28 January 2010

I watched/listened to last night’s State of the Union with a flinchy face and tensed muscles.  The recent media/pundit turkey-shoot (the President is the turkey, in case you didn’t already know) has been painful to witness.

Junot Diaz thinks it’s about story-telling (lack thereof on the President’s part). I agree; but I also think that maybe we — voters, citizens, members of this democratic polity — need to grow up a little.  At some point, we need to start telling the stories, helping to get them out there, instead of waiting to be tucked into bed.  After all, the President’s schedule is a little, you know, busier than mine.

From Diaz’s New Yorker piece:

All year I’ve been waiting for Obama to flex his narrative muscles, to tell the story of his presidency, of his Administration, to tell the story of where our country is going and why we should help deliver it there. A coherent, accessible, compelling story—one that is narrow enough to be held in our minds and hearts and that nevertheless is roomy enough for us, the audience, to weave our own predilections, dreams, fears, experiences into its fabric. It should necessarily be a story eight years in duration, a story that no matter what our personal politics are will excite us enough to go out and reëlect the teller just so we can be there for the story’s end. But from where I sit our President has not even told a bad story; he, in my opinion, has told no story at all. I heard him talk healthcare to death but while he was elaborating ideas his opponents were telling stories. Sure they were bad ones, full of distortions and outright lies, but at least they were talking to the American people in the correct idiom: that of narrative. The President gave us a raft of information about why healthcare would be a swell idea; the Republicans gave us death panels. Ideas are wonderful things, but unless they’re couched in a good story they can do nothing.

The man has tried, of course; we’ve gotten patches of narrative around all the important issues—the economy, the war in Afghanistan, the war on terror (a.k.a. the Undiebomber)—but I’ve yet to hear anything that excites that part of my brain which loves, which craves the symmetries the pleasures of well-told tale. Just this past Tuesday we saw the consequences for the President of not having a real story to draw upon. In Massachusetts, the President was faced with an insurgent Republican candidate who was telling a story that should have been familiar to the Commander-in-Chief: the story of an upstart outsider with energy and ideas, who was going to shake things up, etc. The President tried to help Martha Coakely by campaigning, but since his Administration doesn’t seem to do story he couldn’t lend her one. He could only show up as himself, and that clearly was not enough. A man cannot withstand a story, even if the man is remarkable and the story is simple. The story always wins.

24 January 2010

A backlash against Emerson?  Say it isn’t so.  I reserve a great fondness for Ralph Waldo, great bard of Self-Trust.  I’ve always found his philosophy of how to read — widely, freely, somewhat predatorily, taking what you can, discarding the rest, not getting bogged down by reverence for a static canon but approaching the canon with an “active soul” — particularly helpful and relevant in this Age of Information.

Hence, instead of Man Thinking, we have the bookworm.  Hence the book-learned class, who value books, as such; not as related to nature and the human constitution, but as making a sort of Third Estate with the world and the soul…

Books are the best of things, well used; abused, among the worst.  What is the right use?  What is the one end which all means go to effect?  They are for nothing but to inspire.  I had better never see a book than to be warped by its attraction clean out of my own orbit, and made a satellite instead of a system. The one thing in the world, of value, is the active soul.

-from “The American Scholar”

21 January 2010

I’m coming up on the one-year anniversary of this blog. (And I know this because WordPress reminds you that your annual fee is due).

If you’ve been reading from the beginning, you know how much angst I had about short-form blip writing. I still have it. Halfway through the year, I started writing for The Millions, where there’s a little more room for essayistic wandering, but the angst is still there; anything that gets written in a day, two days, always feels sub-standard to me. I read over what I’ve written both here and at The Millions and feel a certain kind of melancholy.

On the other hand, I’m finding that this space here is becoming a thinking place for the longer pieces at The Millions. For instance, this post is the thinking-out-loud stage for what I think will be an essay about struggling with short-form, and why (for now, anyway) I prefer the novel form. I am on deadline to complete a short story for publication, and as I work on the story, I already feel an onslaught of the writerly challenges that nudged me into writing a novel in the first place.

Is it useful to think out loud? Is it useful to witness someone thinking out loud? What is the value of all this fast-writing we do for public consumption? In other words, a year later, I seem to be asking pretty much the same questions I started out with…

I’ve been re-reading the masterful stories of Chekhov, who wrote quickly and voluminously.  It’s a good reminder.

20 January 2010

And then, apropos of my last post, I read this article about a hip young liberal Manhattanite coming out of the Christian closet.  Actually, I first heard it on NPR’s “Tell Me More,” which is even more interesting, i.e. that this topic got national radio play in addition to the piece at Salon.

Hmm….

I’m not sure how I feel about the author’s inclination toward the notion that it’s better just not to talk about religion:

Not long ago, I told a priest at my church that my friends equated religion with horrible things. I expected her to tell me I had some obligation to stop hiding my faith, but she said, pulling a scarf around her neck to hide her priest’s collar, “Those preachers on the subways make me cringe.” She said she prefers Saint Francis: “Preach the gospel at all times. If necessary, use words.”[...]

But faith and religion are hard to talk about; maybe they’re not necessary to talk about.

Well, thank God for fiction as a way to “talk.”

18 January 2010

Is it just me, or is Christianity making a comeback as an au courant cultural topic?

At Bookforum’sOmnivore,” a sampling of reviews and articles about Christianity.  All of them nonfiction-related.  I’ve been beginning to think about my next project, and a collection of linked stories, in and around Christianity, is what seems to be rising to the surface.  Hmm…

Which is a backhand way of also saying that I can see the light at the end of the tunnel on Sebastian & Frederick (current word count ~84,000, projected word count  ~100,000).

14 January 2010

A new(ish) documentary on legendary soul singer Bill Withers, called “Still Bill,” is terrific.   I saw it at the Harlem Stage Theater — a gorgeous venue on the campus of City College — with a great crowd.

Special guests for Q&A were percussionist and Harlem native Ralph MacDonald (who also co-wrote “Just the Two of Us”) and filmmaker/producer Warrington Hudlin (HOUSE PARTY).

Mr. Withers is an engaging, complicated, and touching character, as documentary subjects go, and the filmmakers Damani Baker and Alex Vlack capture this well.  Performance and interview footage of Withers from the ’70’s and ’80’s is well-chosen.  Here’s a lil o’ Bill, performing his hit, “Ain’t No Sunshine.”

13 January 2010

Check out my essay at The Millions, “Sex, Seriously: James Salter Trumps the Great Male Novelists.

I suspect it’s not the most comfortable topic for most people; maybe even less so for “the younger generation” that Katie Roiphe refers to in “The Naked and the Conflicted”, the article to which the essay responds.

According to the blog stats, the essay (posted yesterday) was widely read (or at least clicked); and yet little commented on.  Hmm… I suppose this makes sense, i.e. in the essay I write that talking or writing “about” sex is like “dancing about architecture” (Elvis Costello said this, maybe).  Still, I’m curious how readers feel/think about this topic.   I did receive a few comments via personal email.

Thanks to Maud Newton for linking to the piece.

Update 1/18/10: comments rolled in, with some great reading suggestions.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 32 other followers