Showing posts with label NYU. Show all posts
Showing posts with label NYU. Show all posts
Thursday, October 26, 2017
Raise High the Roof Beam, Carpenters and Seymour: an Introduction - J.D. Salinger (1959)
It's hard for me to write about J.D. Salinger without coming off a certain way, so I'd like to open this review by mentioning my friend Libby. Libby and I met our freshman year at NYU. One day, she started talking to me about Salinger, I forget why. Like a lot of people, my primary exposure to Salinger was Catcher in the Rye. I don't think I had read any of his three other books. But Libby laid down the line and went through a brief synopsis of each, in particular mentioning how she had written a paper about religion in "Teddy," which was the last in Nine Stories, and extremely beautiful. She explained that the majority of his work, outside of Catcher, concerned the Glass Family: Seymour, Buddy, Boo Boo, Walter, Waker, Zooey, Franny, Bessie and Les. Seven children of vaudeville performers, several of them gaining notoriety on a children's quiz show radio program, and others entering careers in show business, the military, the clergy, prose and poetry (sort of). At least one out of Nine Stories is specifically about Seymour--"A Perfect Day for Bananafish," which is a masterpiece. Franny and Zooey rightly earns its place on the Best Books List (and Catcher in the Rye, I predict, will make it when it is reviewed--I read Catcher like 6 times over the course of 6 years, but I haven't read it in the last 9). I had been meaning to read these for the first time in any case, but after Libby's mini-lecture, I made it a priority and read them my freshman year. I remember having a particular soft spot for Raise High the Roof Beam, Carpenters and Seymour: an Introduction and thinking they were as good as any of his other published writings. I loved him so much at this point, that I tracked down the old issue of The New Yorker that had published his story "Hapworth 16, 1924," and photocopied it and put it in a nice binder and gave it to my mother for her birthday, as she was a massive Salinger fan. I thought this was one of the better gifts I had ever gotten her, but then I actually read it. Do not read it. Read it only if you want a reading list.
So I looked forward to revisiting these two novellas, similar in length to Franny and Zooey. And I found that I felt exactly the same way about Raise High the Roof Beam, Carpenters. It is a masterpiece on the level of his other three books (to be clear, I do not think I would consider Nine Stories to be in Best Books league, though parts of it certainly are--at least "Bananafish" would make a Best Short Stories list, which isn't a bad idea for a project). It is hilarious, socially observant, brilliantly detailed, breezily delivered, intriguing, and inviting. Seymour: an Introduction, however, had aged badly in my mind. This may come into play in the upcoming series planned for Flying Houses, the Kurt Vonnegut Project, for which I am reading Slaughterhouse Five presently, and for which I have this to say: these books may be influential to young would-be writers because they see the authors having fun with the medium. You get a sense of the possibilities of literature. At the time, when I was 19, going through the most artistically fecund period in my life, I thought the conceit of a story like Seymour was tremendously encouraging and successfully experimental. I don't feel the same about it now. Basically, I would put Carpenters in Best Books territory, and Seymour in Egregiously Frustrating territory. I guess I can't actually do that because they're together here. Anybody that reads Carpenters will go onto Seymour and maybe some people will slog their way through it out of a sense of loyalty to the author and the characters, but they might be better off putting it away after about 30 pages. I will get more deeply into the details of the plots of each in a moment, but I wanted to put this down for now, to give an overview of my general feelings on Salinger's oeuvre and distinguish my opinions on this, his final published volume.
***
Raise High the Roof Beam, Carpenters is 89 pages long. It is about Seymour's wedding day. Buddy is the main character. The time is May 1942. Buddy is in Georgia and wrangles a three-day-leave from a stay in the military hospital to take a train to New York to attend the wedding. He has no time to go to his apartment so he leaves his luggage in a locker at Penn Station. He gets in a cab and goes to an old house where the wedding is to occur. After an hour and twenty minutes, the bride, Muriel, leaves. The guests are told to "use the cars" and Buddy ends up getting into one with Muriel's aunt (Helen Silsburn), the Matron of Honor, the Matron's husband (Lieutenant), and a little old elderly mute man (Muriel's great uncle). The Matron of Honor is furious with Seymour. Nobody knows that Buddy is Seymour's brother. The tension in the early part of the scene is fantastic.
[I have to break in here and make a note. I'm finding this review hard to complete because of the great deal of time that has passed. I read Carpenters in early June. Then I read This Fight is Our Fight, Days of Abandonment, Meet Me in the Bathroom, and Giant of the Senate. Then I read Seymour: an Introduction. So while Seymour is relatively fresh in my mind, Carpenters is not. I can only attribute the gap to library deadlines and procrastination.]
Really, the cab ride reads like a play.
***
Again, another long break has occurred. You know what I'm going to say. Carpenters is great, Seymour is not, so I will attempt to illustrate that with 2 (only 2) excerpts, one from each. It is a tall task to pick out a representative sample but I think for Carpenters the choice is clear.
"The Matron of Honor seemed to reflect for a moment. 'Well, nothing very much, really,' she said. 'I mean nothing small or really derogatory or anything like that. All she said, really, was that this Seymour, in her opinion, was a latent homosexual and that he was basically afraid of marriage. I mean she didn't say it nasty or anything. She just said it--you know--intelligently. I mean she was psychoanalyzed for years and years.' The Matron of Honor looked at Mrs. Silsburn. 'That's no secret or anything. I mean Mrs. Fedder'll tell you that herself, so I'm not giving away any secret or anything.'"
.........
"'About the only other thing she said was that this Seymour was a really schizoid personality and that, if you really looked at things the right way, it was really better for Muriel that things turned out the way they did. Which makes sense to me, but I'm not so sure it does to Muriel. He's got her so buffaloed that she doesn't know whether she's coming or going. That's what makes me so--'"
She was interrupted at that point. By me. As I remember, my voice was unsteady, as it invariably is when I'm vastly upset.
'What brought Mrs. Fedder to the conclusion that Seymour is a latent homosexual and a schizoid personality?'
All eyes--all searchlights, it seemed--the Matron of Honor's, Mrs. Silsburn's, even the Lieutenant's, were abruptly trained on me. 'What?' the Matron of Honor said to me, sharply, faintly hostilely. And again I had a passing, abrasive notion that she knew I was Seymour's brother." (36...38)
This is the climax of the first "act" of the story, and probably the whole story. I believe it is representative of the qualities that make for an excellent piece of writing. I have not seen many other writers italicize portions of words to denote accents on certain words.
I also believed Salinger was something of a pioneer in his use of a footnote or two in Seymour, but recall that Nabokov published Pale Fire in 1962. Seymour is an intriguing premise. It is an artistic biography of Seymour by Buddy. The opening sentence (after two excerpts by Kafka and Kierkegaard) gives a fair indication of how bumpy things are about to get:
"At times, frankly, I find it pretty slim pickings, but at the age of forty I look on my old fair-weather friend the general reader as my last deeply contemporary confidant, and I was rather strenuously requested, long before I was out of my teens, by at once the most exciting and the least fundamentally bumptious public craftsman I've ever personally known, to try to keep a steady and sober regard for the amenities of such a relationship, be it ever so peculiar or terrible; in my case, he saw it coming on from the first." (96)
This is a difficult piece of writing. It can be very charming at times. The trope of Buddy writing in a stream-of-conscious style--commenting upon his drinking or the late hour or a recent illness--is one of its more amusing qualities. One will not deepen their understanding of Seymour by reading it. It is more about Seymour's effect on Buddy than Seymour himself. He is every bit as inscrutable a character as he appears in any other place.
Seymour is mostly notable as Salinger's comment on celebrity. If one reads the story in this context, it becomes much more interesting. Buddy is pretty much a stand-in for Salinger. He lives alone in the woods isolated from society. He wrote a bunch of the stories that Salinger published. There are a few moments that definitely break down the fourth wall.
Salinger has such a small oeuvre, and it is of such a high quality that anyone who wants to read beyond the first exposure (Catcher) will likely go through them all. This is the weakest piece, but it's still Salinger, and it's not a bad story. It's just difficult. It's very frustrating.
Because then I see the parts I underlined some fifteen years ago and am reminded that to a particular sort of young person, the story is a treasure:
"I'm so sure you'll get asked only two questions [when you die]. Were most of your stars out? Were you busy writing your heart out? If only you knew how easy it would be for you to say yes to both questions. If only you'd remember before ever you sit down to write that you've been a reader long before you were ever a writer. You simply fix that fact in your mind, then sit very still and ask yourself, as a reader, what piece of writing in all the world Buddy Glass would most want to read if he had his heart's choice. The next step is terrible, but so simple I can hardly believe as I write it. You just sit down shamelessly and write the thing yourself. I won't even underline that. It's too important to be underlined." (160-161)
Thursday, August 3, 2017
Meet Me in the Bathroom: Rebirth and Rock and Roll in New York City 2001-2011 - Lizzy Goodman (2017)
Meet Me in the Bathroom is an oral history of the NYC rock scene in the early 2000's. It is about the Strokes, Interpol, the Yeah Yeah Yeahs, and DFA Records/The Rapture/LCD Soundsystem. To a lesser extent, it is about the White Stripes, Kings of Leon, TV on the Radio, Vampire Weekend, Fischerspooner, Franz Ferdinand, the Killers, Ryan Adams, the National, Conor Oberst, the Vines and the Moldy Peaches. And there are even more incidental references to other bands of the era. It starts off with Jonathan Fire*Eater, as a precursor to the Strokes. I had never heard of them before and I thought the Walkmen (which 1/2 of the band eventually became) were a bigger deal.
Jonathan Fire*Eater is positioned in the kind of Velvet Underground role in Please Kill Me, the first band to get mentioned out of the gate, the primary influence from which the scene sprouts. Everybody that listened to the Velvet Underground started their own band. Admittedly, it is a tall task to match up to VU, but JF*E do not directly influence the sound of many of the bands that are later written about, in quite the same way. Regardless, it is an interesting way to the start the book, because it is really more about the scene in the late 1990's. It goes right into the Strokes from there and never lets go. This is really the Strokes book, at least in terms of myth-making and cementing their status as icons.
I am really conflicted about this but I cannot quite put it on the Best Books list. It is really, really good, but it would basically equate it to Please Kill Me and Lexicon Devil. And obviously, Please Kill Me is a classic, and Lexicon Devil was just a blistering experience for me. This book was extremely entertaining though and I loved it. I was sad when it was over, and that to me is one of the signs of a great book. Whatever, I change my mind. It belongs on the list with that qualification.
It is perhaps worth noting that I went to NYU in 2001 and so was the target at which so much of the buzz of these bands was aimed. My friend Danielle burnt me a copy of Is This It. Interpol was a band of NYU graduates (Paul Banks met Daniel Kessler at NYU in Paris, where I would be 4-5 years later). Also in Paris, I went to see the Rapture at some festival type thing at a club in the Bois de Bologne. We would sometimes go out dancing at Favela Chic and I remember my friend Tommy talking about them. One night the DJ played "House of Jealous Lovers" and he was like, that's them! It was pretty awesome, so we went to the show, and afterwards we saw the band and walked up to them with our third friend, Sarah. We were like, "We're from New York too!" And they were like, "Um, cool." They weren't very interested in talking to us, so I always had kind of a weird feeling about them after, but I still got Echoes.
A fair number of the bands featured in here played $5 NYU shows, and I went to almost all of them. I also miraculously got a press pass to the CMJ Music Marathon in the Fall of 2002, and saw many there as well. I was there as the scene shifted from Manhattan to Brooklyn. I read Our Band Could Be Your Life and gave it to my friends. I recruited about twenty of them to join a potential band, with which we had two very tentative practices. I took guitar lessons and wanted to learn the drums. Finally I convinced my friends to let me manage their band, and got them their first gig. Even though I had no musical talent and could not (and still cannot) play any instruments, I wanted to be around people that did, and I wanted to get involved any way I could. My point is, it wasn't just the Strokes, but the whole scene, that made people want to start their own bands. That kind of situation lends itself well to an oral history.
The atmosphere of New York circa 9/11 also influenced us all. One of the things about this book that elevates it into Best Books territory is chapter 30. I would say that it is the finest piece of writing I have read, to date, on the subject of 9/11. Nothing else had ever so perfectly encapsulated my experience:
Andrew VanWyngarden [MGMT]: "I was a week into my freshman year at college and that's such an impressionable stage. I was a virgin and I was meeting all these new people and was just bright eyed and wow. Then September 11 came and I got so deeply freaked out, paranoid, and just knocked off of my foundation of what reality was that it just totally fucked me up." (203)
There are also a ton of journalists that supply the oral history. The book is dedicated to Marc Spitz, a voluble presence, who recently passed away. Marc Maron is also a contributor and I have been listening to the WTF podcast a lot recently. One of them was with Ryan Adams and my friend actually asked me to go to a Ryan Adams concert in Milwaukee right around when he dissed the Strokes on Twitter. So this is really still topical. Apparently Marc Maron is also putting out a book in October that follows a similar format to this, so I'll probably check that out. Perhaps he was influenced by his experience participating in this, and realized that it is a pretty interesting way to construct a book.
David Cross also hangs out with the Strokes and there are a couple embarrassing stories that I won't recite here. But the stuff about Ryan Adams is too funny to pass up:
Ryan Adams: "One night I was hanging with the Strokes guys and Ryan[Gentles]. We were really stoned because we were basically always smoking pot. It was very late. Fab would always play me a song that he had written, some beautiful romantic song. So one night, jokingly, I'm also certain Fabby said, 'Dude, what if John Mayer was playing that guitar right now?' And I said, 'I can make that happen.' And they all said, 'You're full of shit.' I said, 'Give me three fucking beers'--because there were only so many beers left at that late hour--'and I'll make it happen. I'm a goddamn genie in a bottle.' And we died laughing. Now, I lived down the block from John Mayer and he'd been talking to me about his new song for a while. So I texted him, because he was always up late back then. I said, 'Come to this apartment. Bring an acoustic guitar. I really want to hear your new song.' I didn't tell them that I'd done it. So everyone is sitting there and I was like, 'Let's all take bong hits.' I really wanted it to get crazy. We smoked some bong hits; I probably did some blow. I started to drink my three beers. The doorbell buzzer rings and I open the door and John Mayer walks in with his fucking acoustic guitar and they were all slack jawed. John sat down and played the fucking acoustic guitar--three or four songs that probably have gone on to be huge--while those guys just sat there staring at me like ,'Oh my god, you're a witch.' The next day John was like, 'Hey man, next time maybe less cigarette smoke? That really hurt my throat.' That apartment was like an airport smoking lounge." (379)
In short, I could understand why Ryan Adams might not like the way he comes off in this story, but I finished the book more interested in him. He's basically one of the greatest characters in the story. He comes up in his own way, as he arguably peaked in his popularity with the video for "New York, New York," which was released at almost the exact same time as Is This It, basically on 9/11, or maybe a week or two later. But he mostly comes up as a friend to, and a potential "bad influence" on, the Strokes. Most others are candid about their drug use, and also use the excuse that 9/11 bestowed upon the city a kind of desperate party-because-we're-going-to-die atmosphere. One reads a book like Meet Me in the Bathroom because it has the kind of gossip that you don't usually read about except in really unguarded stories in Spin or Rolling Stone or on Pitchfork. It is also good for correcting inaccuracies that are awkward to kind of mention out of the blue, but fit perfectly with the subject matter. One of the most striking is about the LCD Soundsystem song "Someone Great." Now, many people really love this song, and I think most consider it the second best song off Sound of Silver after "All My Friends." It also supplies a sizable piece of "45:33" (which I actually bought). Everybody says that this song is about mourning a lost lover. But I found the truth even more touching:
Tyler Brodie: "Do you know about the therapist? I never met him, I don't even know his name, but I do know LCD's "Someone Great" was later written about him."
Tim Goldsworthy: "That's not about a love affair. That was written the day that James's therapist died." (265)
James Murphy apparently did therapy three times a week. The book also touches on "Beat Connection," which gave me occasion to play it just now, and I have to say it is a really great song. I think Murphy sounds more like Mark E. Smith on it than on "Losing My Edge," though he is more on rant mode in that song.
The book is just filled with interesting stories and I think it would appeal to a general audience even if the reader doesn't know very much about the bands themselves. There are also little tidbits about the realities of life as a musician that is yet to "make it" that are particularly amusing. Take, for example, this nugget of truth that I appreciated as the purveyor of MEP:
Chris Taylor: "When I first moved to Brooklyn, Chris Bear, who plays drums in our band, moved into the same loft as me; we built it together. We were in this band, and at that age when you really have the energy and ambition to do all of this. There's just things that you don't care about that allow you to be free and experimental and take big risks and live in a dirty place and you don't give a shit. Rent was really cheap, $600 a month. Chris and I were vegetarians because it was cheaper--we cooked rice and beans so many nights. We priced it out. We knew the cost of the beans and the cost of the rice and we bought the onions and we're like, 'Okay, cool, this whole food element of life is under five bucks.' We can buy a Yuengling, which was like a dollar fifty, which was definitely a choice beer at that time, and that was enough. You find a cheap bike, so you don't even have to take the subway. That and some money for weed, that was your budget. That was all you needed."
Dave Sitek: "It was so cheap that you could afford to take risks and fail. If you failed at what you were doing it didn't matter because you were in Williamsburg. If you failed in Manhattan, it was different."
Eleanor Friedberger: I rode my bike everywhere. I got all of these amazing jobs that were so easy and stupid. I would work these office jobs, then go out every night, and I could afford to pay my rent" (310-311)
Speaking of Eleanor Friedberger, she really only has one revealing story, which involves the period when she was dating Alex Kapranos of Franz Ferdinand. I don't know if there will be a "deluxe edition" of Meet Me in the Bathroom that comes out in 20 years (the way Please Kill Me was later supplemented), but I would read it if there were chapters on the Fiery Furnaces, and other bands like Liars and !!!. That is one of the primary criticisms I have of the book. It could have been even bigger and better. Actually there is a brief mention of the Fiery Furnaces record deal. And this classic bomb she casually drops:
Eleanor Friedberger: "It only seemed weird that bands like the Strokes and Interpol were around at the same time as us when they started doing so well and I thought they were so bad. I just didn't give a shit about that stuff." (315)
Oh snap, Eleanor lays it down! Of course no one is obligated to like everything, but she is pretty much the only one in the book that says she didn't like those bands. It would be nice if Julian Casablancas tweeted, "Sad @eleanorfriedberger, I love your music :(," and if she replied, "Okay I guess Room on Fire is pretty okay :)." But I doubt that will happen.
Vampire Weekend signals the beginning of the end of the book. There is a special place in my heart for them, as the subject of one of the earliest posts on Flying Houses. I think that review is a little bit harsh, and I partially disavow it. And actually I think they have gotten better with each album and believe that they delivered on their early promise. Nevertheless, I am not the only one who cannot resist poking fun:
Laura Young: "I was there [at the Strokes' Madison Square Garden show in 2011]. I had seats but I traded with somebody so I could be in the pit. I thought, 'I know I'm a little bit too old for this but I'm going anyway.' I remember seeing these kids that were fifteen years old. I was either talking to them or overhearing them and they were saying, 'This is the first time I'm seeing the Strokes. I listened to them all through elementary school and middle school.' It was so cool to see them there and so excited. I don't know, maybe somewhere, somehow, years from now Vampire Weekend will do some kind of reunion show, but I can't imagine young kids being there saying, 'I love Vampire Weekend so much. I'm so excited about them. I've been listening to them since elementary school.' And if they are, they should be punched in the face." (589-590)
The story of their band is one of the most boring in the book, primarily because they all seem to have their lives together. The reason why I think I hated them so much before is because everything just seemed sort of effortless and easy for them. I doubt that was true, and the story of how Ezra Koenig lived with Dave Longstreth of the Dirty Projectors and all these other people in this quasi-bohemian house-studio is pretty interesting.
I haven't really talked about Interpol and they are a major part of the book as well. Paul Banks is quite entertaining in almost everything he says. Even though he sounds like he's really serious and kind of weird from his lyrics and singing, he is extremely self-effacing and claims to have no talent.
Paul Banks: "...'Like now to college kids, we're old people?! How the fuck did that happen?' I don't feel like I look that different but apparently I'm an old guy now. You know, I'm the guy trying to pick up eighteen-year-olds. 'Hey, kids, want some reefer?' Just kidding." (575)
The gaping hole in this book is Carlos D. He is often talked about--many myths are made about him--so his absence as a contributor feels all the more striking. He maintains an air of mystery.
In almost every other dimension, however, Meet Me in the Bathroom feels very complete and authoritative. On third thought I don't think I'm going to add it to the Best Books list--but it was definitely the best book I read in the past year. I'm not sure I'll read it again, but I think everyone should at least read it once.
Friday, June 9, 2017
Letters to Felice - Franz Kafka (1973)
Oeuvre rule: I have read "Metamorphosis" and The Trial by Kafka. As a liberal arts student at NYU, I was somewhat heavily exposed to him. "Letter to His Father" was also read in the course "The Letter as Literature," and he is casually mentioned by everyone in academia constantly. He is, in fact, one of the greatest writers of the 20th century, and one of the most important artists in history, period. Giving him this designation when his oeuvre is quite small (I still need to read Amerika, The Castle, and some short stories like "In the Penal Colony" and "The Judgment") puts him on similar ground to J.D. Salinger, but it even feels blasphemous to compare the two. Do not forget that Kafka died at a young age (40), whereas Salinger lived on to age 90. Kafka's work is classic, everlasting, whereas Salinger's influence may, or may not, be waning. It is too early to tell with the latter.
So we come to Letters to Felice. First, some background. I was offered a review copy of this book in mid-November 2016. I love Kafka, but I was not sure the book would be for me. For one, it is a book of letters, and second, I still felt there was more of his fiction to digest. Yet it seemed like an interesting book, so I requested a copy 8 days after receiving the e-mail. Then it came quickly, and it is a beautiful book, but I was immediately shocked by its size. There are 550 pages of letters alone in this volume, to say nothing of the introduction, the end notes, and other appendices. I took me a long time to read, but I supplanted it with about five other books as they arose. While I am tempted to name it one of the Best Books, ultimately I must deign to the notion that it will primarily appeal to the academic community. Still, there are so many classic moments in these letters that there is much to discuss in this review.
Let us start with "Kafka's True Will, An Introductory Essay," by Erich Heller, who also edited this volume along with Jurgen Born. I needed to read it a second time after finishing the book to try to understand what I had just read. It begins by discussing Kafka's testamentary wishes, which famously directed that his unpublished writings be burnt. Kafka had shown this will to his friend, Max Brod, in 1921, and Brod had told him he would not carry it out. There is brief mention of another will, written in pencil (the first was written in ink--both appear to be holographic) that dictates six stories should not be burnt, though they had already been published. In any case, had Kafka's wishes been honored, Amerika, The Trial, and The Castle would never have seen the light of day, to say nothing of his diaries, or Letters to Felice. One imagines Kafka rolling over in his grave, but then perhaps, being secretly pleased that his life's work had not been done in vain.
Kafka's first letter to Felice Bauer is dated September 20, 1912. The last letter reproduced in this volume was sent October 16, 1917. Thus, five years, averaging out to 100 pages of letters per year-- yet the first year alone takes the reader to page 320. Over the course of these five years, Kafka asked Felice to marry him twice. As the book ends, the reader does not witness the breaking off of the second engagement, but it apparently happened in December of 1917.
It is very difficult to review a book of letters, and I have not read many books of letters. I read a book of letters between F. Scott Fitzgerald to Ernest Hemingway, and that was very readable and entertaining. Of course, The Sorrows of Young Werther is a beautiful epistolary novel. But Letters to Felice was not meant to be published, and as noted above, will be unappealing to most readers except those seeking a greater understanding of Kafka's psyche. It is documentary evidence of his inner state and replete with extreme honesty.
Owing to this difficulty, there are only a few more things I can say about this book. First, I have put asterisks or smiley faces next to many of the passages in my copy (the benefit of avoiding twerpery), and I will excerpt several of these. Second, if there is one thing that comes across more clearly than anything else, it is this: Kafka became very insecure and paranoid when Felice did not respond quickly. He often remarks upon this in his letters, and it led me to feel this was an acceptable practice with texts. For some reason, I kept imagining Kafka living in the world of smartphones and text messages, and freaking out when Felice would not text him back, and asking, "What were you doing with your time that made it impossible for you to reply?"
There is also the matter of Kafka's profession, which appears to be a claims consultant or adjuster for an insurance company after obtaining his law degree. Of course this holds great personal interest for me, and it was difficult at times to not want to act like Kafka. That is, as a writer that makes his actual living (or wants to) in an offshoot of the legal profession. His comments on his job, and the few times he has to go to court, are hilarious.
Since we are addressing a legal aspect to this book, I have to mention a sincere annoyance of mine, and one thing law journals get right: use footnotes instead of end notes! There are 27 pages of end notes, and over 500 individual references. Much like Infinite Jest, it drove me nuts to have to constantly flip back and forth between them, perhaps because I tended to read the book during my lunch hour, with it sat propped in a silver, standing holder, and I would need to flip back, causing the holder to topple over. Now as terrible as law review articles tend to be, and as ridiculous as they look, what with half of their page being taken up by the text of footnotes, I wish that larger volumes such as this would put the explanatory note on the same page. This may be a petty thing, but I needed to point it out. In fact, to mention him again, I do believe Salinger used an occasional footnote or two in Seymour: an Introduction, and kept them on the same page.
I also enjoy his remarks on Napoleon:
"Only last Sunday afternoon Max said to me on a similar occasion: 'You talk like a girl,' But this is not quite true, for in an excellent collection of Napoleon's sayings (Note 126), which for some time now I have been dipping into whenever I can, these words are recorded: 'It is terrible to die childless,' and he was by no means sorry for himself; friends, for instance, whether by choice or necessity, were not indispensable to him. He once said: 'I haven't a friend other than Daru, who is callous and cold and suits me.' And to judge the true depth this man had access to, take this remark: 'He who knows from the beginning where he is going, will not get far.' So that when he talks of the terror of childlessness, one may believe him. And I have to be prepared to take this upon myself, for apart from everything else I would never dare expose myself to the risk of being a father." (134, December 30 to 31, 1912).
There is another passage about Napoleon too, but this review runs the risk of being interminable if I am going to excerpt every entertaining quote. As a whole, this book is not very entertaining. The love affair between Franz and Felice is quite mundane. They met at the home of Max Brod in August of 1912, and they saw each other 2-3 times a year, in a sort of long distance relationship. In June of 1913, he asked her to marry him, and she remained evasive and did not agree until April of 1914. In July of 1914 the engagement is broken off in what seems the most dramatic "action" in all of Letters to Felice, the scene at the Hotel Askanische Hof. Yet they remained close, and the next three years seem to pass by in a blur, as they become engaged a second time in July of 1917. As has already been shown, the majority of this book consists of letters in their first year of knowing one another. Kafka was a prolific letter writer, sometimes sending off multiple letters a day, and expecting, if not the same depth of effort, at the very least a timely reply. Again, though, an absurd amount of this book is Kafka being like, "Why haven't you written yet?!"
Along the way, however, there are tons of beautiful quotes, and hilarious observations and confessions. And my comparison to texting is not totally without precedent. Felice works for a company that sells parlographs, and Franz offers a list of ideas:
"5. Invent a combination of telephone and Parlograph. This really can't be too difficult. The day after tomorrow, of course, you will tell me that this has already been accomplished successfully. But it would really be of immense importance for the press, news agencies, etc. More difficult, but surely quite possible, would be a combination of gramophone and telephone. More difficult, simply because one can't understand a word the gramophone says, and a Parlograph can't very well ask for clearer pronunciation. A combination of gramophone and telephone would not be of such great universal importance; it would only be a relief to people who, like me, are afraid of the telephone. People like me, however, are equally afraid of the gramophone, so for them there is no help whatever." (168, January 22-23, 1913)
As I flip back through the pages of this book, looking for marginalia, I am struck by the feeling of familiarity with the character of Franz. He is such a humorous and sardonic fellow! It is as if his life is a great absurd comedy in which he generally does not want to live, except to write. A recent co-worker of mine had referred to him as neurotic. I would describe his style as consciously absurd and pseudo-dramatic.
"I have only just started reading the book; on the whole I stay away from everything, including books. It is extremely clumsy; but it does manage to produce one distinctive character, of whom for the time being I really don't know what to think. In any case I am not a critic, am no good at analyzing, easily misunderstand, frequently miss the point, and am left in doubt as to the overall impression." (463, March 1916)
There is really something of a surprise dramatic "twist" in the book, which I shouldn't spoil, but the letters to Grete Bloch merit mention, because they are introduced so fucking ridiculously:
"Grete Bloch and Felice Bauer met probably in 1913. Their friendship lasted a great deal longer than their relationship with Kafka. As late as 1935 Grete Bloch, as a refugee on her way to Palestine and finally to Italy, visited her friend who at that time was living with her family in Geneva. It was then she handed over to Felice some of the letters she had received from Kafka." [While we are on the subject of historical background, allow me to mention that Felice Bauer eventually moved to the United States in 1936 where she lived until she died in 1960.]
"Kafka met Grete Bloch for the first time at the end of October 1913 when, at Felice's request, she went to see him in Prague to act as an intermediary between them. The following represents all that has survived. In the third revised edition of his biography of Kafka (English edition, p.241), Max Brod published part of a letter from Grete Bloch to a friend in Palestine; this was written April 21, 1940, from Florence, where she was then living. In it she says that years ago she had an illegitimate child, a son who "when nearly 'seven years old died suddenly in Munich in 1921.' If this is correct, the child must have been born about 1914. Although the father's name is not mentioned it was clear to the recipient, Max Brod's sole informant on the subject, that she attributed the paternity to Kafka." (323)
What! The editors then go on to say that the tone of the letters to Grete does not suggest that Kafka had an intimate relationship with her--but I'm not quite sure I agree! It's almost like, he and Felice are going through a rough patch, and all of the sudden Grete comes through, Felice's friend, and Kafka is like, oh damn this girl is pretty special too.
"Once, in Dr. Weiss's company (when she happened to be lively and very friendly toward me), she said jokingly (I had been telling them that you had very much liked the Galley): Frl. Bloch seems to mean a great deal to you.' I could only answer in the affirmative. I can really say nothing about F.'s attitude toward you, less even than about her attitude toward me." (358, March 7, 1914)
Some of his letters to Grete Bloch seem more lively and interesting to read, as if he does not get bogged down by his feelings of anxiety and paranoia expressed in the letters to Felice. So there are quotable observations such as this:
"The last of my closer, unmarried, unengaged friends [Felix Weltsch] has got engaged; while I have foreseen the engagement for 3 years (for the outsider, no great perspicacity was required), he and she have known of it for a mere fortnight. Thus to some extent I am losing a friend, for a married friend isn't a true one. Anything he is told will be revealed to his wife either silently or explicitly, and the woman in whose head all information doesn't become distorted probably doesn't exist. Moreover, even if this were not so, one can no longer think of him alone, cannot expect from him that intimate comfort and help, nor even assume the possibility of such comfort or help, for now, whatever happens, one is faced by a partnership. But apart from the fact that I naturally wish him the best of everything." (349-350, February 19, 1914)
Oh, snap--Kafka dishing it out on people getting married and growing distant!
Here, he writes to Grete Bloch on the topic of her imminent departure from Vienna (which is a city he expresses no great affection for, apart from the Grillparzer Room):
"Incidentally, I don't believe that one's sadness at leaving is due to one having loved the thing one is leaving. One's sadness is probably due to the opposite. One feels that the connection are severed too easily, also that others part from one too easily; the superficial relationships which were established in the course of time and which, because they have not been closely examined during that time, almost seemed to represent intimate relationships, now prove to be as insignificant as they actually are. Sadly one remembers the pseudo-relationships that were formed, and sadly one foresees the pseudo-relationships that will be formed. Indeed, one needs both freedom and dependence, but each in its own place, and one feels very uneasy on realizing that one has got the places mixed up. It has often happened to me; it doesn't matter, rejoice with me that you are about to leave Vienna." (397-398, April 26, 1914)
It is not surprising to me that, because I often seem to internally feel something about the book I am reading, and allow it to unconsciously affect my life, I went through my own bouts of paranoia about a significant other not returning a text, and became afraid of commitment, at one point sending the following excerpt in an e-mail:
"But--please listen to me quietly--what I wanted to give you was time to consider carefully your relationship with me--for, to judge from what you have said since Easter (with the possible exception of the first two letters), I was forced to believe (please, Felice, just put yourself in my place for one moment and look at everything in the way I am forced to see it) that I am now able to keep you only be artificial means, by dispatching one letter after another, and thus not giving you time to come to your senses, and thereby urging you in your haste to use old words deprived of their old meaning. This is not my final word, for with each new letter from you even my strongest convictions begin to waver anew, but if it were so, it would really have been the only way in which you had ever disappointed me, because candor is the one thing I have expected from you at all times. I wouldn't have been surprised if at some time you had dismissed me, because you could not immediately have known me for what I am, indeed this was impossible; it was almost as though I had approached you sideways and it took some little time before we turned to face each other. Now of course I don't know what your final decision may be, but only imagine that I can sense it in your recent letters, and the one thing I cannot understand, Felice, is that you yourself shouldn't know how you feel about it. You must not imagine that all I am saying is due to your letters being short and infrequent; you used to write short letters every now and again and I was quite happy and satisfied. But your recent letters are different. My affairs are no longer as important to you, and what is much worse: you no longer bother to tell me about yourself. So what am I to do? I could no longer reply to these recent letters, and pictured you at the office on Thursday morning, sighing with relief on discovering that at long last there was no letter."
-Franz (4/26/13) (246-247)
So yes, I began to feel what Franz felt, and I had a great desire to live his sort of life--to live with my parents (to soften the weight of my soul crushing loans--something that Kafka thankfully did not have to suffer) and work as a claims consultant at an insurance company and to write in all my spare time. And I began to feel that my life was too complicated, and that I don't do nearly the amount of writing I wish I could. And I read this book very slowly, as I transitioned into a job which made me very depressed, in part perhaps because I had to commute by car and could not read on the train. I would stare at the line of cars ahead of me, holding down the brake and hitting the gas erratically. How much better it was to become lost in Kafka's idiosyncratic mind than to observe and participate in the dull monotony of highway traffic.
The other part of the book that strikes one as most notable is the scene at the Hotel Askanische Hof, which is told circumstantially through letters to Grete Bloch:
"You would be doing me a great favor if you sent me the letter that was so disastrous, for I cannot imagine what was in it that can have been so terrible." (434, July 20, 1914)
"53. Possibly one of the letters to Grete Bloch between early May and the end of June 1914. In these letters a number of lines in which Kafka voices strong doubts about the feasibility of a marriage to Felice are underlined in red, probably by Grete Bloch for the purpose of quoting them at the 'tribunal in the hotel' (Askanische Hof). See Kafka's letter to Grete Bloch of July 3, 1914: 'You needn't have quoted from the letters.'" (568, FN 53)
Signs of Kafka's illness become evident at certain points throughout the text, which includes stays at sanatoriums. There is an ominous letter near the end where he mentions coughing up blood, but one particular item written while he was in, or about to go into convalescence, struck me.
"Dear Felice, I spoke to him quite frankly, as you would have done, and eh also answered me frankly. I said 'Why don't you write? Why are you tormenting F.? That you are tormenting her is surely quite obvious, from her postcards. You promise to write, and don't. You send a telegram "letter on way," but there is no letter on the way; it doesn't get written until 2 days later. Once in a while and as an exception, a girl might be permitted to behave in this way, it could even be innocent, provided it is in keeping with her character. But in your case it is not innocent, for your silence can only mean concealment, so cannot be excused.'
He replied: 'But it can be excused, for there are circumstances in which there is little difference between expressing and concealing. My suffering is fourfold:
I cannot live in Prague. I don't know if I can live elsewhere, but that I cannot live here is the most definite thing I know.
Furthermore: This is why I cannot have F. at present.
Furthermore: I cannot help (it is even in print) admiring other people's children.
Finally: At times I feel I shall be crushed by these torments on every side. But my present suffering is not the worst. The worst is that time passes, that this suffering makes me more wretched and incapable, and prospects for the future grow increasingly more dismal." (456-457, August 9, 1915)
And on it goes. I was quite confused and wondered whether Kafka was writing about himself in the third person, or what. It struck me as being the most "unhinged" letter in the book, like seemingly schizophrenic.
There are many other beautiful passages and droll witticisms scattered throughout the text, and if this review has run long on excerpts from the text, it is only because I do not think many readers will actually seek this out for pleasure reading, unless they are writing a paper about Kafka. It does offer sometimes revealing looks into the creation of his literature, but yes, it is primarily an exercise in repetition and exasperation on the subject of Felice's responsiveness. Still, it is a beautiful book, and I am glad I read it. I do not know if, or when I will ever return to it, but I am proud to stock it in my library.
Sunday, March 26, 2017
In the All-Night Cafe: A memoir of Belle and Sebastian's formative year - Stuart David (2015)
While I can attest to being a casual fan of Belle & Sebastian, over the first couple years when I was aware of them, perhaps 2001-2003, I tended to agree with my friend that introduced me to most of the indie rock that I would later consume endlessly--that they were "boring." I should never dare to utter this condemnation aloud, however, because I mostly became exposed to B&S at NYU. They were quite popular at the time, and many swore by songs like "Get Me Away from Here I'm Dying," and If You're Feeling Sinister in general. I found it pleasant, but only for a particular mood, like studying or crying. Well, not crying so much. I was more into music to cry to at the time, and B&S were not emo, but fey or twee. Then Dear Catastrophe Waitress came out, and I liked it a bit more, but still found parts a bit boring. Recently, due to this book I had cause to discover "Your Cover's Blown," which is a B-side from that era, and it's amazing. Perhaps that was leading into the direction of The Life Pursuit which became my favorite album by them. I think their last two albums are pretty good, too. I mention this because, I was embarrassed by not liking B&S enough between 2001-2003. And it doesn't seem good enough to be a casual fan--they have no casual fans. I would say this sentiment changed generally if one thinks they've gone more mainstream in the mid-to-late aughts, or they haven't been as good, or lost part of what made them special in the first place. In any case, if they were into B&S, they were way into them.
And I mention this because the person who had occasion to recommend this book to me says he does not even like them very much. He said he thought I should read it because something about it reminded him of my writing.
So naturally, I looked for the thing that was reminiscent of my own work, in style or substance. First, there was the beginning of the book, which describes an unusual public subsidy, a sort of extremely disorganized music course, that doesn't seem possible in places like the U.S. I wrote a story (http://flyinghouses.blogspot.com/2008/07/failure-inc.html) which imagined a similar "job in the production of creative art." Second, the attention to the sometimes mundane and seemingly unremarkable detail. In my case, they are simply unremarkable details, but in Stuart David's case, they seem to indicate a deeper theme of the book.
The first passage that merits mention is something from the beginning of the book, because it is easily one of the most hilarious portions of it. But there is a touch of something wondrous about it too, that David captures:
"I looked down the list of courses again, even more desperately this time, and it remained a sorry selection: flower arranging, dog grooming, car mechanics. But then, just when I was on the verge of giving up all hope, something seemed to materialise near the bottom of the page--a late addition, in tiny writing. A course in Glasgow that appeared to have something to do with popular music. I thought I might be hallucinating. I called the flipchart man over and asked him about it. He took the piece of paper from me and stood starting at it blankly.
'Hmn...' he said after a while. 'I didn't know that was on there. That sounds strange.'
Then he wrote my name down, said he would look into it for me and sent us all home." (6)
But that is a description of how he came to sign up for it, and it
is funnier when he describes what it was actually like:
"One thing that particularly intrigued me, though, as I wandered around, was the poster which hung on at least one wall of every room I went into.
"One thing that particularly intrigued me, though, as I wandered around, was the poster which hung on at least one wall of every room I went into.
It was a poster of a band, but a band I'd never heard of and they
looked like a cross between The Commitments and Take That, if such a cross is
possible. There were seven or eight of them in the photograph, most
prominently a woman with pineapple hair who had a saxophone strapped around her
neck, and a guy in a vest who was lying on the floor in front of them all,
propped up on one elbow, staring seductively into the camera. I wondered
if they were a real band, or if the poster was a fake, rigged up to give the
detention centre the illusion of being a music course for the benefit of the
inmates.
Time dragged. All day, nothing happened. No one played
any music, no one even picked up an instrument and held it just to pose.
There didn't seem to be any musical instruments anywhere in the whole
building, except for a drum kit with no h-hats and no cymbals in a corner of
the freezing-cold live room. I started to think the day would never end,
but then, late in the afternoon, a woman came out of the main office and called
me and two or three other people who had started the course that day into the
studio control room. I instantly recognised her as the person holding a
saxophone in the band poster plastered on the walls." (11)
Soon, Stuart David meets Stuart Murdoch, and they play with a
couple other people, in a couple one-off gigs as bands with different names.
Eventually they settle on the name of Rhode Island, and then finally
become Belle & Sebastian. This is in the mid-1990's in Scotland, so
the brit pop scene looms large, and the sound of the band is quite different.
They have always had an original sound. Murdoch's voice is
unmistakable, and nobody sounds like him, though I suppose he sounded a tiny
bit like Nick Drake (I only use the past tense because one must acknowledge
that B&S are not the same band they used to be, though it does appear that
it has always been defiantly Murdoch's).
I had a couple other passages to excerpt, both of which are sort
of ensconced in 90's ephemera, but there were two main things I wanted to say
about this book. First, there is the cover. This looks exactly like
a cover of any of the other B&S albums, instantly recognizable and iconic.
In that sense, it's a perfect cover. Second, while it doesn't remind me exactly of Our Band Could Be Your Life, it
reads a lot like one of the chapters about the bands in that book. It
takes place in the U.K. in the 90's, not the U.S. in the 80's, but it's
definitely indie rock, and a lot of the same influences are in play.
There's also the added element that it is written by an insider and not a
journalist or friend of the band. It's also obviously a lot longer than
one of those chapters, but a pretty short book in general. The main thing
that reminds me of it, though, is how it is just about the beginning of the band, and stops after the
release of Tigermilk,
basically at the point where If
You're Feeling Sinister was
being recorded. I believe Stuart David left the band shortly thereafter,
but there is no indication of any of the reasons why he would do so--except for
it being "Murdoch's band."
There was one other famous group that came out of the same Beatbox
recording studio space, and though I had never heard of them, many others must
ostensibly have:
"The boy band themselves never seemed to be there.
There was a rumour that they were from Newcastle, and only ever came in
at weekends when the course was closed. But we did see them once, being
hurried up through the corridor with towels thrown over their heads to hide
their identities. Before they reached the studio, though, they removed
the towels, and they drew a stark contrast with the musicians on the course,
the lazy figures sitting on the floor with their backs up against the wall, or
lying on the punctured sofas dotted about the place. They seemed to have
come from a different world, a world of airbrushing and plastic moulding.
It was as if they already existed in the world of photographs, even though
they were in the corridor.
And then they were gone, ushered into the sanctuary of the control
room, and we all agreed that they were going nowhere, destined to disappear
into the same oblivion as the band in the posters on the wall.
Their name was 911.
Over they next five years they sold ten million records."
(90)
David does mention his love for the band Momus, and how he bonds
with another person at Beatbox over him. His anecdote about listening to
his music on the internet is pure nostalgia, though an experience that many
probably have not had:
"Semple was another Momus fan, an obsessive on the same level
as I had become since Stuart brought me the mixtapes when I was ill.
Momus was probably one of the first artists to have his own website, and
he was certainly one of the first to have his songs on there. Or at least
clips of his songs, which even at thirty seconds long stretched the internet to
the limit of its capabilities in 1995. Semple's patience for sitting on
the sofa in the office, quietly smoking cigarettes, was limitless--and it
needed to be for the specific task of listening to the clips on Momus' website.
When I found out what he was doing in there, I decided I had to get in on
it too, and I got permission from Neil to have internet lessons. This
involved me sitting on the sofa beside Semple, while Neil's laptop sat on a
desk in a far-off corner of the room, plugged into the phone line and blocking
all incoming and outgoing calls to and from the office, while we waited upwards
of a quarter of an hour for our next Momus clip to download.
We were addicts, anxious to hear clips of songs we'd never heard
before, and it didn't matter that the quality was so low they sounded as if
they were being played to us over the telephone in the 1920s, or that each one
cost more to download in phone bill charges than it would have cost to buy the
whole album in a shop. We lived for those thirty seconds of lo-fi magic,
sent to us by science fiction from the future, when each one had to be erased
from the hard drive before the next one was downloaded because there wasn't
enough room to store two of them at once." (115-116)
Friday, February 5, 2016
Hunger Makes Me a Modern Girl: a memoir - Carrie Brownstein (2015)
I first became aware of Carrie Brownstein and Sleater-Kinney when I was a sophomore in college, back when they were touring behind One Beat. There were a couple girls I met that burned me a copy of Dig Me Out and let me accompany to them to the show they played at Irving Plaza, one of a series of NYU concerts that cost $5 or $10 per ticket. I would see them several times over the next few years, and collect all of their albums (except their first). I kind of had a crush on Carrie Brownstein when I saw them, though people seemed to intimate that she wouldn't necessarily appreciate that crush. I got my hair cut in the spring semester of my sophomore year and a friend remarked that I looked like "that girl from Sleater-Kinney" (that I presumed wasn't Corin Tucker due to our facial features). I just assumed that Carrie Brownstein was old, because they had been together for so long. I come to find out that she was younger than I am now when they went on their hiatus in 2006. She's like, barely older than me (at least to me--and maybe I'm alone, except for Nicki Minaj, when I say that '06 feels like yesterday), may or may not be single, and has one of the greatest and most unique catalogs of any rock band in history under her belt, and what, six seasons of a seminal sketch comedy show? She's like, perfect. Whatever she is on, I want to be on.
I'm only not naming this book one of the Best Books of Flying Houses because I didn't bestow that recognition upon Kim Gordon's Girl in a Band. Both deserve to be on the list, but in a way they are too easy: they both had such incredible stories to tell that the books must have written themselves, to an extent. I feel a little dirty saying this, particularly in light of my previous review of an anthology of the genre, but I think memoirs are easier to write than fiction--except for the requisite "bloodletting" that they generally require. All the source material is there before you; all you need to do is to decide where to start, where to end, and what to leave out. You don't need to think up names for characters, or build whole mythologies out of imaginary people. Having said that, Hunger Makes Me a Modern Girl is probably better written than Girl in a Band, but Kim Gordon has her own separate barometer of authenticity or credibility that renders it more powerful. Gordon is certainly vulnerable and confessional in hers; Brownstein opens up a lot in hers, but keeps most of her ex-lovers anonymous. Sonic Youth is a bit more of an institution than Sleater-Kinney--at least, it was, when it broke up, before Sleater-Kinney came back. Now, who knows, Kim was nearly 60 when Sonic Youth folded, so if Sleater-Kinney goes on another ten or fifteen years, then I would say they're of equal cultural import. Frankly, though I love Sonic Youth deeply and dearly, so much that they must be included if ever asked to name my top five favorite bands, Sleater-Kinney has a stronger and more consistent catalog, and albums that are generally more solid from top to bottom. I like them all--except maybe for The Hot Rock--I mean, I like The Hot Rock, I'd prefer the album to music by most other bands, but it's just my least favorite by them. Maybe the self-titled is my least favorite because I don't have it on my iPod, but I actually don't have No Cities to Love on it (owing mostly to my own cheapness and reliance on Spotify and my unwillingness to load up my precariously aged device), though that album sits comfortably alongside their best work, which, to my estimation, includes The Woods and One Beat. I love Dig Me Out and Call the Doctor, and All Hands on the Bad One to a slightly lesser degree, and The Hot Rock to a slightly less degree than that--but they're just a band that seems to get better with each new album they release. I saw them about a year ago in Chicago and they were as good as they've ever been. I seriously hope they come back every few years or so with new music, but another longer hiatus seems inevitable, particularly after reading about the exhaustion that Brownstein recounts occurring after each album and tour cycle.
So I love the music and I love her work on "Portlandia." Do you really think I would say this is a bad book?
For a while near the end, I thought she was getting a little bit boring, writing about her pets. I was like, oh, I wrote about my pets in my memoir, so that's normal. Regardless, just writing about your pets can sometimes be boring. However, she writes about her pets, in this segment, to ridiculously powerful effect, to the point that it is one of the most heartbreaking moments of the entire book. There's a quote on the back from Miranda July, whom I learned was a friend and collaborator of Brownstein's in their earlier days (and more recently if I'm not mistaken)--Brownstein admits at one point that they both wondered if they should be together--as well as a noteworthy artist herself. Me and You and Everyone We Know is a modern indie classic, and she also has a pretty good book of short stories, from what I've read. July writes, as the last sentence in her blurb, "I wept." I wonder if this story about her pets instigated those emotions.
Make no mistake, this is a great book. It's a must read for Sleater-Kinney fans and musicians everywhere. But it takes a really incredible memoir (A Heartbreaking Work of Staggering Genius, for example) to make the Best Books list. Brownstein is a terrific writer, but I must admit that she doesn't seem to employ the "be harder on myself than anyone else" rule of memoir-writing. Now she might say, "Come on, I'm pretty hard of myself a lot here!" And truthfully, she is pretty hard on herself a lot of the time. But she still could have gone harder, more embarrassing, more vulnerable, more revealing. This is a personal preference for memoir writers, and I totally understand not wanting to give out the most painful, secret, unflattering memories one has of oneself, but it's my personal preference that memoirs are as honest and unflinching as possible. I would never say this memoir is dishonest in any way, shape or form, but I would have liked to have known more about Brownstein's personal feelings on bisexuality. I believe she identifies as bi, though in practice mostly sees women, and she keeps a fair number of her exes anonymous and gender neutral. It would be a generous act, if somewhat unsettling, for a writer to open up about such personally confounding matters. Brownstein certainly describes her first moments "experimenting," but never really addresses the "choice" that's implicit in identifying as bisexual. That would be something that I just personally would like to read.
It's also pretty much where my criticism stops, because even in that last paragraph, I had to qualify every blanket statement I made about this book. It took me about a week to read this book, and I loved most every minute of it. If you go purely by ease of reading and entertainment and occasional moments of profundity, this book should definitely be on the Best Books list. It's only out of my snobbishness towards memoirs that it's not.
***
Carrie Brownstein grew up in the suburbs outside of Seattle--mostly Redmond, WA. At this point I must make another personal statement: Brownstein's childhood memories are primarily set in the 1980's, and as such feel very close to mine. At least in the sense that, I had three older siblings who were closer in age to her, so we had some Cabbage Patch Dolls in our home. Our father also went to Australia on business and brought back a few things. And we were also in the suburbs of a big city and we also had a dog named Buffy. The similarities pretty much end there, though. Brownstein had one younger sister. Her parent's marriage broke up while she was in high school, her mother suffering from anorexia nervosa and her father suffering from repressed homosexual feelings. These are delicately detailed in the third and fourth chapters "Disappearance" and "No Normal."
These very personal chapters showcase Brownstein's exemplary talent for writing (as if she needed to be talented at one more thing). Earlier I've accused her of not being hard enough on herself in this book, but I want to say something else to tip the balance: she is extremely modest in this book. She never once even seems to admit that she is a good musician, guitarist, songwriter, performer--anything. Sometimes she admits that Sleater-Kinney is a very good band, but she is always laying the praise on Corin and Janet (in truth, Sleater-Kinney is such a good band because all three of them--like, say, Shellac--are ferocious players). In writing about her mother's disease and her father's guarded lifestyle, she exhibits tenderness, strength, empathy, and realness. She doesn't pity them for their troubles and she is very level-headed about she handles them. She laments that her family was not "together" throughout most of her life, but she really seems like one of the best sisters or children anyone could have. She learned from these troubles and became a stronger person for it. (There could be more details about exactly what happened with her mother leaving the family--she briefly mentions staying at her house with her 2nd husband during the recording of Dig Me Out, I think--but I'm not going to push that criticism too hard.)
Most of this book, however, is about Sleater-Kinney. And while the details about their earlier records are interesting (I had no idea they started the band in Australia, and the chapter about that is super weird--I don't know how they survived in the early part of their career, and I would have liked to see a few more paragraphs devoted to their ostensible poverty), it is really the material on the later stuff that is the most compelling. Because despite their steady growth, they were never "really big" until the end, when they opened for Pearl Jam on the One Beat tour and when they finished up with The Woods. When they got really big, Brownstein seemed more prone to depression, which seems odd but makes sense in a "Kurt Cobain kind of way" (which she references, and must reference, as this book is also thoroughly a document of the Pacific Northwest scene, K Records, Olympia, Seattle, Portland, grunge and riot grrl). In fact, the book opens up in a kind of "teaser chapter" (not unlike Girl in a Band) about the shingles she developed on The Woods tour and her increasing frustrations with the band. It's sort of unbelievable that anyone making what must have been pretty good money, doing what they love, could ever be unhappy with their situation, but Brownstein convincingly portrays the Big Picture and why it wasn't working for them (primarily due, it seems, to Tucker wanting to be a good mother to her children, which Brownstein completely understands).
Here is one example of how Brownstein takes this memoir to another level--her ability to write like a writer:
"The ways that oddity and detachment intersected in the family might best be summed up in the story of the family dog. Buffy, a forty-pound golden retriever mix we adopted from the pound when I was six and my sister was three, had been smothered with love in her youth. Buffy, for whom we took a pet first-aid class in order to learn how to be responsible owners, who was the muse for my grade-school poetry exercises ('Buffy is fluffy!'), our sidekick for picnics and outings, on the sidelines for soccer games, and the subject most featured in my first roll of film--posing on my baby blanket and wearing sunglasses--after I was given a camera for my birthday. Buffy, who followed us around the cul-de-sacs while we engaged in dirt clod fights with the neighbor kids, and trotted after us while we rode Big Wheels and eventually bikes. Buffy, who suffered the sting of the archaic idea that you could punish a dog by smacking it on the nose with a rolled-up newspaper and whose tail was run over by my mother as she backed the car out of the driveway. And Buffy, turned back into a stray in her own home on account of the rest of us surrendering to emptiness, drifting away from anything we could call familiar, her skin itching and inflamed, covered with sores and bites, like tattoos, like skywriting, screaming with redness, as if to say Please, please pet me! But we didn't. When we decided to put her down, not because she was sick but because she was old and neglected--a remnant of a family we no longer recognized--my father asked my sister to do it. My sister was sixteen. She drove the dog to the vent one day after school by herself. No one else said good-bye." (34-35)
And then beneath that is a hilarious picture of Brownstein as a young girl with Buffy and a Cabbage Patch Doll. It was moments such as this that reminded me of my earliest memories from the mid-to-late 80's. The only thing that would have made that paragraph more literary is if the word "the" had been excised before "cul-de-sacs." Brownstein may as well write a novel whenever Portlandia wraps.
There are great little references to other musicians in this book. One of my favorites involves Jeremy Enigk, because he's relatively obscure, but not to those that understand what "emo" really means. I guess I was surprised to read that he was pretty popular. There is also this shocking anecdote about tour bus listening:
"We smoked cigarettes and weed, when available, ate copious amounts of chocolate and cheese, and fell asleep mostly tipsy if not outright drunk. On one long drive, in a fit of giddiness and in the spirit of sisterhood and spreading cheer, Corin and I convinced Janet to throw a mixtape out of the van window. It was a cassette she'd been listening to nonstop, made for her by a friend, a boy she was trying to no longer have a crush on. That boy was Elliott Smith. I still think about that tape, flung, and how I urged it to be so. Gone." (147)
Harsh! Finally, there is a priceless one about Jack White near the very end. It's not really worth excerpting, just a funny story. There is also a funny story about Sleater-Kinney's groupies, or lack thereof. Brownstein does open up about her personal life here, and it is quite endearing to read about trying to maintain a relationship while on tour. We will end with another extremely literary passage, this one in the fashionable 2nd person:
"Here's one way not to go about diminishing the distance: Obsessively call your girlfriend, who is eleven years older than you, crying and telling her you hate being on tour. Rack up more than $1,000 in pre-cellphone calling card fees on various payphones because you are hopelessly in love, willing to ditch everything for this person, and paranoid that she will go back to dating men while you are away. Get so worried that you walk into a family-run restaurant--perhaps the only restaurant--in the town of Lokev, Slovenia (population: around 1,000), ask to borrow their cordless phone, and call your girlfriend some more (sticking them with an international long-distance bill). Write lugubrious, handwritten love letters that compare thee to a summer's day. Drive your bandmates crazy by quoting your older girlfriend all the time and only reading books or listening to music that she has recommended. Now your bandmates are practically begging you to dump her. But, guess what, she dumps you. Of course she does. This girlfriend, who also plays music but who is not as successful as you in this field, you think she wants to hear how sad you are to have an album that is blowing up?! She doesn't. Months later you are still angry and confused and for the first time very, very heartbroken. You freak out and drive to her house one morning and place a bag containing every letter she ever wrote you on her doorstep. Then you write songs for what will become The Hot Rock, songs about a love that is so airless, it's suffocating. Songs about wanting to steal your heart back from someone you never feel deserved it. And thus begins a cycle, of falling in love and then getting hurt, or hurting someone else by falling out of love with them. About trying to maintain closeness despite geographical disparities, then finding inspiration from all the ways you feel splintered and separate, hurt and broken. So, this is one version, and not a pretty one, of being young and in a band and trying to be in a relationship. This is the version in which being gone and busy eats at you because you are scared of being left even though you are the one who is technically always leaving." (151-152)
You should read this book, even if you've never heard of Sleater-Kinney. You will not be disappointed.
Saturday, January 16, 2016
Just Kids - Patti Smith (2010)
Let's go old school with this review. Oeuvre rule: I first became aware of Patti Smith 13 years ago, when I took a course called "Writing New York" at NYU. The syllabus was interesting: it primarily consisted of a big anthology of essays and stories about New York written by famous authors over the previous 200 years, starting with Washington Irving's descriptions of the city as it existed in the financial district at its birth. "Bartleby, the Scrivener" by Herman Melville (1853) was also included, and moved me deeply. There was some of the usual stuff by the Beats, and some ultra modern stuff, like the entirety of "Angels in America." There were three even greater curve balls: The Dark Knight Returns, which I skipped at the time and would love 9 years later, The Velvet Underground and Nico, an album I already owned, and Horses by Patti Smith. Our professors told us that Patti Smith was a poet that became a musician. Later when I did mushrooms with a friend that year, he put on Horses and said that everyone had it wrong--psychedelic jam bands were not the preferred musical accompaniment to such an experience; Patti Smith was.
Fast forward 8 years and I'm doing an internship in law school and I see one of the co-workers with a copy of Just Kids under his arm. I was aware of the book at the time and was interested to read it, but then I went on a dating website and "expanded my options" and who should visit my profile but some person announcing that they were currently reading Just Kids and I quickly realize this is the same cubicle neighbor I know and I "narrow my options" again in fear and embarrassment. After a few weeks, I realize it's just one of those things and nothing awkward comes out of it but I've got to admit that it colored my impression of the book. After M Train was released last year, I figured enough time had passed.
I've written previously about Patti Smith regarding her excerpts in Please Kill Me and if it's not clear, I consider her a national treasure. According to interviews, she wrote most of Just Kids and M Train at Caffe Reggio. When I lived in NYC it was very exciting to think of who you might run into, but Patti Smith was probably right there the few times I went in that coffee shop and didn't even notice. What would you say to such people, though? I wouldn't know what to say until after reading this book. It won the National Book Award and while I really don't like naming back-to-back reviews "Best Books," this is just such a charming story, with authenticity in spades, that it would be wrong to say a Raymond Carver biography is more worthwhile: this is the more digestible volume.
When I took that course, the professors made much of Smith's adulation for Rimbaud. Now here, Smith finally writes about how she traveled to Rimbaud's hometown and stayed in the attic of an inn on a horsehair mattress and tried to summon his spirit:
"After a time, I left, and returned to the warmth of my hotel room and its provincial flowers. Tiny flowers spattering the walls, just as the sky had been spattered with budding stars. This was the solitary entry in my notebook. I had imagined that I would write the words that would shatter nerves, honoring Rimbaud and proving everyone's faith in me, but I didn't." (230)
Smith writes of her worship of great artists and heroes from the past, such as Joan of Arc, Baudelaire and Jean Genet. And it occurred to me gradually that Smith has achieved the status of a living legend. Not only is she a national treasure, but a world treasure. Her musical contributions stand on their own, but with Just Kids she adds another medium to her wheelhouse. One expects that her versatility and passion will be worshiped by future artists.
***
Just Kids is as much about Robert Mapplethorpe as it is herself.
***
Okay I just want to say I can't really go on because yesterday marked the death of David Bowie and it's just way too emotional to be writing about artists from this era that shared so many similarities, particularly as I was situating Smith into a context as one of the Great Artists of our Time. I don't want to say Bowie is any better than her (they were quite close in age and also worked in a variety of mediums) but I don't recall his being mentioned in Just Kids. Many other musicians of the time appear (Bobby Neuwirth, Bob Dylan, Allen Lanier from Blue Oyster Cult (a pretty serious boyfriend of hers), Jimi Hendrix, Janis Joplin, etc.) but not so many from the so-called "punk era" (Tom Verlaine excepted), and perhaps M Train will have a Bowie story or two. Smith did post a photo on Facebook yesterday of her and Bowie singing together in 2004 or 2005. She seems to have a penchant for covering other artists' songs, so I would not be surprised if she shows up at some kind of NYC memorial for him, not unlike her rendition of "Perfect Day" after the death of Lou Reed roughly one year ago.
Sorry but the moment just needed to be cataloged. I don't think I should write obituaries or elegies or memorials or remembrances or tributes because they don't get a lot of traffic, the exception being Roger Ebert because of his extraordinary influence on my critical work.
***
But yes, this is book is decidedly about Mapplethorpe and my knowledge of him went no further than a few friends in college steeped in the art world trying to make me uncomfortable by shoving certain racy photos in my face. That, and a brief snippet from Roland Barthes' Camera Lucida, which considered a self-portrait he had taken. That, and the last track from the AIDS benefit compilation No Alternative which ended with Patti Smith dedicating an ode to him. Finally, of course, the stories already shared in Please Kill Me.
I pretty much knew he was gay, but he really comes off as being straight in the beginning, bi in the middle, and gay at the end. That's not the way it always is, but that's the case some of the time, and probably a lot more often in the 60's and 70's. He basically was Patti Smith's boyfriend for a couple years, and they lived together almost like a married couple. Mapplethorpe's mother, actually, believed they were husband and wife up until the point of his death in 1989. He came from a devoutly Catholic family and his parents did not believe a man and a woman should live together as they did unless they were married. Even though he started going out with another dude, they continued to live together. Patti continued to see other dudes, too. In between, they were sometimes still intimate. Their bond is a truly beautiful thing to behold. If everyone was lucky enough to experience the love that they shared for one another, the world would probably be a much better place.
***
It's quite remarkable how Smith is able to pinpoint the exact date (Memorial Day, 1967) when both she and Mapplethorpe, states apart, committed themselves to the pursuit of art. Also remarkable is the fact that Mapplethorpe is seemingly the first person that Smith meets a couple months later when she ventures out to make it on her own in NYC. I've got to be honest here: I feel like she's stretching the truth just a tiny bit. Like, I'm sure the events happened as they are described, but come on--Mapplethorpe probably did trip on acid that Memorial Day and make that drawing and Smith probably did genuflect before that statue of Joan of Arc in Philadelphia--attaching a greater significance to the situation is what one is supposed to do in a book like this. And maybe she had a meaningful conversation with someone other than him that day when she tried to find her friends at Pratt, but whatever. This is a super petty criticism.
While we do not live in New York in the 1970's, the great value of this book is its portrayal of "the artist's life." They are poor and they live together and they support one another and they have moments of great luck and they network like crazy. They live in the Chelsea Hotel and they go in the back room at Max's Kansas City and basically try to hobnob with the post-Warhol crowd. Mapplethorpe sort of wants to be Warhol, and Patti tries on a variety of guises before settling into the one that fits. Maybe that last sentence is inaccurate: Mapplethorpe also goes through a variety of experiments with different mediums before he is given a Polaroid camera as a gift.
Along the way Mapplethorpe is reduced to doing dishonorable things for money.
"He went to a placement service to get part-time work but nothing panned out. Although he sold an occasional necklace, breaking into the fashion business was slowgoing. Robert got increasingly depressed about money, and the fact that it fell on me to get it. It was partially the stress of worrying about our financial position that drove him back to the idea of hustling.
Robert's early attempts at hustling had been fueled by curiosity and the romance of Midnight Cowboy, but he found working on Forty-second Street to be harsh. He decided to shift to Joe Dallesandro territory, on the East Side near Bloomingdale's, where it was safer.
I begged him not to go, but he was determined to try. My tears did not stop him, so I sat and watched him dress for the night ahead. I imagined him standing on a corner, flushed with excitement, offering himself to a stranger, to make money for us.
'Please be careful,' was all I could say.
'Don't worry. I love you. Wish me luck.'
Who can know the heart of youth but youth itself? (135)
Another pleasure of this book is the effortlessly beautiful prose. Smith is economical with her words and describes a vast array of events. I can only imagine that she kept quite detailed diaries throughout these years. Either that, or she is blessed with a photographic memory. Actually, there are many photographs in the book, so perhaps it is a mix of the two: the photograph as diary.
There really is nothing "fancy" about this book, and its sheer modesty is responsible for a great deal of its charm. Smith certainly could be said to be "artsy," but she is never arch or snobbish. She comes off like an enthusiastic teenager, and her sincerity has an infectious effect on the reader.
I'm at a loss for what else to say about this book, except that, I wasn't going to add it to the Best Books list until I got to the end. The ending is undoubtedly the most powerful section of the book:
"There was no one present save his nurse and she left us to ourselves. I stood by his bed and took his hand. We stayed like that for a long time, not saying anything. Suddenly he looked up and said, 'Patti, did art get us?'
I looked away, not really wanting to think about it. 'I don't know, Robert. I don't know.'
Perhaps it did, but no one could regret that. Only a fool would regret being had by art; or a saint. Robert beckoned me to help him stand, and he faltered. 'Patti,' he said, 'I'm dying. It's so painful.'
He looked at me, his look of love and reproach. My love for him could not save him. His love for life could not save him. It was the first time that I truly knew he was going to die. He was suffering physical torment no man should endure. He looked at me with such deep apology that it was unbearable and I burst into tears. He admonished me for that, but he put his arms around me. I tried to brighten, but it was too late. I had nothing more to give him but love. I helped him to the couch. Mercifully, he did not cough, and he fell asleep with his head on my shoulder.
The light poured through the windows upon his photographs and the poem of us sitting together a last time. Robert dying: creating silence. Myself, destined to live, listening closely to a silence that would take a lifetime to express." (275-276)
One could only pray for such a beautiful tribute from a friend. Over the past week, I've seen tributes and homages like I've never seen before. Bowie touched millions of lives and will be remembered as long as music is recorded. Mapplethorpe doesn't possess quite the same cultural cache, but he was very close in age, and left this world far too early. He will be remembered by anyone devoted to the art of photography, but he might have accomplished so much more. Regardless, Smith has done her part to keep his memory alive to the wider public. There are few better gifts that a human being may bestow.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)





