don’t kill the story!

A quote from E.L. Doctorow’s introduction to The Best American Short Stories 2000:

“…it is a fiction in which society is surmised as the darkness around the narrative circle of light. In other words, the scale of the short story predisposes it to the isolation of the self. And the author’s awareness of loneliness is a literary dignity he grants his characters in spite of their circumstances…”

Oh my god. I would yawn if I weren’t completely paralyzed from boredom.

YES, I am about to rant.

I LOVE books. I LOVE short stories. I LOVE stories. Reading, hearing, creating STORIES.

I even went to school for a frighteningly long time and got a DEGREE in stories.

Well, that’s what I wanted to get my degree in. I ended up getting my degree in literature.

Which is not the same thing. But it was the closest I could get.

Do I think that Doctorow knows what he’s talking about? Certainly! It can be useful to dissect and label the pieces of stories, as you would a frog.

But the appreciation of frogs or stories is not dependent on such dissection! There is a more holistic way to approach stories.

This is one of my major frustrations with formal education regarding literature. I understand the lure of charts and diagrams and answer books.

But they are doomed to being incomplete and therefore false.

For what the codification and dissection have to offer, I appreciate them. But for what they exclude, I loathe them.

Mr. Doctorow, and all literature professors, don’t kill the story to examine it. It lives in the reading. At least let the readers read it before you tell them what they have to see in it.

The Best American Non-Required Reading 2002

Sometimes, it’s hard to make it through a whole novel. But you really want the satisfaction of reading a good story.

Short stories really scratch that itch.

When I’m busy, and I really want to escape into a story, I often read compilations or anthologies.

I found this one, The Best American Non-Required Reading from 2002. David Eggers edited it, and I had been interested in reading more of his stuff. Although I’ve been attracted to him through articles and other things, I still haven’t read his main works, such as the magazine McSweeney’s. Well, at least I admit it.

It was a wicked little collection. David Sedaris was included, although I can’t say his story was the best one. I loved Rodney Rothman’s story of crashing the corporate world without actually working there. Supreme.

McKenzie’s “Stop That Girl” was engaging. It was a very female story, lots of interesting women in it.

But “Higher Education” by Gary Smith was my favorite. It will stay with me. So wholesome it could have done just as easily in a Reader’s Digest, it was needed in this young, hip, cynical compilation.

I’m young enough to be the same kind of cynical Eggers is aiming for. And I also get cynical of my own cynicism. I love that this story ends it, and shows that yes, one person can make a difference and be as real and true to himself as humanly possible.

Middlemarch by George Elliot

I finally finished this book. I think it took me upwards of 6 months. It’s long. And it’s not really that fast-moving.

I did care about the characters though.

But the real reason I persevered is because my Victorian lit teacher said that Middlemarch is Elliot’s quintessential book. I had read Mill On the Floss in his class and truly enjoyed it. He said he would have liked to have us read Middlemarch, but it was too long to read for the class. We were already reading a lot of other books.

When I finished Middlemarch, I really wished that I had read in it a class. It seems to me that there was a lot going on, and that I would have been better able to understand it if I’d had some people to talk it out with.

I especially thought that the ladies in the book were interesting archetypes. This was not a book about one female heroine. Or even one male hero. There were a lot of stories of different people who chose to live their lives in different ways.

Dorothea is the most interesting character. But Mary Garth is very sympathetic, and Rosamond had promise. Celia, Dorothea’s sister, could have gone either way. She ended up being a little too good a fit for the mold of society. That made her much less interesting.

But she had no desire to be interesting.

Well, in the absence of a class discussion, I looked up some websites to see what others had to say. Here is one website’s list of major themes.

But the specific treatment of the women on the book was lacking.

Too bad. I guess nothing really takes the place of free discussion.

I think, right now, that I liked Mill on the Floss much better. But maybe Middlemarch will grow on me with time.

In The Beginning…

(This is Cross-Posted)

Everybody knows Mark Twain, but he has written more stories than most people are aware of.

I was gifted with The Diary of Adam and The Diary of Eve for an anniversary present some time ago.

They are wickedly funny. The oldest arguments between man and wife had very early beginnings. I recommend couples reading them aloud to one another. It’s fun to compare the different perspectives on the same events, too.

Check it out.

The Ends Justify the Meanness

(This is cross-posted)

Some days I go to work, and I can smile at people. We exchange pleasantries and stale jokes in the coffee room.

It is easy to forget that none of them want what’s best for me. NONE of them.

In a perfect world, we would all work together towards improved efficiency, lowering costs and bettering service.

This is not that world. Everyone has to watch out for their own interests.

And that’s not such a bad thing. Who is the one most qualified to watch out for your own interests than you? really, the scheme is an excellent division of labor.
In the system, NOT looking out for your own interests would really be letting your employer down.

A book that I picked up at a trade show after a cranky and frustrating morning at work reminds me of my duty to look out for number one.

What Would Machiavelli Do? the Ends Justify the Meanness

It’s pretty silly, but sometimes I have to remember that I am not among friends. I am among co-workers.

The Portrait of Dorian Gray

My wonderfully intelligent book club voted on this book for February. I’d read a lot of Oscar Wilde, but not this one.

As far as I know, it’s his only novel.

It had all kinds of interesting philosophical propositions in it. Like, what is the value of physical beauty when compared to beauty of the soul?
And, how much of our motivation to do the right things stems from whether we will be caught?

But one of the things that made this book delightful to read was the razor wit of Oscar Wilde.

Those late Victorians were just fabulous at turning a phrase on a pin. Gilbert & Sullivan spring to mind.

So wicked and most of the time, so true!

The book was a lot of fun, but it was weighty too. It was a good book to have a discussion about.

Bargain bin Paradise

I was supposed to meet someone at the Barnes and Noble in Pasadena. He didn’t show.

I didn’t really expect him to.

But I didn’t want to miss a chance of checking out a new book store. And the meeting supplied a justification for the 6 dollars I had to fork out for parking.

In the bargain bin, for ONE dollar, I found a hardback of Molly Peacock’s Paradise, Piece by Piece.

I’d never heard of her before, but the back of the book said, “By exploring her choice not to have children, Molly Peacock discovers what has made her herself.”

That seemed worth a buck.

As it turns out, Molly Peacock is a poet of sonnets, and someone I should perhaps be aware of, since I aspire to be a literature snob.

Well, the book is supposed to be about her choice not to have children.

She’s from an earlier time than I; to me the choice not to have children does not seem so amazing. This is due in a large part to the battle that 60s and later feminists did to change American culture. Women now are not defined entirely by the female capacity of hatching eggs and lactating.

Not so much anyway.

So for me, the thrust and thread of the stories was how Molly learned to deal with others’ expectations for her.

Her mother expected things from her.
Her father expected things.
Her sister expected.

Her lovers, her husbands, her employers and her students expected things.
Random strangers expected things.

But she also expected things from herself.
She had to learn to listen to herself and screen out other people.

It’s a very hard thing to do, to choose and shape your own destiny. Deciding on the shape of your life, what you will and won’t do, based fundamentally on your own desires and needs takes courage. It is not accomplished in one moment.

I like how she continues to revisit her choices and decisions–sometimes because others challenge her, but sometimes because she herself is completely unsure of what she’s doing.

I relate to that.

The books is on sale on Amazon, too. It’s definitely worth it.
Good bathtub reading.

sf stories

This was obviously Cross-Posted on Blogcritics. But I didn’t want my own blog to miss out
***

Blogcritics is a beautiful thing. And I don’t care if it’s self-promotion, it deserves to be said. It’s a wonderful thing to have a collection of interesting people giving their own opinions and publishing them in a place that others can get to.

It’s hard to find fresh and unfettered points of view sometimes.

Except on the internet! The internet is full of that sort of thing.

If you know where to look.

I know we are supposed to point to Amazon.com when we recommend a book. It’s kind of cheating, but I want to recommend a book.

San Francisco Stories by Derek Powazek is a really good collection of stories. Derek caught the mood of foggy, laid-back, soul-searching San Francisco.

If you love the City by the Bay, or even just the idea of it, get the book!

I know you San Francisco-philes would love the feeling of getting an off-the-beaten-track book as well.

Derek started this thing as a website, sfstories.com. I don’t remember how I stumbled upon it, but it touched me and I kept coming back.

I don’t live in the bay area anymore, but I went back there recently and found out he’d made a book.

GO, web-boy, GO!

So check it out. It’s worth a look.

the culture of tolkien

Readers, I am so excited about The Lord of The Rings movie coming out!

I was talking to a friend at work, and I mentioned some of the background mythology for this story. He wanted more information about it. Well, I started to write an email, and I couldn’t stop. It’s more of a blog post. Here you are:

Beowulf is one of the oldest books in ancient English (Anglo Saxon) still around. Originally, literacy in the British Isles was concentrated in Latin, since Latin was the language of their ruling elite, the Romans.

Although the Brits had their own language and writing (known as runes), they mostly relayed their cultural stories through word of mouth (oral tradition). Beowulf is only one of these stories, and it is highly treasured because it is one of the very few peeks we have into the culture of the Anglo-Saxons (MY people-transparently white child that I am).

I know of two main reasons why more stories didn’t survive:
one, the advent of Christianity created an unfavorable environment for stories about pagan deities. The British Isles, and especially Ireland, really embraced Christianity when it arrived. Some of the stories were christianized, and deities and legendary heroes got cleaned up into “saints.”

Beowulf has some christianizing in it too.

But the second reason is because of the Norman invasion.In the 11th century, I think, the French came in and enslaved (enserfed?) all the Anglo-Saxons. The Roman empire had long been dead, although Latin was still the Lingua Franca. But Anglo-Saxon writing and speech was what ordinary people used to communicate. When the French took over, they insisted that everyone speak French. Servants only spoke English to each other. And naturally, they had limited time to chew the fat. The complicated grammatical structure of Anglo-Saxon got mushed into a quicker, less nuanced speech. Anglo-Saxon wasn’t really taught; if a person went to be educated, they learned Latin or French. The Anglo-Saxon words that survive in English today are servants words. Swine for a live pig, but the Norman Pork for the meat (the only part that the Lord of the manor would see). Interestingly, all the cuss words survive.

Some of that Norman/Anglo-Saxon antagonism is played on in Monty Python’s Holy Grail. You’ve seen it, I imagine.

But English was saved, as a language, when Chaucer decided to write his “Canterbury Tales” in English. His patrons were Norman nobility, and there was a current of thought at the time which said that nothing poetic could come from this servant language. But the Canterbury Tales were written entirely in English, and this bold statement on the part of Chaucer encouraged many others to attempt the same. Shakespeare would never have written the way he did if not for Chaucer.

Of course, after Shakespeare all kinds of things happened. He was part of the renaissance, then the Age of Reason (aka the age of revolutions: American, French) happened. Then the Romantic period followed that, reacting to the cold idealization of reason. The Romantic period focused on the beauty of nature, and the transformative power of love and higher emotions. Nature elicited those emotions, so nature (with or without the concept of the Christian God, which had suffered some blows during that “reason” period), nature was raised as a saving mercy. The beauty of nature was a place of refuge and a reminder of the beauty of life, a sort of reassurance that good things endure. Thoreau, who wrote Walden, was on the tail end of the American Romantic period.

But then the INDUSTRIAL AGE began. English and American capitalists started raping and pillaging NATURE for fun and profit. Actually, all kinds of capitalists were doing it, not just the English-speaking ones.

Also, around this time, Darwin and other naturalists starting coming up with plausible theories that did away with the need for a benevolent deity. “Survival of the Fittest” was a philosophy that knocked the stuffing out of the idea of nature as a beautiful restorative refuge. Nature wanted to kill you, so that it could eat you. And if you couldn’t thrive, it was probably just as well that you died. One less weak genetic contributor.

How horrifying! You can imagine the slow, sick realization of all these things. The Victorian English ended up focusing primarily on appearances. Keeping a stiff upper lip, doing your duty for your country, and not upsetting society. America also had strong middle-class bourgeois tendencies. Certainly, we were happy to keep any new immigrant class “in their proper place”, often using the new Darwinistic philosophies to justify the mistreatment of other nationalities and the prejudicial racist treatment of African-Americans. “Nature” had made things hard, and the dominant culture took their dominant status as their natural (god-given?) right.

It was the “enlightened” and “modern” way of thinking. Do your duty, do the right thing for no other reason that that it was right. Until World War one happened. Then the “right thing” led to all kinds of wrong things. Thousands and thousands of good people, young upstanding soldiers died fighting for the meaningless cause of a few miles, a few feet of dirt.

The soldiers got really close to nature then. Sitting for months in their foxholes, seeing nothing but dirt, mud, excrement and the bodies of their mates decomposing nearby.

When it was all over, not much had changed but their attitudes. The “modern” way of thinking now meant utter disillusionment. It is no accident that the era was called “The Depression.” God was irrelevant, nature meaningless, and hope was scarce.

It was during this period of time that J.R.R. Tolkein conceived the story of Middle Earth.
You thought I was never gonna take it back around, didn’t you?

Now, most of what _I_ know about concerns the cultures that speak English–America and England. To have the full picture, I will eventually have to learn more about Germany. Because the Germans were REALLY the ones who pursued heroic legends and folks tales. They started it much sooner than the English did. Remember the Brother’s Grimm fairy tales? Now that people have started to study fairy tales more extensively, we have found that they are STUNNINGLY similar across cultures. I think I read that almost every culture has a Cinderella story, which is my personal favorite.

But the German stories were very close to English stories. We actually are a Germanic people, sharing a culture with the folks over there in what’s now called Germany. Wagner also took a well-known Norse legend and made it into his Ring Cycle.

Did I say “ring”? Why, yes I did! It’s the same ring from essentially the same story that Tolkien was ripping off of.

But let me focus on Tolkien again. He was a Medieval scholar at Oxford, and he was probably one of the weirdest guys there. He hung out with C.S. Lewis, of Narnia fame, while he was there. I”ve been to the pub in Oxford where they all hung out. They would have a pint and read their writing to each other. Tolkien was obsessed with the Medieval legends; he has also published a version of Sir Gawain and the Green Knight, translated for the Middle English. He knew all the stories live he was living in them.

I think he tried to live in them. I have read that he wrote the Lord of The Rings series in a made-up language (elfin, maybe?) and then TRANSLATED it into modern English.

COOkOO!

But it is my opinion that he was trying to escape into another world. This one wasn’t offering much, and he wanted to retreat into a place where heroism and courage and honor still counted.

You notice, I”m sure, that one of the characteristics of a “fantasy novel” is that it takes place before any industrialism. About the most technological they get is a windmill.

And Tolkien was the one in the English language that created the foundation of a complicated fantasy world.His universe is extremely fleshed out. He is as obsessed as you want to be. And many of his fans today are quite obsessed.

But see, he wrote these books in a particular place in time.They were moderately popular in his time, because people felt an affinity for the world that he had created. The novels are complicated. They begin in the middle, the way life does. The characters do something that will have an effect beyond the scope of the novel. They have done something lasting and meaningful. Their heroism is not wasted or twisted into evil ends, as was the heroism of the WWI soldiers.

Basically, Tolkien was calling on the power of myth, the myths that had evolved and been honed through generations of wise and intuitive storytellers. He knew the myths of his culture forward and back; and he dramatized them anew for modern sensibilities.

Society was sick and needed to hear a story. The story they needed was essentially the one we needed all along. Moses, Homer, and wise clan leaders told the stories. Tolkien put it in the language modern readers could understand, with the structure we were used to now. We didn’t use poetic chants…We use dialogue and description.

We don’t use campfires so much. We use ink and paper.

As I said, the Lord of the Ring was moderately popular when Tolkien first published it. But it wasn’t until the hippies rediscovered it that it went platinum, so to speak.

The hippies were sick of the old ways, and they BELIEVED in a new order. Frodo’s heroism was possible for them, they knew it! Hope was everywhere, and so were the Hobbit books.

This is also when the fantasy book market opened up.

NOW, with all that intro
(I am nothing if not thorough)
I would like to propose some of the original myth stories to be read by a fan of fantasy.

TRY
Beowulf
Sigurd the Dragon Slayer
Tales of King Arthur
All fairy tales
the Grimm fairy tales
fairy tales of any culture, particularly of the culture you are from
(if you are an American mutt like me, go for ALL the cultures that are in your mix)
The Iliad & The Odyssey
Gilgamesh
the Aenid (although, that’s an artificial myth, just like Tolkien’s)
Greek Drama (yeah, like Oedipus Rex)

All these are a little difficult to engage, because they are not told in the way we are used to. We are accustomed to being entertained in certain set ways, for plots to move in certain patterns. These stories pre-date those templates.

But they are worth the trouble of reading. You will find that they stay on your mind in ways you didn’t expect. And they don’t go away. The images stay, working as metaphors that give you handles on life’s confusing moments.

That’s what they are supposed to do.

And for learning more about myths, as a topic, I cannot more highly recommend Joseph Campbell.

Park Your Car in Harvard Yard

Park Your Car in Harvard Yard by Israel Horovitz, produced by LA theater works

This was labelled as a COMEDY, which is completely incorrect. According to classical definitions, comedy ends in a marriage. Tragedy ends in death. Well, this ended in death.

You make the call.

Perhaps we’ve progressed beyond classical definitions, and find death the funniest thing we’ve ever heard?

Probably not. But there were a few funny moments in this play. Mostly not, though.

It’s set in Massachusetts, a place that makes me think of my friend Christy. She lived there for a year. That’s the east coast, the OLD part of America. They have a sense of the social class that we don’t have as well defined here.

Imagine! Your family being in one area for generations, and all of them doing the same sort of work. Dock work, maybe. Or some kind of unskilled manual labor. Having the same few miles that you know. And not knowing at all how to get past them.

I don’t respect those sorts of boundaries, I consider them a dare most of the time. As in, “I can’t? Who says I can’t? I’ll show you!”

Anyway, the high school teacher that everyone was afraid of, for years and years, is finally on his deathbed. He needs someone to help him. And this woman comes to be his housekeeper until he dies.

She is his former student, only she doesn’t tell him that right away. Some part of her hopes he will remember, but knows bitterly that he will not.

They have more things binding them together, being in the same place for so long, than you would expect.

He is full of rage and regret at how his life turned out.
She is too. And she actually blames him for a lot of it. Her ticket out was education, but he flunked her and slammed that door.

I’m mad at him too, for her. He should have been a better teacher, and tried to help them learn. He should not have held the bar so high and mocked his students when they could not pass it.

I think he was trying to illustrate dramatically how SUPERIOR he was to them.

But she should have kicked harder against her lot, if she really didn’t like it.

At the end, though, they were both in the same neighborhood, they both endured the same cold winters.

How different are we, really?
These two were quite similar.

He was trying to die, which is a difficult thing. She was trying to live, which can be much harder at some times than at others.