Every Day is Mother’s Day (Revisited)

I’m fortunate, in a sense, to be the type of person that gets more sentimental about the times I read a certain book or heard a particular album than I ever do about holidays. But I’m still human. I still recall the almost breathless inability to accelerate time and make Christmas arrive more quickly. Or the Halloween costumes, Easter candy or the great Thanksgiving feasts (and the not-so-great family fights that would sometimes ensue). The holidays, as idealized rites of passage, still resonate; but these occasions are not capable of enhancing or obliterating whatever mood I’m already in. As such, the absence of my mother might feel more acute on holidays, but none of these events have been unduly marred during the past decade.

Surprisingly, even the week that presents a triptych of raw remembrance, comprising her birthday (August 23), and the anniversaries of her death (August 26) and funeral (August 30) have been bearable. These have become prospects for celebration, however somber, and I am mostly able to channel that grief into gratitude for the times she was around. Similarly, Mother’s Day is seldom joyful, but it provides an imperative to consider happy times and my relative good fortune—despite what is obviously lacking, now. It also obliges me to behold my family members and friends who have become admirable mothers themselves, and I am humbled to see my mother alive in the looks they give their children.

And if I’m ever inclined to stop and consider how corny, or manufactured these sentiments may be, I console myself with the awareness of how increasingly corny and manufactured holidays in America have become.

***

Any time I need to be reminded that I am one of the lucky ones, I look at the picture taken the day I was born. The pose is not unique; virtually every child has at least one frameable shot of the post-delivery adoring gaze. Or, every child fortunate enough to have been born in a hospital (or home) under safe conditions to a mother who welcomes the moment and, most importantly, is prepared for the moments (and days and years) that will follow. I don’t need to resort to religion or sociology: I can simply consider the circumstances and the infinitesimal odds that I ever made it from my father to my mother in the first place (if you know what I mean).

What child cannot recall asking, on Mother’s Day, why there wasn’t a Kid’s Day? The response was always the same: Every day is Kid’s Day. Most of us who have lived a single hour in the so-called real world quickly came to register how accurate this tired cliché actually is. Indeed, those of us who were sufficiently well-raised didn’t need to wait that long for this epiphany to occur. A year or two punching the clock, paying bills, cleaning up one’s own messes—the literal and especially the figurative ones—and generally attaining that independent status one strove so single-mindedly to attain is impetus enough for reflection. Not merely an appraisal of how impossible it would be to repay the investment made, measured in money, time, affection and approbation, but a recognition of what was truly at stake: the selflessness your parents displayed, putting in all that effort to enable you to become your own person. The best gift a parent can give (you come to understand) is loving you enough to allow you to not be exactly like them; to encourage you to figure out exactly who you are supposed to become.

***

Holidays have not been intolerable, no more than any other day, especially the bad days when I miss my mother most. As a result, I reckon I’m not the only one who has found that my birthday is the single occasion that can never be the same. Inexorable nostalgic pangs, the pull of biological imperatives, or the simple fact that I’m still human has ensured that the annual recognition of my birth day is imbued with sadness and a heavy longing I don’t feel any other time. If so, it seems a reasonable trade-off: that deep and uncomplicated connection, along with the longing any child can comprehend, signifies that yet another cliché holds true: absence makes the heart grow fonder.

Every time I scribble a thought with artistic intent I am inspired by the support my mother offered, going back to the days I was a kid with crayons, coloring outside the lines while listening to The Nutcracker Suite. She will never be forgotten; in fact, she will never be gone. This is what helps and it is also, at times, what hurts.

***

How do you get over the loss?

That is the question I asked a former girlfriend who lost her father when she was a teenager. “You don’t,” she said. Hearing this, you can acknowledge—and appreciate—the sentiment; you can easily empathize with how inconceivable it is to possibly heal from that kind of heartbreak. But it isn’t until you experience it that you comprehend the inexplicable ways this reality is an inviolable aspect of our existence: it’s worse than you could ever envision, but if you’re one of the lucky ones, it’s also more redemptory than you might have imagined. Mostly, you accept that a day will seldom pass when you don’t think of the one you loved and lost. And more, you wouldn’t have it any other way.

Every day is Kid’s Day, and who would hope to change that?

Every day, for me, is Mother’s Day. And on my birthday, I don’t celebrate myself so much as acknowledge—and appreciate—the one who did the most to help me get here.

* From a non-fiction work-in-progress entitled Please Talk About Me When I’m Gone.

Share

A Joyful Noise

This is not the first dog/soldier reunion video I’ve seen. It may not even be the best one (though they are all wonderful in their way). But it is probably the most perfect one.

Anyone who has loved a dog will appreciate –and recognize– the myriad emotions (ranging from happy to ecstatic) that are all playing out simultaneously.

The dog is obviously surprised, then delighted, then happy, then ecstatic, then confused, then giddy, then remembers he has his ball in his mouth and he’d love to let his guard down but business is business….and the sounds that ensue are the glorious gamut of canine communication: barks and yelps suppressed by the toy he is still munching on, and a paralysis of sorts: he is unable to jump up because he is still confused/excited, and he can’t bark properly because of the ball, he is crying from pleasure (when a dog actually cries from joy it is one of the more pure distillations of emotion any creature is capable of conveying), and he is looking/dashing around as if to say to the others: “Do you see who is home? Can you believe it?”

The noises (funny, touching, genius) this dog makes are some of the best noises I’ve heard in a long time.

The fact that the soldier is home safe is pretty awesome too.

Share

Dick Clark, R.I.P.

This is the face I remember, and the one I’ll recall most fondly. It’s nice to see the ones when he (impossibly) looked even younger or the ones where he (impossibly) looked so much older, but this is the face indelibly imprinted in my mind.

As a child of the ’70s, I got to know Dick Clark once he was already a legend, but before he became the ubiquitous go-to guy for everything from new music to New Year’s Eve. He was New Year’s Eve and for that alone, he will be remembered fondly. Plenty of other outlets will dutifully report his myriad, mind-boggling (in terms of variance and success) enterprises. Mostly he was famous for being who he was: Dick (motherfucking) Clark.

Here’s the thing: I’ve long since acknowledged that it’s only going to get more difficult for folks from my general generation to behold all the heroes (the super and the super-sized) dropping like flies as time marches unkindly on.

Still, there are a handful of larger than life archetypes who we could never imagine dying, and will probably never reconcile no longer having around. Clint Eastwood is one; Keith Richards is another. But both of those dudes, for very different reasons (aside, of course, from the beastly burden of time not being on any of our sides) have worn their age on their faces: it has lent character and augmented gravitas. It has reminded us that even our gods play by rules they could not create. But Dick Clark was different, if for no other reason that he looked pretty much the same for decades. He was a real-life Dorian Gray, and it almost made sense that he sold his soul: how else could you get that rich, seem that happy and make that much money unless darker forces were pulling the proverbial strings? Even worse (for the haters and cynics), his act was genuine; it wasn’t even an act. Check out some interviews: he had no illusions what he did and what he had done (i.e., he wasn’t kidding anyone about his lasting imprint on the cultural landscape, but of course that is usually something only people who write about the culture from the outside looking in bother to obsess about, or better yet, people who have not made the money or connections to have any real impact). He talked about bringing a modicum of escape and pleasure to the people: no more, no less. And it worked. People responded to him and his ideas for a reason: they worked. He worked: as a concept, as a celebrity.

It didn’t seem like he would ever age, much less die.

Then he had his stroke. That was tough enough (nobody wants to see anyone suffer, but it’s always harder to see the strong ones surrender to the illimitable forces of Nature who, as we all know, is a Bitch). But he kept on rocking New Year’s Eve. What was he supposed to do, sit at home and watch? No, he had to be Dick Clark because no one else could be. That was his legacy, this is what gave his life (our lives, at least for a few minutes every December 31) more meaning. Yes, it was painful to watch –and hear– him, however bravely, soldier through those countdowns (particularly with the oleaginous Ryan Seacrest breathing down his neck). But I’m glad he did, and I’m certain I’m not alone. The only thing that would have been more intolerable than seeing this once-impregnable institution showing the slings and arrows of outrageous –but no longer impossible– fortune would have been hearing that he was at home, in a chair, watching what only he could do.

No one else will do it like he did. No one else will do a lot of things like him. That is what we mean when we say someone was one-of-a-kind.

Dick Clark didn’t cure cancer or feed the foodless, and he never claimed he was trying to. He didn’t do anything other than make the world a bit less serious and a tad more enjoyable. How many people can we honestly say that about?

Share

Robert E. Simon, 98 Years Young

Robert E. Simon, the man who named the town I live in (R.E.S.ton, get it?) turns 98 today.

Here he is, in 2006, on the balcony outside his penthouse suite at Heron House, which overlooks Lake Anne (one of several man-made lakes in Reston) on Lake Anne Plaza, the first of many “village centers”. (Old school street cred question number one: Do you remember Hunters Woods Plaza? Old school street cred question number two: Do you miss it? The second question is rhetorical, otherwise you are not old school.)

(For a history of Reston, check this out. For a less official history –or love letter– from a kid who grew up and has lived most of his life here, check this out.)

Who took this picture, you may be asking yourself.

I did.

And how did I happen to have the opportunity to be kicking it with Robert Simon, you are perfectly entitled to inquire.

Well…long story short is that I wrote a novel that takes place in a town never named but bearing a more-than-passing resemblance to Reston. In a sense, the town is the central character; it’s the typical coming-of-age novel, and a young-ish dude (who bears a more-than-passing resemblance to the author) –as well as the town– are confronting the inevitable interstices of time and memory. It’s equal parts earnest, yearning and pretentious. Typical first novel. Anyway, my goal was to have the man who created this town (this character) see some relevant sections before one of us died (or it got published). Since it looked –and looks– like one of us will die before it ever does get published, I took matters into my own hands and did the courageous thing: I left it outside his door. Imagine my surprise when he called me and told me he loved it, and wanted to meet.

We eventually got together for lunch (I was hoping to do drinks and dinner), and of course we patronized one of the restaurants at the plaza. When I arrived, a few minutes after noon, he was already seated and had a glass of white wine in front of him. I’m a stickler for time, he said. (Takeaway: if this had been a job interview I would not have gotten the job.)

What followed was a fascinating, humbling hour where I was content to ask questions and listen to whatever he cared to tell me. (Some of the things are echoed in this nice, brief intereview with him, here. There’s another one here.)

I was struck –and impressed– with his candor and disdain he still felt for the people who (he felt) screwed up his vision. For instance: the Reston Towncenter was always part of the plan, but it was supposed to extend from where the Target is to where the Home Depot is (think about that!) and he remains disappointed that we resorted to strip malls instead of plazas, which integrate housing and commerce. He also remains a little bitter about the way he was forced out and unable to execute full control over his evolving vision (see history in link above). Between the glass of vino and the righteous indignation, it was easy to see how he had managed to make it well into his 90s. And that was six years ago!

In any event, it was quite gratifying to be able to convey to him how much it meant to me to grow up in a planned community that had soul and saved trees. That had bikepaths and encouraged cultural diversity. That expanded but never turned former farmland into a concrete clusterfuck. I told him I was speaking for dozens, probably thousands of other kids fortunate enough to grow up in the town he created.

(I scored my first soccer goal at Wainwright fields and still play basketball at Lake Anne Elementary –about 100 yards away. I learned how to ride a bike on Scandia Circle and learned how to navigate a stick-shift on Wiehle Drive. I caught my first fish in Carter Pond and skinny-dipped in Lake Audobon. I waited tables on Lake Anne Plaza and waited tables at Reston Towncenter. I rode my bike on the W&OD trail to Penguin Feathers and ride my bike on the W&OD trail past the still-verdant landscape between Reston and Vienna. I bought pop rocks at the 7-Eleven and bought my first beers at the 7-Eleven. I bought my first property and will never sell it. The place I called home is still the place I call home.)

There was a lot more I could have said and a lot more I wanted to hear.

What else could I have said; what more did I need to hear?

See you on the plaza at noon, this Saturday.

Share

Intermission

 

merf

I’m going to be “unavoidably detained” for the next week and change, storming castles, photographing coastlines and drinking as much Guinness as I’m humany capable of doing. So, while I’m away amuse yourself, if you must, with some personal favorite posts (links below) or check out the archives. This joint has been open for business since October ’08 and there is plenty of fat to chew on.

Until then, cheers.

***********************

Mission statement: I’m trying to play the truth of what I am. The reason it’s difficult is because I’m changing all the time – Charles Mingus

Sean Murphy loves music, books, and movies and can’t imagine a world without sub-titles. He was born in northern Virginia and has never found a compelling reason to leave. He studied English at George Mason University and has an MA in Literature. One of his thesis papers dealt with the utopian impulse in ’70s rock (which, depending upon one’s perspective, at least partially explains why he opted not to purse that PhD in Cultural Studies). During his time at PopMatters he has written music and movie reviews, along with the occasional essay. Despite living just outside DC, he remains recalcitrant in his conviction that paychecks mean less than personal fulfillment and that the pursuit of peace is not ironic. Endorses, in no particular order: anyone who is similarly allergic to right-wing radio and reality TV, the Red Sox, miniature schnauzers, Pho and Blanton’s single barrel bourbon. Ambition: to write the pretty-good American novel.

This blog is an attempt to engage with the world, while playing the truth of what I am.

The posts are categorized roughly by topic , such as music, sports, politics, literature and film as well as the very blog-like ruminations in real time. The entries can be searched by topic or month. A sample of somewhat representative offerings is listed below. Thanks for checking it out and feel free to drop me a line if you see something you like (or dislike).

A poem, a tone poem, fondly remembering my mother, my dog, high school and the redemptory powers of the slush puppie.

Some meditations on the Catholic church, torture, war, the Holocaust, history ceaselessly repeating itself, George W. Bush’s legacy, an early read on Glenn Beck, (Touchdown) Jesus and the causes and effects of loneliness.

Sports and recreation, including Bird, Ovie, the Easter Bunny, and the history of violence (in film, and speaking of film, an appraisal of the best American film of the last decade and, arguably, the only perfect American film ever made). And, of course, The Kids in the Hall.

And especially music: Mingus, Miles, Morrison, Hendrix, Jethro Tull, Sabbath, The Beatles (White and Blue albums), The Who, Michael Jackson, 1989, my take on the Top 50 albums of the last decade, the all-star team of American bands, the search for the most sublimely awful rock lyric, and the six perfect rock songs.

It you are the twittering type, check me out @bullmurph

Become a fan and get updates via Facebook here

Share

Better Git It In Your Soul

It takes a village to raise a family; it takes a forest to write a book.

Share

Looking Into The Sun*

(March, 2000)

I look down at my mother as she lay dying.

It was worse than I expected. (You don’t expect anything; you worry and fear and anticipate and dread and delay and avoid and if you are the type of person who prays you hit your knees early and often, but mostly you prepare yourself as best you can for what you never can prepare yourself to see.) I had not expected this: I had seen my sister, only a few years before, just after childbirth and while, of course, that was an occasion to celebrate, it was also serious business, my sister obliged to undergo a C-section just as our mother had done.

I expected, I reckon, something similar, not thinking (not allowing myself to think?) about the difference between local anesthesia and going under; the real differences between a by-the-book medical procedure and a search-and-destroy kind of surgery. She is not yet able to speak (they had wheeled away a frightened woman and brought us back an infant, uncertain how to talk, breathe and think: that is what those first seconds are like when they let you into the room) and the force of my shock hits me like a sucker punch below the belt. The wind rushes out of me like an innocent bystander anxious to leave the scene of a crime and the water spills out of my eyes as if someone had flipped a switch. It’s not crying so much as a chemical reaction (Chemistry? Physics? Biology? All of the above, including the algebra of anxiety), and I am mortified that my brave, smiling face (Everything is going to be okay!) had betrayed me in less than five seconds.

Look at her: spread out under oppressive white sheets like an etherized lab experiment (Biology again). A tube inserted through her nose into her stomach to clean up the mess they make while saving your life. Tubes and wires connected to machines that blinked and breathed, electronic chaperones keeping guard over carefully administered fluids. It was all at once impressively state of the art and appallingly primitive. Look how far we’ve come; we’ve only come this far? And, inevitably: is this what she saw when she visited her mother, almost exactly twenty years ago? How much worse were the conditions (the prep, the prognosis, the recovery) then? And twenty years before that: her father’s father and the colostomy bag he wore for that last decade of his life. Old school: it was unfortunate, but it was miraculous; twenty or so years before that he wouldn’t have had a chance. This is progress, this is medicinal intervention being refined before our eyes, stitch by stitch, drip by drip, second by second, each patient another specimen, another insect laid out on the table to be scrutinized, tagged and, whenever possible, saved.

Where are you?

Did you actually almost faint just now? Are you kidding me with this cliché? (Get used to it, kid, you’ll finally find yourself saying, not without a little appreciation at the ways situations like these turn unbelievably personal and possibly profound moments into scenes that couldn’t even bribe their way into bad movies.) Do I really need to leave the room and splash cold water on my face? Yes, I do.

I rush out into the hallway, past the white coats scurrying here and there, somehow frowning and smiling at the same time, as only doctors can do, and find the bathroom and its impossibly clean and brightly-lit sink. Take some deep breaths, just as you’d learned to do at times like these. A few moments ago I had felt hot; now I am chilled (The physics of chemistry?). And tired. It wouldn’t be a terrible idea to get some fresh air, I think, heading toward the elevator.

On the way down to the lobby it stops and a tall, older man gets in (if I saw him today, ten years later, I’d probably say he was later-middle-aged and maybe, if he had grandkids, they would say I was middle-aged). He looks at me and we exchange a quick, cordial nod. It is a gesture that stops short of being formal, or friendly, but it is considerably different than the look strangers customarily give one another in a public place. The difference, to anyone else, would be all but imperceptible: this exchange of empathy, this implicit solidarity. It is a communication given and received exclusively in hospitals, where no one entering or exiting is free from the peculiar burden compelling their visit.

As I’m walking out I pause and hold the door for a young woman (if I saw her ten years ago I’d say she was middle-aged) wheeling an older man (her grandfather? Her father? Her husband?) hunched over in his chair. She is smiling and she is beautiful. She is beautiful because she is smiling; she has the unforced look of assumed control masking whatever concerns lie beneath. Or maybe she is on her way to figuring out (or has already figured out) the appropriate calculus between care and acceptance. Whatever it is, she is beautiful and I hold the door while she slowly slips out from the real world into the sanitized field of dreams and secrets where destinies come to be realized around the clock.

“Thank you,” she says, the smile spreading.

“Don’t go,” I want to say because I’ve fallen instantly in love.

Strangers can become unwitting angels to someone who is grieving. It’s not something you (or they) can control; it has to do with the formula that occurs when our Biology feels Chemistry and does Physics. We are scared and in need of assurance; we are vulnerable and desperate for consolation. We are people and need to grasp whatever hands might be reaching out in the dark; we are hoping to be saved by that human touch.

And so I find myself, suddenly in love, just as I’d fallen in love with the oncologist in ’97 and would fall in love with the nurse from the night shift in 2001—the one I actually sent flowers to (or at least I meant to; I actually wrote down her name with a note reminding myself to send her something to let her know I appreciated her efforts, that some of us realize what a difference people like her make, and that even if all our efforts are ultimately in vain the type of care and concern she provided was never without meaning, and above all that I loved her). The exact opposite of the way I would despise the surgeon in 2002 for laughing (she wasn’t laughing at us; she didn’t know I could see her, so I had no choice but forgive her even though I can never forget that moment, in the hallway, seconds before she and her colleague—the one she was laughing with as they walked toward us—delivered that final verdict; the one we had waited for and been able to avert and avoid for a little under five years).

***

 

Outside, at last. I can feel the sun, that unblinking life force. At once imperious and impervious, a warm-blooded bystander to our exigencies, however fervent and fleeting.

I look up, cautiously: you learn not to stare into the sun; it’s dangerous and even worse, it’s a cliché. What is the sun going to tell you, even if cared to acknowledge us, even if it could? It’s enough that it’s there. I’m grateful, at least, for the clarity of its glow, the fact that it does its dirty work during the day, making it possible (impossibly) to light up the other stars who operate under cover of darkness. These stars don’t say anything and they don’t need to; at least we can see them: they are there, no matter where they came from. They were there before we got here and they will be there long after we’re gone. Humbling, maybe even horrifying, but there is nothing we –or they– can do about it. It might not be enough, but it somehow has to be.

Tiger, tiger burning bright

In the forests of the night,

What immortal hand or eye

Dare frame thy fearful symmetry?

You learn not to talk to the stars, or you eventually realize it is senseless to imagine they can hear you. Yet enough people need to have their actions explained that we made a science of sorts out of animals in the sky, lit with meaning and the ability to govern our affairs the way the moon turns the tides.

Many of us are taught to talk to God, and some of us actually think He is listening. Those one-way conversations are enough for enough people that we sanctified that shot in the dark, that wish upon a star. We have enough people who need these mysteries and secrets explicable that we invest the sky with spirits and wish them into being: we have them make sense out of what we can’t explain for ourselves, and suddenly the senselessness yields salvation.

If all else fails enough people come to understand, and possibly take comfort in the fact that you can always talk to yourself. You know who you are and you will always hear your voice, even when you don’t want to. Even –and especially– when you are not sure what you can tell yourself, when you are not at all certain what you can or should or may say.

* From a non-fiction work-in-progress entitled Please Talk About Me When I’m Gone.

Share

Bright Moments*

Question: What’s it all about?

Answer: I don’t know.

But I do know a few things.

I know some of the things that make me tick.

Even though I write (for fun, for real and forever), I would still say that music has always been the central element of my existence. Or the elemental center. Writing is a compulsion, a hobby, a skill, a craft, an obsession, a mystery and at times a burden. Music simply is. For just about anyone, all you need is an ear (or two); that is all that’s required for it to work its magic. But, as many people come to realize, if you approach it with your mind, and your heart and, eventually (inevitably) your soul, it is capable of making you aware of other worlds, it can help you achieve the satisfaction material possessions are intended to inspire, it will help you feel the feelings drugs are designed to approximate. Et cetera.

You hear plenty about the suffering artist syndrome, the suicides, the drinking and the desolation, because these are the things that people who write about artists tend to write about. Certainly, the artists themselves express this angst in their art, but you seldom see the solipsism on the screen or the stage or in the grooves of the vinyl. But then again, these artists don’t need anyone to celebrate their achievements, because the art they created does so with exceeding adequacy and eloquence. You can’t believe everything you read, but you can always have faith in what you hear; the ears never lie. Not when it comes to music. Not when it comes to jazz music.

How to talk about jazz music? Well, perhaps it’s better to determine how not to talk about jazz music. Hearing is believing. That’s it. And if you hear something that speaks to you, keep listening. Whatever effort you put in will be immeasurably rewarded.

Listen: most of us are blissful or oblivious inside our little boxes, incapable of hearing, much less expressing, the joyful noises that reside in those most inaccessible spaces: within each of us. (For instance, what John Coltrane achieves on the final section of “A Love Supreme” could cause even the most cynical hater of humanity to feel humbled by the uniquely moving and profoundly positive force of musical expression. It’s not possible to remain neutral while listening to Charles Mingus, who, after amyotrophic lateral sclerosis confined the colossus to a wheelchair, was obliged to literally sing his songs, composing them with his mouth when he no longer could lift a pen.)

The great Rahsaan Roland Kirk (who was born blind and eventually taught himself to play three saxophones—simultaneously) often talked about bright moments: occasions where you feel deeply connected to the music, the message, and the soul of the messenger. To be sure, he made it rather easy: all one need do is listen with the heart as much as the ears and the music takes care of everything else—you’re just along for the ride. And yet, you’re not. You really do go somewhere: begin here and end up there: when you listen to the best jazz music, the experience is never static; you are always on your way someplace.

This is what jazz music signifies for me. As a dedicated non-musician, I use jazz as a viable source of empowerment; while it remains first and foremost a very real and easily identifiable source of extreme pleasure; it is also a vehicle, something used to get you someplace else. A stimulus that demands a response, inexorably capable of conjuring up words and concepts (and constructions) such as spirit, soul, God, karma—things that are (rightfully) almost unbearably oblique, or pretentious, or all-too-easily invoked, usually as readymade escutcheons for folks who ardently need a way to articulate the feeling they either can’t quite explain or desperately wish to get in touch with.

(When all else fails (and all else always fails) there is music. When the emotions and awareness start to squeeze their way behind your mind, giving way to those awful times when you wonder how you can possibly find peace or make sense of anything ever again, music is there when you need it most. August 27, 2002 was the first day of the rest of my life. Anyone who has lost a loved one will recall (or half-recall) the blur of events that come after, all of which are a blessing in the disguise of distraction. I did a lot of driving: driving from father’s house to my place, from funeral home to father’s place, to the airport to pick up relatives. The emotions and sensations would become overwhelming at times, and there are those interminable hours when you are not even certain what is real or who you are. During one of these episodes I was coming or going somewhere and I had not been paying attention to my car stereo, and then I came to my senses, recognizing a song I’d heard hundreds of times: in this crucial moment it broke through that haze like the sun and saved my life. I can’t count how many times something similar has happened, though it’s possible I never needed music as much as I did on this desperate occasion.)

Here’s the bottom line: when I contemplate whatever life has in store for me, or even if I allow myself to entertain the worst case scenarios regarding what I could have been or might become, as long as my ears work, all will never be lost. In this regard I echo the letter of Paul to the Corinthians, which is obligatory reading at every wedding: and though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries and all knowledge, and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, but have not love, I am nothing. I feel that, and I don’t know many people who would attempt to contradict such a beautiful, irrefutable sentiment. But I reckon, if everything else was removed from my life, including love, I could find meaning and solace if I still had music. If I’m ever reduced to a bed-bound wreck, so long as I have ears to listen with, I’ll never be beyond redemption; I’ll always be willing to draw one more breath. Take away my ability to write, speak, see the world, smell the air, drink, eat or emote, this life will still be worth living if I can hear those sounds.

Which is why I make a request to my friends, family and the medical establishment: even if I’m someday in that coma and every professional would wager a year’s salary that there is no possible way I’m able to hear anything, as long as my heart is still beating please, no matter what else you do, keep the music playing in my presence until I’m cold. Because no matter what you think or whatever you’re praying for, as long as I can hear that music I’m already in a better place than wherever you imagine or hope I’m heading toward.

*From a non-fiction work-in-progress entitled Please Talk About Me When I’m Gone.

Share

Rebellion*

i.

Question: What are you rebelling against?

Answer: Whaddya got?

The thing most adjusted adults eventually understand is that everyone who marches to that proverbial different beat does so not necessarily out of abandon or indifference; it is usually a calculated, even cultivated design for defiance. Of course, when you’re young you have your youth to burn, like Marlon Brando on a motorcycle. Or perhaps you long to improve upon the petulance of previous generations: you hear the different drummer and then refuse to march even to that music. It isn’t that you’re going nowhere; you are content to not even go there—to keep one step ahead of oblivion, and achieve it by any means necessary so long as you’re still inside the cyclone. Or something.

 

ii.

You think: Sometimes it’s better not to think.

Ignorance, after all, is bliss and a little ignorance goes a long way, especially in this hyperspace, computer-chip information overload moment in time. A moment that is in perpetual fast-forward. Time, it seems, can scarcely keep up with itself.

On occasion (every day, more or less), you find yourself overwhelmed by a compulsion to comprehend the things you cannot control that have complete control over you. Things like aging and illness and quantum space and the mysteries of compassion. For starters. The things that only poets understand, and who understands poets? Each person, it seems, must ultimately develop a progressive inability to understand this world in which they suffer and survive. And maybe this is a good thing, all things considered. Maybe this is for the best. If the necessary miracles of evolution unfolded in ways we could readily fathom, anarchy would likely ensue. If people understood how Nature really worked and the ways in which the game is rigged, think of all the would-be Robinson Crusoes, setting sail for the deserted islands that no longer exist. They simply aren’t there.

The future, as it always seems to be, remains at once exciting and intimidating to consider. And yet: thinking about the reality, the inevitability of the 21st century, it doesn’t seem altogether possible. Can’t we just slow things down a bit and grapple with the century that we let get away from us sometime back in the mid-to-late 1800’s? The Pony Express, the phone, the phonograph, pasteurization, planes, product assembly lines, atomic bombs, Apartheid, All The President’s Men, politics as usual. Prosperity. Privation. Privacy. The Internet. Enough.

After a century of explosions—overpopulation, death, wealth, squalor, apathy, ethnic cleansing, e-mail—is there anything left to establish or invent? Haven’t we already outdone ourselves? What does the new century, the future, have to dole out that we have not already discovered? What do we have to fear that doesn’t already stare us dead in the face? Aside from the fact that we are still unable to cure ancient diseases, we can’t feed everyone, superstitious tribes are ceaselessly quarreling, and every single one of us will eventually, inevitably die.

To be continued.

You think.

 

iii.

Milan Kundera, in the book Testaments Betrayed, explains his vision of the novelist’s acumen, which is “a considered, stubborn, furious nonidentification, conceived not as evasion or passivity but as resistance, defiance, rebellion.”

In The Brothers Karamazov, there is a chapter entitled “Rebellion” wherein the mercurial Ivan lays out his rationale for rejecting God. If the ostensibly benevolent—and omnipotent—Being that created us in His image can be credited for everything we see and achieve, He must also be accountable for all the inexplicable misery. Ivan is, ultimately, less concerned with Heaven or Hell but what occurs on God’s watch, here on earth. Even if his personal salvation were secured; even if every soul’s redemption was guaranteed, the calculus is intolerable if it depends upon one innocent child being forced to suffer. Ivan is incapable of accepting any circumstance where ultimate peace is contingent upon anyone’s pain. This is his rebellion.

Taking this scenario one step further, Ursula K. Le Guin, in her short story “The Ones Who Walk Away from Omelas”, synthesizes elements of what both Kundera and Dostoyevsky are describing. In her tale, once certain types of people ascertain the way things really work (on earth as it is in heaven), they turn their back and forsake the security of organized society. Unable to reconcile the cost of a not-so-ignorant bliss, Le Guin’s heroes rebel by refusing to endorse—or even abide—the practical, and spiritual cost of doing business.

In Slaughterhouse Five Kurt Vonnegut draws an intractable line in the sand (or salt), siding with vulnerable humans over an infallible God: “And Lot’s wife, of course, was told not to look back where all those people and their homes had been. But she did look back, and I love her for that, because it was so human.”

What they said.

 

iv.

Once I’d dispensed with organized religion and then determined that academia was no longer a suitable solution, I might have become paralyzed, either because of other options or the lack thereof. Instead, I felt oddly liberated, although that realization by no means occurred overnight. Eventually, I found I was not running away from anything so much as I felt compelled to run toward almost everything. Avoiding quiet desperation became my approach; finding ways to make art into life and life into art was my new mantra.

My rebellion, if it could accurately (or fairly) be described as such, was rather simply an antagonism against cliché: clichéd thoughts, actions, excuses and even intentions. I was still not certain what was going to work for me, but I was steadily recognizing what wasn’t going to work. Understanding that bills had to be paid, relationships had to be cultivated, mistakes had to be made and, above all, that one day I would no longer be around, my objective revolved around an obsession to live a life nobody but I could live. During those post-graduate years I steadily fortified, for all time, the most important—and rewarding—relationship of my life: the one with myself.

*From a non-fiction work-in-progress entitled Please Talk About Me When I’m Gone.

Share

Deconstruction* (Revisited)

I.

Il n’y pas hors-texte.

Or, there is nothing outside the text.

If the names Barthes, Foucault and Saussure (for starters) mean nothing to you, it would be difficult to argue that you are missing much. And yet: in the autumn of 1992 I spent more time with these gentlemen than I did with actual, living people. You see, they were all literary theorists, and they were all dead. I arrived at grad school expecting to become more intimately acquainted with some of my favorite Russian authors and dive deeper into American literature.

This happened to be right around the time that Cultural Studies had infiltrated English departments with the fervor of a rotavirus. It is tempting to say I was unlucky in this regard; as it happened, I was also fortunate in ways I did—and did not—perceive at the time. To put it as plainly as possible, if the circumstances had been different, the likelihood that I would be writing these words right now is less than remote. I almost certainly would be, if I was lucky enough, a tenured professor. I also, most likely, would be well into my second decade crafting articles for scholarly journals that not even my friends would read, nor would I, being a good friend, want them to.

Long story short: after initially resisting the jargon, the unending analysis (which was initially like watching a Fellini movie on mushrooms) and the impenetrable pretension, I was, for a time, converted. Once the signifying pieces fell into place, I began to appreciate the maddening method of making molehills into mountains. Post-structuralism can quickly become a metaphysical cult, and once the scales fall from your eyes, you embrace the oddly cathartic notion that there will be a ceaseless stream of scales to be pulled off every day for the rest of your life.

As a result, like a soldier who has spent time on the front line, these experiences informed my subsequent relation to reality. Today, I carry deconstruction like a tool in my trunk anytime I need to change a flat tire in my critical acumen. For a while there I was not sure I would be able to read, much less write fiction ever again. Eventually, I learned how to think without seeing myself thinking, but it took many years to sluice all that onanism out of my system.

What are they after?

I came away from this experience mostly unsullied, intellectually speaking, and am glad for it (the experience and the lack of permanent damage). I came away convinced that, when it comes to art, theory and philosophical concerns certainly have an important place, but not at the expense of the work itself. Perhaps this is why, to this day, I find that actual writers compose the most insightful and convincing reviews and appraisals of fiction (and non-fiction, for the most part). Maybe, if I were to deconstruct my own line of thinking, I’m unintentionally (or purposefully) prejudicing my perspective as the more thoughtful, balanced one. Regardless, academia is, in its extremes, like any cult: it is usually worthwhile to avoid any group convinced they have figured out the secrets of the universe, particularly when the answers involve the creation of more, unnecessary questions.

II.

Toujours déjà.

What are we after?

From the moment my mother stopped living, everything that has happened can, of course, be measured along the continuum of before and after. But being alive, still, I now am unable to recall anything that happened before without some awareness that she is dead; that she will die. This happens in the abstract (the knowledge is there, which doesn’t change the memory, but it alters, however subtly, the process of remembering), but it also affects specific times and dates: I will recall an event from 1998 and some part of me thinks—or is simply aware in advance—how she will be gone in four years. An occasion from 2002 will prompt the troubling question: eight months left; she had no idea and neither did we. And so on.

It gets even more complicated during dreams. And that is only addressing the ones I remember, and the ones I remember remind me that most of us are dreaming constantly, endlessly, every night, creating screenplays and scenarios, concocting future stories while revisiting past mistakes or triumphs or slipping darkly through the glass into impossible escapades—the type that could only happen in heaven, or dreams, or else a Fellini movie.

In these dreams and in my memories my mother is always-already deceased. I am always-already predisposed to deal with her death, just like I can’t remember attending church without the eventual loss of faith, or my post-graduate studies without the abrupt decision to flee the ivory tower, or my ongoing quest to construct mysteries I might solve only through writing.

Mostly, perceiving existence through this lens applies to looking forward as well as looking backward. Knowing, ahead of time, how certain decisions or actions are likely to play out (based on experience, based on characters from books, based on intuition) obliges one to avoid clichés. This insight, a sort of prognostic radar, can be as paralyzing as it is liberating: you don’t want to make any moves that will contribute to a life someone else already lived, but you also don’t want to preclude the fortuity of chance. If you think too much you can outsmart the future, or else become Bartleby, preferring to do nothing in order to preserve the illusion of an unfettered free will.

III.

The living owe it to those who no longer can speak to tell their story for them.

Czeslaw Milosz, one of the great artists of the last century, was both a poet and a professor. He could appreciate literature from both angles: the creation of it as a writer and the appreciation of it as a reader. Having seen some of the atrocity humankind was capable of during his lifetime, his work uses words to elegize, accuse and above all, to remember. His great obsession was doing his part to ensure that the suffering and the bravery and the cruelty were a little less possible to ignore and forget. His poetry, in part because of its brilliance but mostly because of its restraint, all but resists analysis: he knows what he is trying to say and you know what he is trying to say. It’s more than that; it’s always more than that. Like all the best poetry, the deceptively simple words are fraught with feeling and affect. You cannot, in short, deconstruct Czeslaw Milosz.

I came across a poem of his around 1993 that I strongly suspect would have affected me in a profound fashion whether I encountered it before or after grad school. It does, nevertheless, seem to epitomize—with astonishing clarity and conciseness—what miserable if well-meaning theorists spend chapters and careers agonizing to articulate half as well.

What I know of my laborious life: it was lived…

I don’t need to write memos and letters every morning.

Others will take over, always with the same hope,

The one we know is senseless and devote our lives to…

So the Earth endures, in every petty matter

And in the lives of men, irreversible.

And it seems a relief. To win? To lose?

What for, if the world will forget us anyway.

Poets and professors are ultimately in search of similar things: not necessarily the answers to specific questions but the process of discovering, and interrogating the things that perplex us. It is not the answers or even the questions but the act of investigating: that dissatisfaction; not an act of rebellion or defiance, but an appreciation and, ultimately, acceptance that we can’t know. We can never know but we must try.

This, it seems to a former altar boy and once-future scholar, is the most satisfactory elucidation of what impels us to learn and love and live.

*From a non-fiction work-in-progress entitled Please Talk About Me When I’m Gone.

Share