Look mum, no hands

It started back there with Orhan Pamuk, and now, all of a sudden, it’s an obsession. I didn’t notice the trend at first, because you never do notice that kind of thing until you’re in the middle of it, but before I knew it, I was through The Museum of Innocence, The Little Stranger, Freedom, and was pulling Wolf Hall off the shelves.

Must. Read. Thick. Books.

Reading The Museum of Innocence was like taking a walk in a summer shower. Sensuous and inspiring all in one. It’s set in Istanbul, and if I were a city, I’d aspire to be Istanbul, opulent and melancholy and seething and vibrant and cohesive and divided and bloody hard work all wrapped into one.

But more than losing myself in characters and plots and settings, reading big thick books is making me slightly euphoric (can you be slightly euphoric, or is euphoria an absolute state?) simply because I am reading them.

I am reading them because I can.

My fragility is fading.

This time last year, I was reading, but it was either with ferocious focus (The Shaking Woman, The Spare Room, A Year of Magical Thinking) or it was flitting about on the internet, filling my hours with links and words I didn’t even try to absorb. (I know the internet gets blamed for shrinking our attention spans and our brains, but maybe sometimes it’s more a case that we go to the internet when we’ve already got shrunken spans and brains.)

I don’t know how other people measure their wellness, but obviously, for me, reading is a measure. This time last year, there is no way that I could have picked up a book with several hundred pages and expected myself to finish it. Last year, I might have picked Freedom up, but I wouldn’t even have noticed the point where I stopped reading it. I would have just put it down one night before I went to sleep and never picked it up again.

This year, I can start on the first page, end on the last, *and* tell you something of what I have read. This year, if I stop reading a book, it’s because I decide to stop reading it, not because I’ve forgotten I ever started it. Which brings me to Freedom, the reading thereof, and whether or not I am going to finish it.

I am a finisher of books. Not without exception, but by and large, and I don’t abandon books easily. It might even be said that I over-think the decision to stop reading a book.

Reading Freedom started out well, by which I mean when I read the first sentence, I thought, ‘I am gonna love this,’ because I do love these [insert adjective] stories. What adjective should I put in there? I’m inclined to put in rambling, but there you go that’s why I’m not a critic or textual analyst, can’t think of a better word than rambling. Ever since Becky Sharp absorbed an entire adolescent weekend, I’ve liked the opportunity to sit and read and read and read and to know that even if you’re being told a lot of things you’re still not being told everything. I love domestic dramas and abundant characters and sprawling narratives. But on page four, which is the second page, I got my first inkling that me and Freedom were not made for each other.

“There were also more contemporary questions, like, what about those cloth diapers? Worth the bother? And was it true that you could still get milk delivered in glass bottles? Were the Boy Scouts OK politically? Was bulgur really necessary? Where to recycle batteries? How to respond when poor person of color accused you of destroying her neighbourhood? Was it true that the glaze of old Fiestaware contained dangerous amounts of lead? How elaborate did a kitchen water filter actually need to be?”

Hmm. Okay. Firstly, it isn’t very original and secondly, I’m over it. I am over this constant attack on women, attack disguised as coolly ironic observations of women’s preoccupations. And please don’t say that this is a general critique and it’s not aimed at women, because it *is* about women, and I say this not only because I know if this were a cartoon it would be a woman’s speech bubble, but because the next paragraph affirms it: “For all queries, Patty Berglund was a resource, a sunny carrier of sociocultural pollen, an affable bee.”

So I was only a few hundred words in, and my heart was beating with the stress of taking this personally and I was thinking this isn’t going as well as I thought it would.

Now, I know that there’s a difference between author as messenger and author as protagonist. I’m not especially good at textual analysis, but I know enough to know that I shouldn’t confuse the two and I shouldn’t be taking this personally, so I kept reading. In lots of ways I kept enjoying myself and got swept away in it and wanted to know what happened next and neglected to get the tea ready because I was asborbed and so on. But there were a few things that kept niggling at me, and most of the time, I couldn’t shake the feeling that I was being despised or at least held in contempt.

Here’s my problem. Dabbling in comedy I learnt that as the creator, you must eventually include yourself. Your observations might be clever and smart and erudite and all of those things, but if you don’t turn it back on yourself and include yourself in the joke, you’re just being mean. Or disdainful. Or contemptuous. Or some combination of those and other things.

The more I read of Freedom, the more I felt that the overall tone of the novel was disdain, and I couldn’t help feeling that this was because the author kept a disdainful distance from his characters. Further, I couldn’t shake the feeling that he treats his characters that way because that’s how he thinks of people generally. It greatly affected my willingness to keep reading, because just as I don’t want to go to a night of comedy to be constantly put down nor do I want to spend a week in the company of a book which treats me with such disdain.

Again, I know to separate messenger and message from author as person and their opinion, but I was heavily influenced by a sentence from The Discomfort Zone which I have never been able to forget. I read The Discomfort Zone, Franzen’s last book of essays and memoir, at the same time as I was reading And When Did You Last See Your Father? and I think perhaps that wasn’t a good combination because there was just too much discordance between Morrison’s and Franzen’s styles. Whatever the reason, I found The Discomfort Zone to be disconcertingly cold and distant, particularly for a memoir. For example, in talking about his separation from his wife, he writes (and you will be able to tell the sentence that has stayed with me):

“…I didn’t believe we’d really separated. It may have become impossible for us to live together, but my wife’s sort of intelligence still seemed to me the best sort, her moral and aesthetic judgments still seemed to me the only ones that counted. The smell of her skin and the smell of her hair were restorative, irreplaceable, the best. Deploring other people – their lack of perfection – had always been our sport. I couldn’t imagine never smelling her again.”

Back when I bought and read The Discomfort Zone, everything I read was part of a focused attempt to make sense of my own life which was, at the time, a shambles. Morrisson’s work made absolute sense to me, but Franzen’s left me confused and baffled, both about myself and about the work. When I finished reading it, I studied every piece of criticism I could find, trying to make sense of my impressions and responses. It’s interesting that in the front cover of the book, I have copied this from a review in The New York Times: “…the inevitable revelations that you get here make you reconsider the novels more harshly than more compasionately.”

Were the mister reading this, or if I had decided to talk about this between overs or over a cup of tea, he would say, ‘What’s the big deal? If you don’t like it, don’t finish it.’

Point. But I don’t want to miss out on Freedom. I mean everyone else likes it, no one else is taking it personally and also I don’t want to be the tosser in the corner waving my glass around and saying, INXS was great until Shabooh Shoobah, LA is fine but you really want to be in Chicago, Franzen is overrated. It could be that I’m out of practice reading fiction and I need to warm up first. I mean, about ninety percent of the things I’ve read in the last two years, both hardcopy and online, have been memoir of one kind or another. Maybe I just need to get my fiction brain back in gear.

So, here’s what I’m going to do. First of all, I’m going to read Wolf Hall, and if I haven’t found another big thick book by then, I’ll go back to Freedom. Either way, it’s tragically exciting to be reading thick books again.

Nobel prizes (something I never usually write about)

Usually, the announcement of the winner of the Nobel Prize for Literature is another opportunity for me to think, ‘I’m something of a pretender really when it comes to the world of literature’. But because of that whole Central and South American thing the mister and I had in the nineties, I know a lot about this year’s winner.

Now, if you’re like me, and the announcement of the Nobel Prize winner makes you think, ‘Maybe I should read at least something by such and such’ and then you go to the bookstore and just pull something off the shelf, trusting that they’ve got what you need to read in stock, let me give you a piece of advice. Do not let the one thing you read be The Feast of the Goat. It contains what must be the singularly most disturbing piece of writing I have ever, ever read. It must be at least five years since I read it and more than any case study I have ever read for Amnesty, passages of The Feast of the Goat have haunted me, frightened me and made me despair for the state of the world. I’ve only read it once, but I still remember it vividly to the point that I can still pretty much see the pages in my mind and remember the chair I was sitting in when I read it. Maybe that means you should read it. I guess it made me even more grateful that my knowledge of human rights abuses has come from reading and hearing and not from lived experience.

On a lighter note, I would highly recommend Aunt Julia and the Scriptwriter which is one of my Go To Books. It is great fun, and I never get bored of it. I think it was the first novel I read in Spanish. Which sort of depresses me, because there’s no way I could read it in Spanish now.

Good morning

I’m reading Orhan Pamuk’s The Museum of Innocence a book I most highly recommend, though perhaps not as something to be taken on the plane as it is, on its own, the size of a small suitcase and most certainly does not fit into the pocket in front of your seat.

Anyway, this morning, I woke at 5.30 – not to run in a vertical marathon, but because my body is still on Australian time – and picked up my book. I was rewarded with this reference back to the book’s most excellent opening sentence:

In fact no one recognizes the happiest moment of their lives as they are living it. It may well be that, in a moment of joy, one might sincerely believe that they are living that golden instant “now”, even having lived such a moment before, but whatever they say, in one part of their hearts they still believe in the certainty of a happier moment to come. Because how could anyone, and particularly anyone who is still young, carry on with the belief that everything could only get worse: If a person is happy enough to think he has reached the happiest moment of his life, he will be hopeful enough to believe his future will be just as beautiful, more so

Which was astonishingly close to my experiences yesterday only in the complete reverse. I survived yesterday by recognising, at around 8.30 am, that this was it. Between now and the end of the year, this was as unhappy as I was likely to be. Tired, jetlagged, hot, helping children find their new classrooms and both of them separated from all of last year’s friends, no coffee in the cupboard at home. This was the worst it would get.

I think that is why, at the end of the day I sat on the lounge not happy, but not unhappy either.

And on the way home we got rained on

Did you know that there is a Roald Dahl Museum and Story Centre? Neither did I. But there is.

These dudes, Clewis Productions seem to be associated with it, and we went to their Roald Dahl’s Revolting Rhymes which was as much fun as you would hope it would be. The more I read and listen to his work (which is a lot around these parts these days), the more I am struck by the enormity of Roald Dahl’s storytelling talents.

Also, watching this performance with my newly-formed performer’s eyes, I was in awe of their ability to take volunteers from the audience and give them such substantial roles. Unpredictability, she be frizwiggling to me.

The Rip

One of the books I took on the flight to Abu Dhabi was Robert Drewe’s The Rip.  His earlier collection The Bodysurfers is one of those books that I read whenever I need to understand how writing works. I just love it. And The Rip has not disappointed me, including as it does, the following:

“But he still looked a bit edgy. After a moment, he said, ‘Desiree has laid down some new ground rules for staying with me.’

‘Ground rules?’

‘Rules on the way things have to be arranged in future. What’s it called? Chop suey? Mah jong? You know what I mean. She’s making me do things with my shoes in Chinese.’

There was another long moment while I sipped my coffee. Eventually I had a brainwave. ‘You don’t mean feng shui?'”

It cracked me up when I read it, and it’s still cracking me up now.

The Rip. If it isn’t on your Christmas list, you have an unfinished list.

Chop suey. How funny is that?

Holiday reading

IMG_0434

‘It’s as beautifully sad as a Paul Kelly song,’ I said to the mister when I went back inside to get a mid-book snack (dried peach) and refresh my cup of tea (green).

We’ve known each other a long time, the mister and I, and I could see him thinking to himself ‘oh, fuck’ and I could see him not saying, ‘Do you think that’s a good idea?’. Now, I don’t know what preparations the mister made for himself, but he was right. I was headed for a meltdown. Two days later I hit one of grief’s brick walls, which, for  days has left me paralysed with fear. I’ve got not parents. Fuck. It’s the worst I’ve been since Dad died (which, I note, was barely three months ago, so, you know, it’s to be expected and all).

Of course it wasn’t the book that caused the meltdown. I believe that my subconscious knows me so well that it lead me to pack my reading material carefully, knowing that the meltdown was building and would probably come at the end of a week’s holiday.

Which is all a long-winded way of saying that I went away for a week, and during that week spent a lovely morning reclining here, listening to the sea and reading Willy Vlautin’s The Motel Life. It’s been on my to-read pile for quite some time – I would have said around a year – but I’m almost certain I first heard him on The Book Show and ordered the book pretty much straight away (as an aside, I very often love The Book Show as I did the day they were interviewing Willy, but sometimes that show makes me so mad I can’t see straight – does that happen to you, or is it just me, I’d be interested to know).

The backcover blurb says, “Narrated by Frank Flannigan, The Motel Life tells the story of how he and his brother Jerry Lee take to the road when bad luck catches up with them.” That’s a pretty fair description. Then, because this isn’t a first edition, the cover – front, back, inside and outside – is peppered with quotes and snatches from reviews. “A hugely compassionate, wildly original road movie of a novel…”, “courageous, powerful, wonderfully compassionate, this is a very fine novel”. Actually, I think they’ve gone overboard on the quotes. I agree with most of them, I just think, ‘All right already let the book speak for itself a bit’.

My subconscious did an excellent job because for me, books like this are perfect for times like this. Not that I want to wallow, but “plaintive ballads” of books provide me a way of giving into it all. Of letting it be. Of getting to the heart of things. Without wanting to get all overly-romantic on you-all, my mum was something of a Paul Kelly song. Complex and fascinating and strong and vulnerable and flawed. It’s what’s made me mad at her when I was fifteen and what makes me miss her now.

And it’s what made me love reading this book.

Plus, I like stories about vulnerable young men who make my heart ache (that’s inherited from my mother for sure). I like writers who make us think about the spaces in our relationships and what those spaces mean. I like page turners of books that make you beg of the characters, ‘Please don’t do that’.  (Just now as I’m writing this, it occurs to me that’s what Vonnegut meant when he said “Give your readers as much information as possible as soon as possible. To heck with suspense. Readers should have such complete understanding of what is going on, where and why, that they could finish the story themselves, should cockroaches eat the last few pages” – though admittedly he was talking about short stories – but I’ve struggled to understand what he meant by that).

I was also reading this book in a way I’ve never read before and with a different awareness of writing than I’ve ever had. Because for the few days before we left on our holiday, I worked like the clappers to get the latest draft of my manuscript back to my editor. I’m at the fairly detailed editing stage, rather than the kind of structural things I’ve been doing until now. I am in no way comparing myself to any published writer, but I’m reading very carefully to see how experienced writers deal with different problems I know I’ve got.

It’s an exciting way to read.

For example, I was paying very close attention to the dialogue. I’ve got much more dialogue in my manuscript than I realised. Which is fine. As long as it’s good. And as long as it’s not punctuated with endless ‘stage directions’. Which mine was. So much biting of lips and flicking of hair. Oh, my. By the time I’d taken out all the flicks of the hair and the curled lips and the blinks of the eyes I’d lost about 4 000 words. Thank goodness.

Anyway, there’s lots of dialogue in The Motel Life and it’s good, and I see that it sits just nicely without endless decoration.

I think my writing style is what people often call ‘spare’. By which they mean (I assume) spare as opposed to ‘not baroque’ not spare as in leftover. So I was reading this book with a very strong awareness of that spare style – and I noticed that it has more dangers than I had realised. For example, “I turned on the radio, put a can of soup on the hot plate, and sat down at my table. I lit a candle I kept and ate”.

I reckon that last sentence is shit. You can love a book and still see that every now and then something doesn’t work. That sentence is clumsy and awkward, and made me stumble even though I was only reading to myself. But that made me think. Is it too pared back? Is it too spare?

Mostly though, as I was reading, I finally understood what a couple of people have told me over the last year (as they’ve been rejecting my new work). You can be a bit too enigmatic, leave too many spaces. You need to give the reader more. I wasn’t entirely sure about that, and I wasn’t sure what to do about it. But while I was reading The Motel Life I ached for more about the relationship between the brothers. Not much more. But more (oh. I think we’re back at that Vonnegut quote again). Just a childhood incident here or there. Just a bit more reflection on Frank’s part about Jerry Lee as a person.

And then of course I fell into a funk – oh god, he’s got the odd awkward sentence, but all of mine are shit, what made me think I could write blah blah blah.

But then, I would’ve taken another sip of tea and moved on. I can’t have dwelled on it too long, because my overall memory of this book – no, I should be more precise about that – I should say that my overall memory of the experience of reading this book – is a good one.

Good. What does that mean?

It means I was completely absorbed and fully alive and knowing that life is hard but good.

Although, if it was me, if I’d had the final say, I would’ve ended the story two sentences earlier. Which didn’t stop me going to the bookshop when we got home and buying Northline.

Reading

Being the only person over the age of 6 who hasn’t read The Handmaid’s Tale, I thought I’d give it a whirl.

So if you need me, I’m on the couch. With the packet of Mint Slice biscuits the mister thought he’d hidden from me.