“Love For Being Itself”: Marina Abramović, Di Fara Pizza and Chatroulette

On the final day of Marina Abramović’s performance at MoMA, “The Artist Is Present,” somebody tossed a manuscript from an upper balcony. Its pages peeled apart in falling, fluttering to the floor like so much confetti. One Memorial Day attendee called the sight beautiful. Inspection of a fallen page revealed font too small for ready understanding. Maybe the pages didn’t want to be understood, the spectacle of their descent their raison d’etre. While gathering them up, a guard asked the crowd to please not read the words. Nothing to see here, folks, he might have added. It was The Artist we were meant to feast our eyes on: New York City to the exhibition’s gathered United States.

Sitting opposite the temporal stream of her fifteen hundred plus guests, Serbian-born Abramović appeared massive, her red, white, and blue robes (a color per month) augmenting the size of her body. Her breathing was plainly visible, a single braid lying across her left shoulder, her posture canting to the right. Like a Central Park mime or a guard at Buckingham Palace, she held her place with seeming Zen, blinking and blinking and blinking again, face waxy with moisturizing balm. And what could we, the gathered, possibly have had to show her; what energies might we have silently transmitted?

“I wonder what she’s thinking,” a viewer mused.

“She’s writing a book,” went the earnest reply.

However true, it spoke to something: as art, only books carry the kind of monumental silence and stillness that a woman (Artist) seated in the center of the room, day after day, for months on end, brings to bear. As the program notes relayed, Abramović’s quadrant was a space where “nothing, and possibly everything” happened.

Art, it could be said, is true to everyone and faithful to no one: two thousand years ago a statue of a Roman soldier signified to its viewer a set of meanings (an ideal of manhood, the thrill of weaponry, the power of the state) that today have been reconfigured for most onlookers (a model physique, a quaint notion of violence, the ruin of empire in time). Ozymandias, and all that.

To create art is one thing; to confuse yourself with art—as only a human being after all—another: confusion at its most turbulent. And that is exactly the sort of confusion “The Artist Is Present” tempted. In this age of the watching eye, Marina Abramović invited us to share the mantle of her artistry in the most open and transparent manner possible.

Was that, in the end, truly to share at all? What would repeat sitter, Paco Blancas, say? How about “the streaker” who pulled her dress over her head before being immediately escorted from the premises by security? What of that critic who rained his pages from the upper balcony? Gathered there, what did we expect to receive? Or was it just a beautiful sort of relinquishing that her presence solicited, willingly surrendered by those who sat?

I was standing on the perimeter. Notepad in hand, like many others with notepads in hand. Or sketchpads. Or cameras. Something was happening there, and I was determined to know it by its name. Over the course of my three brief visits, one in March, one in April, and once more, on the show’s last day (“The Artist Is Leaving” they might have called it), I wrestled with the question of what to write, and how I would relate it to my passion for fiction.

Would I include an “I” in my essay, or go for more straight reportage; set ink on the Hunter S. Thompson or Tom Wolfe side of the line? And if I did include an I, would that “I” be me, purely mine and mine alone? Or a quality of self I owe in part to Marina Abramović having been present before me?

***

Considering these questions, I caught a train out to Midwood, Brooklyn, home of Di Fara Pizza. People bring their cameras, and notepads, to Di Fara too. As has been well documented, the guys know pizza. Their works of culinary genius are born in the most open and transparent manner possible. In fact, as I approached, with maybe something like a twinkle of anticipation in my eye, owner Domenico DeMarco, in apron and striped, short-sleeved button-down glanced out the sliding window at the front of the store. As if I were about to sit with him.

Or stand, as it happens. With a number of other patrons. The worn brass bulk of the cash register sports a set of ‘I Like The Pope’ stickers and a statuette of the white-robed Virgin Mary in prayer. A guy in ball-cap and apron took orders at random, as a star athlete signs autographs (who do I make it out to?), the three-tiered double ovens emitting their formative heat off to his left.

The interior walls wear the character of years, making no effort to hide their age and grit. Alongside the many, many mounted newspaper clippings heralding Di Fara Pizza’s pitch-perfect textures and flavors, a sign advises: “A group of 10 to 30 in the store can result in a delay, even of an hour or two. Yes, it may be frustrating, but perhaps the anticipation can enhance your appetite.”

Watching your pizza take shape comes with the ticket price (or if you can stand not having a slice, you’re free to stand and watch without paying a cent). Father, daughter, and sons perform—with support from others—behind a counter allowing full view of their preparations. Red tins of Salerno tomatoes are stacked behind the wooden balustrade lining the upper wall. Canisters of Vantia Olive Oil sit side-by-side above the flat expanse where dough is kneaded and spun.

It’s more often than not Dom DeMarco himself who dribbles the oil from a thin copper watering can, cuts shoots of home-grown basil with quick, sure strokes, and sprinkles the shredded parmesan before a pie in its box is released. Spinning the cheese grater, working the dough, rotating pies from counter to oven, oven to counter, then sectioning a finished pie, too hot yet for a patron to taste, into eight slices: these same motions DeMarco, his children and employees, have been practicing for decades on end, a version of perfect stillness—their perpetual motion notwithstanding. All toward the end of that most mythic phenomenon: the cross-generational, family-owned business.

Greatness is this: one grown man (like me, say) looking into the eyes of another, eyes that anywhere else would be guarded with un-recognition, to find shared ground, openness, wonder, the fact of Di Fara Pizza and an awaiting meal. Community. We arrive in Midwood, streaming desire, faces in a continuum. Most walk away ready to describe the experience in tones of amazement: you, too, should have the good fortune of knowing what I have known.

***

If knowing Di Fara Pizza is generally chalked up to good fortune, knowing Chatroulette, and what it holds in store, is more fraught. The very fires of hell, a more strictly religious guy than me might say. Some kind of fun, the shameless and sporting. An outlet, the isolated and lonely. The truth our parents hide, the young and wondering. Criminal behavior, the bearers of civic standards. Life, the tech-savvy, before hitting ‘Next.’

It is difficult to offer any single experience as representative of the Chatroulette universe, and yet that is all that Chatroulette is made of: once-in-a-lifetime meetings—here, then gone. Existentialism for dummies. These virtual interactions, cued by a mysterious algorithm—the genius of a Russian youth—take place in the blink of an eye: snap-snap-snap. The Artist is you, the space you and your webcam inhabit the context, the parade of strangers your fellow sitters. Think Reality TV confessional, the uncensored version: instead of London or Boston or San Francisco, the destination locale is your head. The narrative is post-modern in the extreme. There is someone, a person or people, on the other side, strangers in strange lands: do we need fiction no longer to help us visualize the other?

Perhaps it is no surprise, given the tempo at which most interactions occur and the freedom of apparent anonymity (and apparent safety of being a virtual being, not an accountable one, not a known entity) that many choose to let their genitals do the talking. These are the early days of the site, so a lot will change: already there is a ‘report’ button, which holds out at least the possibility of some future of regulation and pursuant shaming.

At present, though, Chatroulette is the revolution in cross-section, the anti-Facebook, a subversion of social-networking tribes, an altar to the god of chance (who may, it turns out, be nothing but a masturbating dude… not that there aren’t women out there, too). The thumbs up, the raised middle finger, the two-pronged peace symbol serve as pidgin language for some emerging universal consciousness; while this may have been the case for years, it is only now that anybody with internet access and a webcam can see that it is so.

Nouveau Edward Hopper, in close up: no more or less obscene than consuming a solitary fast-food meal separated from a city street by only a pane of glass. These are the molten edges around the plates of community, always the stuff of artistic obsession, where any given interaction can be creepy or thrilling, vacuous or revelatory, brutish or sweet.

On Chatroulette, not only do you see a stranger, you also see yourself. I am an image, you might think, and that is all: what vanity drove me to gather these herring fish words in my net? What good are they? Why not cut loose my shame, slip out of everyday masks?

In contrast, for those who decide, however reluctantly, to keep their clothes on—how much more clothed clothed people look in contrast to the others—naming is all. Pleasure lies in finding words to describe the succession of images, of people, of signifiers.

***

Unlike Marina Abramović’s recent performance (the mantle of artist so nearly tangible!), the launching pad for these stray reflections on the sunny enterprise of Di Fara pizza pies and Chatroulette’s shadow world, literary fiction—that which aspires to Literature with a capital ‘L’—is prefaced on absence. That the author is not there with you, and yet is, is exactly the fact of authorship.

Writers create a bridge that, once crossed, reveals the far to be near, the other to be self. Say Hemingway, and it is as if he is there, sitting opposite you. An idea of him persists, rooted in the continued life of his fiction. Say Tolstoy. Say Woolf.

In Charles Baxter’s short story, “Reincarnation” from the collection Believers, a tenuous community takes hold between three couples in a rural backyard one summer evening. The couples trade stories, over drink, as their faces recede in darkness. This continues in leisure until one of those present rejects the bond the gathered have carved out.

Before that happens though, the topic of incarnation is discussed, a notion of unearned love: “Whitman’s poetry is about love you don’t have to earn. It’s about love that you have or that you don’t have or that you just get or you give but not the kind that you did something to earn… It’s love for being itself.”

Call it adoration. In the search, perhaps, of love for being itself, a belief that such a feeling should exist on earth—a person should receive love just for being!—we seek out The Artist and deliver to her that love as we conceive of it in ourselves. Everyone should be so fortunate.

- Jeff Price is a freelance writer and editor.

Photos courtesy of VividRadicalMemory and UntitledBlog.

Creeps of the World, Unite!

“To Console The Hopeless Self”: Castle by J. Robert Lennon

“‘Out!’ I said.  I suppose I was shouting.  My sister stood up, trembling, and I must admit that I expected her familiar sneer to have taken its usual place on her face.  But all I could find there was unhappiness and fear.  Fear of my reaction, perhaps.  But when a person has lived a life like hers, a life of promiscuity, rootlessness, and substance abuse, resentment and fear tend to replace all reasonable and proper emotions, and the world becomes your enemy.” -Eric Loesch

An ex-soldier with a mysterious past.  A venture into the eerily silent forest flanking a house recently purchased outside “Gettysburg, New York, population 2,310 and falling.” An albino deer that leads the protagonist to a strange castle hidden among “tightly packed maples, birches, ashes, and pines.” A confrontation with the forgotten.

If these sound at all like tropes of a conventional thriller, it is because they are.  But in the fiction of J. Robert Lennon, whatever sort of genre costume the narrative might wear, there is always something more to be peeked at beneath the outer layers, sly hints of contradiction to the façade.  Lennon’s novels fulfill the role of cool older brother spotted in the banquet-hall of a formal affair, winking, ‘Hey, kid, it’s me.’ The Harrison Ford of literary fiction, if you will: reckless, ungainly, charming.

Castle, Lennon’s latest novel, is not so big on formality even if the aforementioned protagonist, Eric Loesch, practices its art where ever he goes, a self-protective mechanism: there are things that he would rather forget.

With a blend of solipsism, presumption, and unease, Eric rebuffs the everyday friendliness of the few people with whom he must interact in purchasing the plot of land and procuring the necessary supplies for his home renovation project. “Yalp,” a local electrician named Heph opines with respect to Eric’s labors, “it’s real nice to see a house come back from the dead, as it were.”  Thinks Eric: “His backwoods charm and colloquial speech did little to dispel my sense that he was observing and testing me, gauging my reactions to his supposedly innocent comments and questions.”

When a real estate agent named Jennifer thanks him for making her day with a big sale, Eric explains that he would “prefer to keep things between us on a professional level.” His implication is not well-met.

And yet, it isn’t that he doesn’t mean well.  A children’s book, discovered in the moldy basement of his new home, speaks to him: “The book offered a character with whom I was able to identify, and a portrayal of bravery and self-reliance that corresponded very closely to my own values.  I wished only I could send the book back in time, to my younger self, in his moments of greatest need.”  For Eric, his “younger self” continues to exist, marooned in time—surely a sympathetic trait.  He simply happens to be a guy grown accustomed to a hostile world.  The reasons for that lurk in the shadowy recesses of the house he has purchased and the castle deep in the silent woods and the unacknowledged confines of his own painful history.

Researching the identity of the house’s former owner, Eric converses with a professor at the local college, who is compelled to respond to his challenge in the following manner:

“All I meant,” she said slowly, “was that, in the wake of the sixties, and of our military adventures abroad, most intelligent people have absorbed the idea that none of us is ever very far from emotional collapse.” When I offered no reply, she went on.  “Our personalities are complex, but the animal instincts they conceal are stronger, and not very far below the surface.” She met my stare and said, “Don’t you agree, Mr. Loesch?”

Castle is a novel about shame, the inchoate and unnamed rearing up its ugly face, the best built defenses helpless to prevent it.  Eric has a passion for restoring the run-down and surveying the uncharted; other people, no matter what emotions might blip across the sonar of his self-perception, signal a threat: fear or disgust.  And yet… he knows… he knows… there is… someone… else… out there.  While harboring resentment, even rage, for his long estranged sister’s perceived lifestyle, Eric, an intelligent man, has managed to make a relative nullity of his life, lacking for nourishing social ties (akin to Marilynne Robinson’s Jack Boughton) and taking refuge in the creaking home whose former owner may well have been his one-time mentor.

“Did the family ever imagine, as they sat together around the table, that this room might someday be empty of everything but cobwebs and dust?”: In short, Eric is a creep, convinced, perhaps rightly, of a greater creepiness’s existence, itself a creepy thing to dwell on.  Lennon employs the means of thriller convention (“He was here—I knew it.  The moment had come”/ “At last, I faced my nemesis.”/ “I was, at last, inside the castle.”), the ends of which are sales and movie adaptations, to turn the story around, as it were, and cast a hard look at the face peering in.  Which is, of course, only the face that Lennon imagines.  Though, as anyone who has read Mailman knows, his imagination in regard to male creepiness is more than fertile.

“Surprises Are Good But Not When They Are Eternal”: The Soul Thief by Charles Baxter

“‘If you had disappeared, if you had died, we would have… we would have become you.  We would have taken you on.  We would have turned into you.’ He waits. ‘You would have lived in us.’” –Jerome Coolberg to Nathaniel Mason

“Everyone needs to be saved, right now, instantly saved from history itself, the factuality of it.”: For all the submerged horrors he has faced, one thing Eric Loesch can count himself fortunate never to have experienced is a roomful of partying grad students.  Now it is there that the unnerving truly underlies everything said and done, the amassed ambition, swirling anxiety, identities in seemingly permanent flux.  What type of grad students, you ask?  Well, their physical location is Buffalo, NY, but, more than that, Charles Baxter’s latest novel The Soul Thief does not state.  Something to do with art, suffice it to say; perhaps, music, or literature, or philosophy.  The exact subject of their studies rests beside the fact of their immersion in each other’s example, the figure each cuts.

Or figures, rather.  At least, when it comes to Jerome Coolberg, whose name, the narrator Nathaniel Mason acknowledges, “sounds fictional and implausible, a poor effort at whimsy.” While the shambolic factor is subtextual in Lennon’s Castle, here it occupies a position in the novel’s foreground, enacted through the shenanigans of Mr. Coolberg and ultimately driven by him to such lengths as to resemble nothing so much as art.

Says a partygoer of “whiz-kid sage” Coolberg at the grad school gathering where Nathaniel makes his acquaintance: “He’s the first person I’ve known who can be in two places at once.  He’s dislocated.  Not a joint or a knee—the whole person.” When Nathaniel and his impromptu date Theresa find Coolberg holding court in one corner of the old house, Nathaniel observes how his voice has “a pleading note, halfway between seduction and distress, and an intelligent gentleness that is all the more alarming for its measured calm, its burnt-over benumbed despair.” As well, Coolberg insists that he be called either “Jerome” or “Coolberg.” Never “Jerry.”

Another important question, though: who is Nathaniel?  An earnest observer, a good looking guy, a transplant from the Midwest (his father: “a patiently good man who seemed to relish his nonentity status, his lack of individuality”), Nathaniel also takes great satisfaction in volunteering at The People’s Kitchen, a local pantry founded to lend aid to those who cannot afford a warm meal.  When he returns to his apartment one night to find a burglar rooting through his shirt-closet, he decides to have a chat with the man, bidding him when he makes his belated exit: “Drop by again.  Just knock next time.” Every so often Nathaniel receives a phone call from his mute sister, Catherine, to whom he feels obligated to recount the events of his day, believing that “the stories keep her alive.”

Generous and well-intentioned, perhaps to a fault, Nathaniel’s heart is divided between two women: Theresa, whom he meets in a rain-dappled park en route to that initial party—she is a Midwestern transplant much like himself, if also, like Coolberg, a student of the striking image—and Jamie Esterson, a sweet, mothering sculptor, who lives a solitary existence full of fleeting, all-consuming passions.  It also happens that she identifies as a lesbian.  No matter: a recovering Catholic, Jamie finds herself drawn to Nathaniel’s virtues, in the original sense of the term.  “You make me nervous,” she tells him.  “You’re too available.  You need to be more vigilant.  Close yourself down a little.  Men shouldn’t be like you.”

One of these entanglements quickly becomes more serious than the other, while, not to be forgotten, along totters Coolberg, trailing Nathaniel’s literal and figurative footsteps.  There is this novel he is working on, you see: “The strain of loving two women is one that few men can withstand,” the aspiring great professes to Nathaniel, “Even Ezra Pound lost his mind by loving two women.  This young man, this character named Ambrose, develops an antipathy to daylight because in his doubleness, his double-heartedness, he fears that he will meet himself on the sidewalk coming toward himself from the opposite direction.”

Steadily, the moment is forced toward its crisis.

When the smoke clears, decades have passed, Nathaniel having returned to the Midwest, a suburban home, two boys, a loving and “frighteningly guileless” wife.  Regularly at night, a show called “American Evenings” plays on the radio, one whose host happens to be that old classmate of Nathaniel’s, Jerome Coolberg.  It is a show Nathaniel has paid attention to from time to time, in spite of himself, marveling at Coolberg’s technique of making himself at once invisible and omnipresent.  All these years later, Nathaniel’s feelings for Jamie abide in his heart, memory of their relationship’s dissolution still fresh:

“This is desperation you’re witnessing,” he says, gripping her.  All at once, the thought occurs to him that what he’s expressing is not love but hysteria, rising out of his own emptiness.  He is in the grip of inflated speech, exaggeration, all the insincere locutions of opacity and self-deception.  He is becoming, he feels with sudden queasy recognition, like a character in a plot dreamed up by someone like Coolberg.

Nathaniel’s chance to address the unresolved arrives one evening in the form of a call from that very Coolberg, inviting his old acquaintance out to L.A., for a talk like those on the show he hosts.  But this one will transpire without the studio set.  Nathaniel accepts the invitation, once again, in spite of himself.  He meets with Coolberg at Chateau Marmont, or a scene very like it, and together, the two venture out toward Santa Monica.  Nathaniel waxes poetic: “Night dropped its black lace around us.” Time plays onward through drinks and rehashing of the past until Nathaniel finds himself in Coolberg’s apartment, its mystery at last revealed to him:

The rooms looked like the temporary unsupervised housing of someone with a ravening spiritual hunger, a grandiloquent vacancy that would consume anything to fill up the interior space where a soul should be.  Books were piled and stacked everywhere.  Behind this craving resided an urge as strong as love.

Baxter—yes, Baxter: where has he gone in this account?—has written a novel that ought to last for as much time as there is between here and forever.  The Soul Thief is the coolest book to have read, and never admit to having read.  Perhaps the creepiest two sentences of all fall in the novel’s final section, oddly resonating, as they do, with Lennon’s Castle: “Nathaniel Mason enters the silent house.  I can easily imagine it.”

- Jeff Price is a freelance writer and editor.