' storytelling (objective narrator) may be to blame.  I haven't gotten to a point where I'm willing to set down a book and go look up the traits of Apollo in order to understand a poorly translated and especially dry paragraph of text.  I'm okay with that.  I'm not against taking the time to do a Freudian or Nietzschian close reading, I just can't bring myself to go back and do that here.  Nor do I presume to know enough Freud/Nietzsche to attempt it.

This blog sums up my general reaction:  "Death in Venice ... through the use of complex metaphors, is essentially a rigid, damp love letter to a small half-naked boy the narrator leers at throughout."

I have two other Thomas Mann books on my canonical reading list, so we'll see how he holds up later.