A Nice Place for George to Live: Class, Imperialism, and The Man in the Yellow Hat

I am obsessed with the Man in the Yellow Hat’s finances.

We’ve been watching Curious George, the show, on PBS as a family, and after watching the Man in the Yellow Hat take his monkey to his country house and back again to the two-bedroom apartment with terrace in a doorman building in the city, I too was curious.

“What is his job?” I asked my husband.

He looked at me, unsure whether to answer. “I think he’s a writer.”

***

I grew up out in the suburbs on Long Island, and for as long as I knew New York City existed I knew that’s where I wanted to live my adult life. Tired of the endless cycle of diners and Dunkin’ Donuts and Friendly’s, tired of standing around in parking lots trying to conjure up somewhere else to go and failing, I didn’t understand why anyone would choose to live somewhere with such a paucity of cultural offerings. I left as soon as I could to attend college in Manhattan and swore I’d never come back.

In college, I babysat for families uptown, and while I held no illusions that the whole-floor Upper East Side apartments with a private elevator were likely to be my future, I thought the post-war two-bedrooms with a terrace near Riverside Drive — the real-life version of the Man in the Yellow Hat’s apartment — would be within reach for the well-educated upper-middle-class professional that I expected the adult version of myself would be someday.

Nearly fifteen years later, the rowhouse down the street from my apartment in once working-class Sunset Park sold for $1.3 million, in a Brooklyn real estate market where cash sales and bidding wars were common. I was 31, a new mom and fully the adult version of myself. Someday was now, and I was no closer to that apartment.

***

We started to speculate that the Man in the Yellow Hat must be some wealthy eccentric in order to afford his multiple residences. He wears all yellow, after all, an entire closet of yellow button down shirts and yellow pants to match his yellow hat and yellow polka-dotted tie, and he has a pet monkey he brings everywhere he goes, whom people know by name, even while nobody refers to the Man in the Yellow Hat by name.

“His apartment building is yellow,” my father pointed out. “Maybe that’s where his money comes from; the rents of the other apartments.”

“No,” I disagreed. “He’s old money, and that’s just bonus.”

The real reason, of course, is that the Man in the Yellow Hat is a fictional character in a fictional city with a fictional economy, but I can’t stop thinking about it.

***

A child wreaks havoc on your life, which parents understand in the abstract but not in the specific, as in, I knew it would feel like everything changed but not that I’d spend so much time at urgent care that all the doctors and nurses recognize us. I appreciate the acceptance of chaos as status quo in Curious George and his relationship with the Man in the Yellow Hat. Until my son was a toddler I might have doubted the sanity of someone who invests emotional and financial resources into a relationship with a monkey, but there’s a reason “my little monkey” is a popular pet name for one’s toddler. They hang all over you, they stick their fingers in your mouth, and they play with their feces if not watched closely. It feels like domesticating a wild animal, albeit a cute one.

Until my son was a toddler I might have doubted the sanity of someone who invests emotional and financial resources into a relationship with a monkey.

Most of all, the chaos is a reminder that the illusion of control one assumes as the adult in the relationship is just that: an illusion. I understood this as true when my first pregnancy ended in miscarriage, and I realized that even my own body could not be counted on to follow prescribed instructions for how things are gonna be, but for many people living a comfortable life above the poverty line, the first time things really go off the rails, control-wise, is when they have a kid. A baby has any number of wildcards, and even the neurotypical ones are unpredictable in what challenges they’ll throw your way; how they’ll sleep, what they’ll eat, their moods during the waking moments. Crack the code and a few weeks later the code no longer works.

***

The Man in the Yellow Hat in the original books is an explorer of the Indiana Jones variety, in keeping with the other explorer characters of the 1930s. My son has a compilation of the originals and its his most-requested bedtime reading. I do a lot of on-the-fly editing to avoid some of the more problematic depictions of Native Americans and the propensity to use “young” and “pretty” as descriptors for women in a professional context, and to skip the part where Curious George discovers a bottle of ether and passes out, but I’m still navigating how to handle the entire premise, in which Curious George is living “in Africa” — no country is identified as it presumably does not matter to the audience — and the Man in the Yellow Hat uses his hat as a lure to trap George in a bag and brings him back to the United States on a boat.

Curious George, being curious, makes trouble on the boat and then in the Man in the Yellow Hat’s apartment, where he spends the night before being deposited at the zoo. The zoo is called “a nice place for George to live” and leaves no instructions for age-appropriate ways to broach the subject of a troubled history with slavery that is part of our shared past as Americans with a two-year-old drinking his milk before bed.

***

In this context I wonder whether the Man in the Yellow Hat’s wealth is similarly seized, unfairly appropriated, in ways that explain how he can afford that apartment with the bright, airy kitchen and the French doors to the terrace in an apartment building that allows residents to have monkeys. Somehow this is more comforting than remembering all of this is made up and the apartment in question doesn’t exist. If the Man in the Yellow Hat is part of a larger tradition of imperialism, and the apartment is financed on less-than-ethical terms, then it lets me off the hook. There was no way I was going to afford that apartment on a writer’s salary, and despite the nagging feeling I have otherwise, there wasn’t a lot I could have chosen that would have put me in a position to live the life I imagined years ago as a babysitter.

If the Man in the Yellow Hat is part of a larger tradition of imperialism, and the apartment is financed on less-than-ethical terms, then it lets me off the hook.

Right? Because when I see the Man in the Yellow Hat has a country house in what looks like Maine, especially if we’re going by the accents of the townsfolk on the PBS show, I am reminded that a Maine country house is the marker of a certain type of artsy intellectual New Yorker, in the style of E.B. White, and specifically the type of New Yorker I thought I’d be when I grew up. Which is why my husband was so hesitant to tell me the Man in the Yellow Hat was a writer — because if he were a writer, he’d be the writer I wanted to be: the New Yorker with the apartment and the Maine country house and the time to indulge hobbies.

The Man in the Yellow Hat may have inherited his Maine house — on the show he refers to what the property was like when he was growing up — and so it’s possible the house was inherited from his mysteriously absent family. He spends most of his working hours “helping Professor Weisman at the museum,” and his job seems to involve research and writing and supporting academics. It’s not the type of job one imagines would support multiple residences, or a family — even if the family is just himself and a monkey.

***

In the original books the Man in the Yellow Hat is fairly distant from George, seemingly unconcerned that this monkey he has kidnapped and brought to the city is breaking into apartments and upsetting traffic. But by the time Curious George Goes to the Hospital is published 20 years later, the Man in the Yellow Hat has grown into the role of parent, at least enough to notice George needs medical attention and to bring him to the hospital.

I can’t tell if he’s the worst parent model in the world for this, or the best.

On the PBS show, the Man in the Yellow Hat, though still George’s “friend,” is enough of a parent to George that parents in the audience can recognize their own struggles in him. The Man in the Yellow Hat exhibits eternal patience with his monkey/kid, though George is often making trouble by scattering groceries to lure a suspected dinosaur, or stealing the food and newspapers of all of his neighbors in order to participate in a recycling contest, or otherwise causing destruction in the name of curiosity. When the Man in the Yellow Hat discovers George’s mess, and the misunderstanding that led to it, he’ll correct George and apologize to the neighbors, but he’ll never discipline George. George is going to continue to be a monkey and invite chaos wherever he goes, and the Man in the Yellow Hat acknowledges this by accepting the chaos as part of the deal and moving on. He lives in the present. I can’t tell if he’s the worst parent model in the world for this, or the best.

***

I bought a house on Long Island after a year of searching. To my surprise, but not to the surprise of people who live here, it turns out there’s plenty of art and culture. While I can’t say I’ve mastered living in the present, I do try to accept that chaos is part of the deal with my little monkey, who in our time in the suburbs has gone from tentative first steps to walking to running, and from coos and cries to words and sentences, naming the world around him.

One of the movies calls the Man in the Yellow Hat “Ted,” but the rest of the books and shows refer to him only as “the man” or “George’s friend.” The Man in the Yellow Hat is not named in part because his only family, a monkey, is unable to name him.

My son asks me to read Curious George yet again before bed, “Mami, THIS one, Currus George” and settles in to drink his milk. In naming me the chaos subsides, if only for a moment. We are home.

Writer Horoscopes for March 2016: Total Eclipse of the Page

by Apostrodamus

Pisces (February 19 — March 20)

If you’re tearing your hair out, dear Pisces, over revisions, submissions, or other missions, you’re likely feeling the effects of the March solar eclipse. Before the eclipse on the 8th, expect to be short-tempered with editors, agents, friends, family, pets, pigeons, words, punctuation, paper, staples, paper clips… you catch my drift. Plan accordingly and avoid making messes you’ll have to clean up next month. During this time, you may also jump to conclusions. So if you think you’ve figured out that plot hole or decided to cut pages 200–450, just save a copy of the old draft, ok? (Editor’s note: please do not change your book of poetry entirely to the second person!!!!) March 4–11 are good goal-setting days — be they professional, financial, or creative — but here too be careful of making hasty and impulsive decisions. Creativity is back in the house in the second half of the month, so quit your grumbling and get back to work.

Lucky inspiration: Tantric meditation

Aries (March 21 — April 19)

Get deep this month, Aries. The lead-up to your birthday is a prime time to examine your writing slate. Do you have a project that excites you? Or do you feel stuck in yet another way to make a buck? If your reflection is less 🙂 and more a ¯_(ツ)_/¯, it’s OK. Drop the hair shirt, and rechart your course. If you’re a freelancer, try out a new ratio of client to personal work. Steal time whenever you can. Write what’s true/strange/fascinating to you, and 2016 might bring those wild words: staff writer, tenure track, eternal solvency.

Lucky inspiration: Psychoanalysis

Taurus (April 20 — May 20)

Stubborn Taurus, you are lucky the world adores you thus. You may like to play things close to the vest but the eclipse on March 8 signals a time to get something off your chest. Need to talk to your coworkers about inequality and the lack of diversity in publishing? Need to have a difficult discussion with your editor about the direction of your novel/poetry collection /etc.? This month is as good as any, and the stars say folks will be more receptive to what you have to say in the first two weeks of the month. The second half of the month, dear Taurus, is about taking action on those conversations and opportunities — make that change happen on the page and off!

Lucky inspiration: Manuals for public speaking

Gemini (May 21 — June 20)

Your writing engine’s full of pep, and you’re looking sharp this month, Gemini! Say yes: pitch new outlets, join a workshop, sign that contract — and know the deal’s gonna go in your favor. The only words of caution: you’ve got real friends and “real friends.” Now’s the time to sort between the two. Who’s in your corner when you’re wavering on sending that final-final-REAL-draft.doc to your editor? Who’s only in it for your stack of ARCs? Drop the scrubs — keep your love and editorial emotional labor for those who reciprocate.

Lucky inspiration: Advice columns

Cancer (June 21 — July 22)

Cancers with book deals in the works will find March 4–11 an especially auspicious time for haggling over contracts. Now is a good as time as any to demand only red M&Ms in your ridersor contractually obligate your editor to forego semicolons!!! While others are “feeling the Bern,” you are feeling the power that writers only feel during goddamn solar eclipses (which is to say: minimal, fleeting, and probably bullshit). Have no fear, though, because Cancers get slapped with the pretties mid-month (it’s as if someone slid rose-colored glasses over your sleeping head and dosed your coffee with E), so write some epic love poems and utopian manifestos, and reassure the rest of us that the world isn’t going to shit in a Trump-branded handbasket, m’kay?

Lucky Inspiration: Utopian theory

Leo (July 23 — August 22)

OK, Leo, here’s your March spell. Gather your giants, whatever moves you — books (duh), movies, weird scientific theories, jokes, the truly human depths of Yahoo! Answers, etc. Go cross-genres, -mediums, -forms — and steal from each. Mash everything up. This month’s stellar for literary experiments, especially early on. You’re gonna spew some mutant genius, and people will like it. Heck, you might score a big-bucks contract.

Lucky inspiration: Teen Tumblr

Virgo (August 23 — September 22)

Uh-oh, literary Virgo: You’re in a bad way AGAIN this month. I’m not sure why the planets hate you so much (probably because you are so smart and awesome and they’re just jealous) but it looks like frustrations from last month carry over into this one. From March 4–11 pesky Mercury is opposite your decan, which means your communication game is OFF — so off, in fact, you might want to turn your phone off too. TO BE CLEAR: this is not a good month to try to negotiate contracts, STET your editors edits, have that sit-down talk with your partner about respecting your “writing time,” etc. This is a good month for writing paranoid espionage thrillers, paranoid gender thrillers, paranoid economic thrillers, and paranoid horoscopes. I mean, does it matter if the world is out to get you if you get them first with…A BOOK?

Lucky inspiration: Airport espionage thrillers

Libra (September 23 — October 22)

You’re a writing machine this month, Libra, but look out for yourself. You’ll generate keener ideas and sharper lines if you mind your health. Get physical: work out character arcs loping round the park, pummel your way through stalled starts (just enough to get zen — don’t ding your typin’ hands), or soak in the tub (self-care is real!) and dream up your ideal cover. Do what makes your body happy, and you’ll crank out the pages by month’s end.

Lucky inspiration: Athlete biopics

Scorpio (October 23 — November 21)

Dear literary insect, this month is all smooth scuttling. Writing and revising will come easily to you this month, whether you’re working on a new project or finishing up an old one. Beauty reigns supreme, and those writing about relationships will find their writing extra, erm, fertile. This is especially true of the second half of the month when Venus is trine your decan (that means not exactly opposite: 120 degrees). March is also a good month for bringing visual art into your writing, whether via collaboration with an artist, or by simply paying attention to the shapes your words make on the page. Turn your stinger into a pen nib and use it for drawing vast swashes and curliques in the sand, Scorpio!

Lucky Inspiration: Museums and art galleries

Sagittarius (November 22 — December 21)

If you’re experiencing a manuscript meltdown, befriend an animal. For real — loiter in a dog park, cat-sit for the best writer you know (try this chant: the fluffier the ruff, the better the pub), or google the zillion adorable animal havens in Japan (e.g., deer that bow! back! to you!). You got a lot of energy to burn in the first chunk of the month — so let your mind unwind, and pesky plot points will slot in place. Your revision success puts you in the best mood the second half of March.

Lucky inspiration: Cat videos on loop

Capricorn (December 22 — January 19)

Oh snap, Cap, it’s eclipse season!! If you don’t know now you know (that it’s good news for you and your writing). It looks like you’re going to have a good run these next few months so think long-term projects and new collaborations. Creativity peaks on the 8th and 9th, so play hooky from work and spend those days writing past the margins of your spiralbound. Boss want to know why? Tell ’em the stars made you do it. Oh, hold up: the stars also say you should play hooky the 14th-16th to work on your writing!! Actually, according to our predictions you only REALLY need to go into work on the 18th this month. [Editor’s note: Please consult your bank account before following this advice. The stars are not legally responsible for the loss of any job due to the advice in this post.]

Lucky Inspiration: Lottery winners

Aquarius (January 20 — February 18)

Everyone’s gonna give you the eye this month — make sure you give them good material. For the first two weeks, chat up would-be editors, collaborators, even publicists. Get the word out about you and your work: sign up for a panel, swap drafts with a friend, make the laps at book launches. RT that praise. If ever, this is the best time to hot-take your way to a new deal or assignment. Get in your human interaction now; stars realign the second half of the month, and it’s back to the desk.

Lucky inspiration: Ad slogans

“How Can They Write About Anything But Pain?”

We’ve asked some of our favorite international authors to write about literary communities and cultures around the globe. We’re bringing you their essays in an Electric Literature series: The Writing Life Around the World. This month’s installment is by Fazilhaq Hashimi, an emerging writer from Afghanistan.

Here is a page from my elementary school math book from the Afghan civil war era (1992–2001). At the bottom of the page, the teacher’s guide notes that the instructor “must ask about the names, usage, and quantity of the above items.” The word “quantity is the only math-related term. It is mentioned at the end of the series. The names and usages of the ammunitions are given pride of place. In language classes, while “A” was for “Allah”, the rest of the Dari or Pashtu alphabets included war-related components such as T” for “Toopak” (gun), “Sh” for “Shamsheer” (sword), “J” for “Jihad,” “M” for “Mujahid,” and “Ta” for “Talib.” Every book promoted war, violence, and guns. Math problems were asked as, “A group of Mujahideen are on the frontline. Three of them are on duty at the checkpoint. Each has a box that consists of sixty bullets. In the fight against the infidels, the first Mujahid fired 24 bullets, the second 40, and the third 16. Write the total number of bullets fired and the numbers that are remaining.” Sometimes such questions were even expanded, “If a total of 19 infidels were killed with a single shot by the brave Mujahideen, how many bullets missed?”

That’s how Afghan children were taught in the refugee camps in Pakistan. The students who were left in Afghanistan were only taught religious subjects. All the scientific, extra-curricular, and art classes were erased from the curriculum. Literature and poetry, however, were not completely forgotten. Each morning, the students were lined up to read aloud a patriotic poem and to recite a religious Taraana (song). I remember the Taraana that was once sung by a student on the loudspeaker. Everyone praised him for his gifted talent as his soft voice echoed in the school,

“Oh, my Mujahid brother, I’m a Muslim,

Lying injured at the infidels’ prison.”

Though known as the “graveyard of empires,” lab mouse for various regimes, safe haven for terrorist groups and opium, Afghanistan is also the land of poetry, story-telling, fables, folktales, and proverbs. It’s the birthplace of Rumi, motherland of Avicenna, realm of Gul Pacha Ulfat, love-land of Rabia-e-Balkhi, empire of Mahmood Ghaznawi, and the land of Ahmad Shah Abdali, the founder of Afghanistan and a poet himself.

Until the early 19th century, many of the former rulers shared an intense interest in poetry. King Amanullah’s father-in-law, Mahmud Tarzi is known as the “Father of Afghan Journalism.” In October 1911, Tarzi founded Seraj-al-Akhbar, the first ever newspaper in Afghanistan, which published biweekly until January 1919. Tarzi and King Amanullah were modern thinkers who opposed religious extremism and worked for reforms and secularization until the government was overthrown by a coup in 1929. Tarzi fled to Turkey and resided there until he died in 1933. However, poetry still lives in and nourishes this country, much like its beautiful year-round perennial flowers. The Narinj Gul, or Orange Blossom, Poetry Festival in Jalalabad has been celebrated for more than 60 years now. In Kandahar, there is the Anar Gul, or Pomegranate Blossom, Poetry Festival. These annual traditions provide opportunities for writers and poets to recite their work in front of thousands of people from across Afghanistan. The writings reflect on love, peace, solidarity, youth, corruption, illiteracy, causalities, incompetent government, destruction and wiping out the seeds of hatred, discord, and disunity.

Afghan portraits
clockwise from far left: Mahmood Ghaznawi, Rabia-e-Balkhi, Gul Pacha Ulfat,
Avicenna, Ahmad Shah Abdali, Mahmud Tarzi, Rumi

Afghanistan’s literary foundation has been built on “oral literature,” except for the works of a few legendary writers. I come from a family where fables, proverbs, and stories were quoted regularly to convey messages. Now, my brother is a published Pashtu language poet and my younger sister writes in Dari. On the other hand, I write short stories in English. I believe we inherited the stimulus from our mother. She was uneducated — she could not write nor read with the exception of the Holy Quran and some other Duas (Islamic prayers) — but she was blessed with a miraculous art of storytelling. “It reminds me of this story…” was a familiar expression of hers. In 2010, when I was twenty years old, we lost her to cancer, but in all those years I don’t recall her repeating the same story or proverb except to emphasize the message or to bring out new meaning in a different context. She was raised with folktales too. Her mother told us of women using Tappa or Landay (two-line poems) to express anger, pain, and affection, young-lovers narrating a Naara to express a crush, grandmas telling Naakal or Qessa to put children to sleep, clergies delivering Moonajat to express devotion.

This still is the culture in many of the remote villages. Such stories have been transferred from generation to generation by word-of-mouth. Luckily, some writers and publishers, like Operation Mercy Afghanistan, Danish Publications Afghanistan, and Aksos Bookstore are now giving this oral literature a new life in print.

In Afghanistan, we do not write for fun, passion, or money but to express the immeasurable pain inside. Maybe that’s how the actual writing is. There must be something discomforting to be disclosed. At least, that’s how we see it. Rabia-e-Balkhi, probably one of the first female poets, was in love with a slave. Her brother, Hares did not approve of this. In the process of expressing her unbearable longing for Baktash, she started writing. She is said to have written her last poems with her blood in the bathroom she was locked in. A friend of mine is a writer and a social activist; he produces his best work after he has witnessed injustice, discrimination, or wrongdoing. It seems to be a common incentive among the contemporary Afghan writers — recent writings are filled with the pain, agony, and suffering of the Afghan people. That’s how my writing journey started too. My first story depicted the reality of a forced marriage. I write to portray cultural practices that are based on superstitions, norms, and traditions. When I re-read my own work, I find it melodramatic, more a Greek tragedy than a work of the 21st century. It can’t be helped. I feel like there is an inner voice reaching out to me, dragging me to write. The writing receives its inspiration from true stories around me. I hear the characters’ dialogues, find them haggling with salesmen, cursing the government, or striving to prevent a mischief. There are nights when I can’t fall asleep unless I first put my thoughts on paper. By the time I’m done with the story, some pages are wet-dried.

In a country where people are born and killed in wars and social disorders, how can they write about anything but pain?

Perhaps the last several decades of wars, the rise and fall of regimes, the shootings, and the lack of peace have killed our creativity. A friend of mine finds it hilarious to anonymously play a loud AK-47 shooting ringtone during the crowded Juma prayers or to shoot a glass building with a rocket launcher to see how the glass will shatter. One of my friend’s uncles, an elderly man, still keeps extra food and sacks of wheat in his basement out of fear that a fight may break out and for days no one will be able to go out. Our minds are distracted with the disturbances of wars. Afghans in the remote provinces still build their walls thick to prevent casualties in case of a rocket strike. In a country where people are born and killed in wars and social disorders, how can they write about anything but pain?

Since the beginning of the 19th century, over twenty different flags have been flown over Afghanistan by rulers, monarchs, kings, Emirs, and presidents. This also means that over twenty dissimilar political and social ideologies have been practiced. Each ruler exercised his own restrictions on the ways people lived, including freedom of speech and writing. The reason many rulers held strong interests in poetry was that poets were paid to flatter them and to praise their empires, castles, and armies. Anyone writing against the state was hanged, murdered, or exiled.

Self-censorship has ancient roots in Afghan history, though writers seem always to find a way to speak up. In the fables that our grandmother told us, the lion could be personified as the “cruel king”; the fox as the flattering clerk; the wolf as the wise minister; sheep, goats, and cows as the inhabitants. This can’t be done in the 21st century. Therefore, writers disguise themselves through pen names. It reminds me of this proverb, “As long as there’s a head, many hats can be worn.” It refers to the legend of a man who was threatened to death if he refused to give his beloved hat to the thief. He hesitated initially and then handed the hat to him and whispered, “If there’s life in my head, there will be many hats.”

Social activism and writing go hand-in-hand in Afghanistan.

There’s a saying, “Anything is possible in Afghanistan.” Journalists are regularly beaten, novelists can’t write freely, and newspapers are warned. Even though the eras of religious and communist extremism are gone, artists are commonly ill-treated and excoriated. According to the Afghanistan Journalists Center, 47 journalists, writers, and media workers have been killed or murdered since 1994; thirteen have been abducted and fifteen jailed. They are mostly Afghans. A few are expat journalists. The current Unity Government of Afghanistan is made up of both open- and closed-minded individuals. That’s probably another characteristic of post-conflict societies and ongoing war zones where the warlords are empowered to restore a temporary peace. Writing, reporting, or even posting against a single political figure, current or deceased, might put your life at risk. Such fears limit the writing capabilities of authors inside the country.

The high demand for writing about Afghanistan in the recent years has given birth to Afghan writers in exile or the so called foreign “experts on Afghanistan” that have too little understanding of the actual country and its culture. In addition, it is quite astonishing how the recent regimes self-censored themselves and the inhabitants. Communists strictly prohibited religious Islamic books and executed intellectuals who were considered threats to the government; following that, the Taliban regularly burned stacks of “non-Islamic” books in public places all over the country. The current government also seems to act blindly toward the accomplishments of many artists and sometimes even tries to censor them. Recently, the social activist and writer Masood Farzan was warned by a government official that his intentions, evident in Facebook posts and comments, were hostile to and aimed at overthrowing the current government. Masood responded, “If the government is that weak that it can be overthrown by my Facebook posts, let it be overthrown!”

Although Pashtu and Dari are the languages of love, poetry, literature, and proverbs, they are also the languages of wars, criminals, warlords, and human rights violators. Afghans are constantly the victims of their own languages and words. For instance, hundreds of Pashtuns were killed after they were unable to pronounce, “Qo-root,” a type of dried Afghan whey. They were asked to pronounce the word in order to differentiate them from other ethnicities, and when they could only say, “Koo-raat,” they were killed by having nails hammered into their heads. I learned how to say both words exactly the way they should be pronounced; many parents taught their children the same.

Language is a symbol of power in this part of the world.

Now, there are two other present-day words that have divided the country, including the Parliament, ministries, courts, and even academic institutions: Pohantoon and Danishgah. They both mean “university,” except the latter has a more Iranian root and emergence. Parliamentarians have fought over these words, undergraduate students have stabbed each other with knives, friends have become enemies, neighbors have turned into strangers, and classmates have grown into foes for opposing use of one of the other. Language is a symbol of power in this part of the world. When I tell my friends that my brother is a published Pashtu poet, some ask, “why not a Dari one?” I respond, “My sister writes in Dari.” To provide further justification, I add, “And I write in English. And I hope that one day; one of my siblings will become an Uzbek writer.”

I feel so relaxed writing in English. I do not think of ending up with a word that would conflict with the other national language of Afghanistan, nor will I anger my close friends. I was driven into writing when I started reading. I read my first English language book, For One More Day, by Mitch Albom, several times during the year I stayed with an American host family in Highlands Ranch, Colorado. I spent numerous hours in the Douglas County Library. Not having standard libraries in my own country, I was inclined to read as much as I could. Thus, libraries hosted me as much as my host family did.

It is very easy for writers to be labeled, “racist” or Kafir (infidel) in Afghanistan. Some of the most well-known current writers and social activists are Barry Salaam, Emal Pasarlay, Musa Zafar, Majeed Qarar, Masood Farzan, Lina Rozbeh, Shaista Sadat Lameh, Wais Barekzai, and Fahim Tokhi. Depending on their writings and statuses, they are branded as linguistic, ethnic, or tribalistic bigots; fascists, nationalists, xenophobes, xenophiles, atheists, or self-loathing Afghans.

It is hard to believe but there are still good writers who strongly support the harsh former regimes of the country, including the Taliban, the communists, and the interventionists from neighboring countries, but just like the residents of the country, the writers, too, are divided. They are as political as the government officials.

This leads to the question whether a writer is neutral or not. Maybe my mother was right when she quoted, “One’s own flaw is between the shoulders.” You can’t see it. The writers are probably blind to their flaws. Or maybe writing in Afghanistan is inherently biased. Even if you are an individual who does not take sides, your ethnicity, tribe, language, and peers will make you prejudiced. For instance, if one of the above writers regularly writes in one of the two national languages other than his/her own native language, the followers accuse him/her of not valuing the language.

Writing or reporting against a political figure might put your life at risk. Such fears limit the writing capabilities of authors inside the country.

Social activism and writing go hand-in-hand in Afghanistan. Afghan writers tend to circulate their works in bits and pieces over Facebook. Only a small number of writers have books of their own. This could be due to the lack of readership and publishing opportunities. When my brother and I were assessing various publishing companies for reprinting his collection of poems, we came across a number of bookstores that volunteered to sell newly printed books only if the writers provided the books to them free of cost. In a war-torn country like Afghanistan, there is little demand for books; people prefer to read short (at times biased and discriminatory) Facebook statuses and Twitter posts instead.

I have traveled a long path (of wars, poverty, and illiteracy) to writing, and so did many of my fellow Afghan writers. We will cling to it and do our best not to lose the opportunities we have. The culture of expressing our own point of view is nourishing. The number of both male and female writers is increasing. There’s also an active community of female writers, including the members of the Afghan Women’s Writing Project. Unfortunately, there are other groups of writers and social activists on the rise. When I read their work, I think of the schoolbooks from the civil war era. And yet their work is perhaps even more destructive and dangerous. The citizens of this country are provoked against each other by young writers who inject poisonous and prejudiced feelings into the minds of their own ethnic groups. They use their creativity in publishing discriminatory writing, posting racist videos, creating Facebook pages and closed groups slandering other ethnicities. At least, the civil war books asked for unity against a foreign force. These writers and social activists are dividing the country into pieces.

Maybe these writers are the products of those civil war books and education?

Or, are they producing another generation with far more destructive ideologies than their own?

About the Author

Fazilhaq Hashimi is an Afghan author writing in English. His work, including the short story, “If I Heard Her Right,” has been featured in The Gifts of the State, New Writing from Afghanistan (Dzanc Books) and Electric Literature. He studied at the American University of Afghanistan and recently relocated, along with his wife, to Colorado, where he is working on several new stories.

You can find all the essays from The Writing Life Around the World at Electric Literature.

Writing Life Around the World

Drum Circles, Sexual Temples, and Skinny Dipping in Hawaii — An Essay by Emily Meg Weinstein

ESSAY: UNSAFE SPACES, BY EMILY MEG WEINSTEIN

To a New Yorker, California is far out, or so I believed when I moved there. But when I arrived, all the real adventurers had set their sights not on the edge of the country, but on the states that weren’t even attached.

My friend and fellow East Coast refugee, Jeff*, had done me one better and moved to Hawai’i. Like me, Jeff was from Long Island and had gone to a fancy college, but he found those experiences lacking. His search for something more had taken him first to the far north coast of California, and then, when he tired of the soap-opera politics of small-town dope-growing, into the Pacific itself. He picked me up at the airport on the sunny Kona side of the Big Island, drove us to the rainy Puna side and announced, “This is what’s left of the town of Kalapana.“

What was left of the town of Kalapana was a drive-thru salmon-burger joint and a combination outdoor concert venue, picnic area, and bar that doubled as a church on Sundays. Some people, Jeff said, passed out drinking on Saturday night and woke up in attendance at the Sunday morning service.

We walked on the hardened lava that had destroyed what wasn’t left of Kalapana, drank some kava, and enjoyed the high caliber of reggae only beach towns can attract. Then we went to Jeff’s hobo camp, a small plot of land he had recently purchased in a dense rainforest outside Pahoa, a place described in theBig Island Revealed guidebook as “a town of outlaws and wackjobs.”

Jeff had hacked his way to a space big enough for him to erect his Burning Man shade structure over a sleeping pad, some plastic storage bins, and a bucket he used for a toilet, creating a makeshift shelter he planned to live in until he built his cabana.

Jeff only lived at the hobo camp part-time. He had been attending a series of workshops at what he described as an “intentional communal sustainable holistic living experiment.” The experiment was run by a permaculturist and polyamory advocate named Pono, and the workshops included free camping.

The next morning at the farmer’s market, we visited Pono’s booth. Pono supported his intentional community by climbing untended coconut trees, shaking down coconuts, and selling them at the famer’s market.

While Jeff and Pono discussed DIY sewage options, I perused Pono’s personal collection of poetry, music, and mission statements, which were on display next to the coconuts. These documents were neatly organized in plastic sleeves in three-ring binders, and included such titles as “I Party Naked,” and “Spirit Re-Quest.” I leafed through the mission statements on tantric sexuality, instinctive eating, and mindful co-parenting, but slammed the binder shut when I saw the words “nonviolent communication.”

What was it about the words nonviolent communication that made me feel so…violent? And then, immediately, guilty about this reaction? Nonviolent communication could probably help me cope with these feelings, but I had only ever had nonviolent communication advocated to me by a certain kind of man, the kind of man just now explaining how humidity affected excrement composting times. This was a man with both a graying ponytail and a receding hairline, whose sexuality was just a little too close to the surface for my comfort.

It wasn’t just the presence of this type of man’s sexuality, it was that his sexuality had been workshopped into its current prominence. His workshopped sexuality was wrapped in layers of acceptance and celebration that had been workshopped there, too. These workshops, which were conducted in “safe spaces,” had created too safe a space, a space safe for something that, paradoxically, made me feel less so.

There was something about the way men like this used words like “nonviolent” that was similar to the way the Bush administration used words like “freedom” or “democracy.” The very deployment of these words instantly implied their opposite. When he labeled his communication as explicitly nonviolent, the ponytailed man with the openly displayed chest hair made me think that without extreme efforts to the contrary, he would, in fact, be violent. His constant insistence that we were in a “safe space” hinted at danger.

At Pono’s polyamory workshop, Jeff told me, a sixty-something woman had invited him to the sacred sexual temple with her. (Like me, Jeff was in his mid-thirties.)

“I didn’t end up going,” said Jeff, “but it would have been a good opportunity to confront my ageism.”

I looked down at my deeply tanned cleavage, wondering whether, if I attended the right workshop, I could one day convince a much younger man that I had created a safe space for him to resolve his Oedipal issues.

When I snapped back to the present, Pono was emphasizing the importance of making sure one’s homemade toilet not only encouraged, but demanded, a squatting position. “Are you familiar with the benefits of squatting?” he murmured gravely.

Our tour continued to a clothing-optional beach down a short, steep, lava trail, where I became preoccupied with finding the right level of nudity. Options ranged from fully fig-leaved to totally naked, to totally naked and painted. In the drum circle, women were mostly bare-breasted, though heavily accessorized. When I asked if this were some kind of festival, Jeff told me that it was just the weekly Sunday morning drum circle, held following ecstatic dance.

On the beach, people were drumming, gyrating, smoking, nursing beers, nursing babies, and sitting in small circles, doing what Jeff said was “processing.” Given the popularity of polyamory on the Big Island, processing was a Sunday morning activity as common as drumming or ecstatic dancing. Processing, as far as I could tell, meant that everyone talked about every feeling they had about everyone having sex with everyone else. I had the sense that a certain kind of eye contact was involved in “processing,” perhaps a type of listening preceded by an adjective, like “active,” or “patient,” or “radically empathetic.”

Hardly anyone was swimming, but I’ll choose pretty much any activity over processing, active listening, or a drum circle. I decided to take advantage of this safe space to swim like a man, in just my board shorts, while maintaining some kind of shield to indicate that I would be celebrating my own sexuality as a party of one.

We waded into the thundering surf and swam past the breakers. It was only when we were just far enough out to make getting back a project that I realized the ocean was a not a safe space. A strong current pushed toward a jagged promontory. The shoreline sloped steeply, and you had to scale a forty-five degree ramp to get clear of the waves before an insistent undertow sucked you back out.

I watched an older man eating it in the breakers over and over, getting tossed and slammed like a rag doll, trying to crawl ashore. When some other naked beachgoers finally pulled him out, his nose was bloody. I had never seen waves hurt anyone before.

“I want to go back in now,” I said, in a voice alien to my own ears.

“Then you better pick a better wave,” came an equally otherworldly voice. Jeff was nowhere to be seen, but a bearded, naked sage was floating belly-up nearby, as if we were in a calm lake.

He wasn’t afraid. I had only just started rock climbing then, but the glint in this man’s eye and the sinew on his limbs reminded me of the guys who had gotten me started. I trusted this old sea turtle like I trusted those old desert rats. These were the men of any age I found attractive. Not the ones who preached about nonviolent communication and created safe spaces into which their celebrated sexuality could ooze, but the ones who knew how to stay safe in spaces that really weren’t.

“This is a good one,” nodded the naked old man, blithely stroking further out to sea. I swam into the swell. It lifted me up and hurled me shoreward, forcing me headfirst into a gravel trench. I stabbed a foot in front of me, clawed my way up the sand and outran the Pacific’s frothing jaws.

Once clear of the waves, I hunched over, gasping and choking, then straightened up, wiped my nose, and shucked my shorts. I no longer cared if Jeff, or any of these Hawaiian hippies, saw me wholly naked. I was alive, in that way you can only be when you apprehend, even for a moment, how easily you could not be.

A storm rolled in. Without breaking rhythm, the drum circle migrated into the rain shadow of a cliff. I bought a beer and lit a smoke and let the raindrops fall on me, feeling like I had gotten away with something that I needed to preserve by pickling and smoking it into my cells for deep storage.

The next day we went up the volcano and watched its crater smoke. There was a visitor center with scientific exhibits and stacks of an emphatic pamphlet: “Lava Viewing: COMMON SENSE IS NOT ENOUGH.” It turned out there was another entity on this island that thought safe spaces were a joke — the molten mother earth herself.

It was then when a spiritual experience found me on the Big Island, not at ecstatic dance but in the volcano visitor center. Next to the brochures was a painting of Pele, the goddess of this volcano. She lived, the placard said, in its crater.

The painting represented her as if she were the volcano. Her long hair, curly like my own, formed the fire rivulets that ran beneath, and sometimes broke, the earth’s surface. She sat in the lotus position, meditating with a Mona Lisa smile before a subterranean lava lake, holding a flame in her hands. The goddess looked like me to me, but not as worried.

It was the first time I saw an image of a deity and wanted to worship. The pamphlet was right — common sense was not enough. The waves were so big, the volcano so unpredictable, the islands so isolated, the lava so sharp, that to live here, a person would need more than common sense. They would need more than Pono’s pamphlets. They would need deities.

The volcano did not care whether it communicated violently or nonviolently. After its outbursts, nothing was processed. No workshop could make its space safe. Gods and goddesses couldn’t help us or save us, but they could give us someone to beg, or to blame.

*Names have been changed.

The Stories in Cities I’ve Never Lived In Are High-Cost and Gentle

“I didn’t want another period of instability,” Sara Majka writes in the title story to her spectacular debut Cities I’ve Never Lived In. “I felt the suspension you feel when you’re fine, but you’re worried it won’t last, and there’s nothing you can do to make it stay.”

In the story, being “fine” is traveling by bus across the United States on an assignment to report on soup kitchens. The project had seemed structured and achievable to the narrator at home, but she finds it to be much more elusive in practice, in part because she’s almost as broke as the people she meets. After picking up her first dinner from a truck in Detroit, she reflects, “Holding the bags changed how I felt about myself. It made me feel more vulnerable… For a number of years I had been struggling to hold myself together, though I had worked to disguise this, and now carrying the thin bags made this visible.”

The narrator who frames each of these fourteen stories is vulnerable — she’s caught up in the tumult of an ended marriage, and the poverty of an artist without a back-up plan — and her vulnerability resonates across the desolate landscapes she stops in. In “Boston,” for example, the narrator stays the winter in the empty beach town of Provincetown, Massachusetts. She goes clamming while she’s there, “at first out of curiosity, and then because [she] loved it, and then after that, when the wind became bitter, the clams scarce, the ice on the jetty treacherous, simply because [she] didn’t know what else to do.”

The narration in the stories maintains an anchored and distinct sense of loss, and — in part because of occasional biographical overlaps — it often seems to engage with memoir. The ex-husband Richard feels vivid and continuous each time he appears, as does the runaway father, as does the craving for a baby before it’s too late. But, it’s unclear where or when Majka switches between fiction and nonfiction. Her stories seem to resist those genres.

In a recent essay for Catapult, Majka wrote, “Not long ago, I realized that whenever I picked out books to teach my freshman composition students, I often picked ones where the narrator could be confused with the writer …I would guess my attraction to those books has something to do with an alleviation of loneliness that comes from that proximity to a real person, though that may not be it. It’s hard to say why this work means so much to me. You sense the cost of it.”

The stories in Cities I’ve Never Lived In are high-cost, and also necessarily gentle. In addition to the narrator reporting on her own life, she also tells the stories of the people she meets.

Take, for example, “Settlers,” in which she remembers an impoverished painter she knew, who told her about how he was abandoned by his wife in northern Maine. Everyone in his rural town was very poor, and almost all of them ate in the church hall soup kitchen, where no one would talk to him about his wife leaving. Majka writes, “[He] had to remind himself they thought they were doing him a favor.”

Later in his story, the father walks through the Maine countryside at night, and goes to the house of his daughter’s daycare provider. She’s single, too, and seems to like him, and he asks if she’ll come have dinner sometime. She tells him she wants to invite him in and she wants to come have dinner, too, but she knows she’ll just be lonelier when it’s over, and, “this — how she was now — was as lonely as she could handle.”

Every character is lonely in these stories, and none of them how to fix it. Life on this social and geographic periphery is savage. In one story, a young woman drowns in the ocean at night; in another a child gets abducted from her school. In “Travelers”, the narrator’s therapist — a “gentle woman” whom the narrator loves to talk to — dies unexpectedly of a brain hemorrhage. “I ended up calling a crisis hotline,” Majka writes. “It was the first time I had ever done that. I called not because life had become unendurable, but because I wanted to know what to do in case it became unendurable.”

One of the most prevailing desires in the book is the narrator’s craving for a child. She is single, poor, and her fertility is fading. In the final story, she sits on the floor of her mom’s tiny bedroom and says she doesn’t think her waitress job will last —

“That it had been [her] plan to save thirty thousand dollars to have a baby, but now there weren’t enough customers.”

Her mom says, “Thirty thousand dollars wouldn’t have paid for a baby.”

The narrator says, “I know.”

But Majka’s biography says that she now lives with her son in Queens. So maybe it’s all just fiction. Or maybe some things really do work out.

10 Great Novels of the Rural: A Reading List by Michelle Hoover, Author of Bottomland

by Michelle Hoover

Soon after the publication of my first novel, I met Manuel de Lope, the Spanish writer, who had just released his gorgeous epic, The Wrong Blood. After reading my work, he told me, “Your characters, it is as if they live beneath the land.” He patted at the air to ease my translation. I took his words as a compliment. I tend to work with emotionally repressed personalities. I find their lack of communication fascinating. But repressed emotion needs its outlet, and so my landscapes not only mirror my character’s psyches but bear the displaced weight of the emotion itself.

I later discovered a similar kind of mirror in Willa Cather. I knew Cather’s books intimately. But it wasn’t until reading Douglas Bauer’s “Cather’s World and the Future of Narrative,” that I realized what I’d taken for granted — in her writing as well as my own. In describing his seminar about her work, Bauer writes:

…what impressed the students most were Cather’s matchless descriptions of the physical world, the way she often treats the landscape and the light… as characters themselves, giving them the same qualities of mood and motive, the same temperaments of ambitious display and daunting indifference that she often gives her human characters. (Writers’ Chronicle, March/April 2012)

Though I usually duck comparisons to Cather, I felt as a child would, having witnessed an unarticulated part of herself echoed in the larger world.

Michelle Hoover

In my second novel, Bottomland (Grove Press, 2016) landscape would remain paramount — whether it be the flooded Iowa fields or the bricked-in topography of Chicago’s “back of the yards.” Still I cling more to the rural. Even in my travels, in the States and abroad, the real places and people seem to lie along the hard-to-get-to pastures, in towns and homesteads connected by unpaved roads. It shouldn’t come as a surprise that the kind of characters who live in such settings capture my imagination most.

So here are a few of my favorite rural novels. Consider Cather’s My Antonia the great-grandmother of this tribe, Maxwell’s So Long, See You Tomorrow and Gass’ In the Heart of the Heart of the Country its contrary uncles, Morrison’s Beloved its aunt, and Proulx’s Postcards its cool older cousin. I’m leaving out plenty of kin — rural families run large. To further whittle the list down, I’ve set some uncomfortable parameters: that the novels take place on American soil and be published in this brief 21st century.

1. Falling to Earth, Kate Southwood

Though Southwood lives in Norway, her first novel reaches back to her roots in Illinois where a deadly 1925 tornado razes a rural town only to leave its survivors to turn against themselves. Southwood’s spare, pitch-perfect prose quietly echoes the empty landscape and its devastated lives.

2. Gilead, Marilynne Robinson

Few books surpass Robinson’s Housekeeping, but Gilead comes close. The novel has little structure and less incident, but its power lies in the voice of John Ames, a dying preacher on the Iowa plains whose need to tell his story makes this an unusually poignant tour-de-force.

3. In the House Upon the Dirt Between the Lake and the Woods, Matt Bell

Both strange and captivating, Bell’s debut is a mythic tale about the dissolution of a marriage in an isolated house in a nameless place. The novel is as much an exploration of the wilds of the mind as it is of this in-between land.

4. The Known World, Edward P. Jones

On the eve of his master’s death, Jones’s Moses lifts a harness from his shoulders after a fourteen-hour day, reaches into the dirt and drops a pinch into his mouth. In this sweeping novel about black slave owners before the Civil War, the possessed becomes the possessor, and ownership is about more than fields and fences.

5. The Long Man, Amy Greene

The impending flood from a newly-constructed federal dam looms over Greene’s impoverished Appalachian setting, keeping this second novel permanently on edge. We mourn the end of this ancient-seeming place as much as Greene’s brimming final pages.

6. The Orchardist, Amanda Coplin

In this other first novel, Coplin’s William Talmadge is a man nearing old age on his isolated orchards in 1900 Washington state. When two pregnant teenagers turn up at his door — rabid, starved, and obviously abused — Talmadge’s life irrevocably changes. Coplin’s prose is meaty and soaring, with both beauty and violence fighting for central stage.

7. Plainsong, Kent Haruf

A cheat, as this book was published in 1999, but our recent loss of Haruf makes this choice necessary. The prose in Plainsong stays true to its title, though it simmers in its depiction of ordinary lives gone astray. Try to forget the old McPheron brothers and their neighbors in this small ranching town on the western plains.

8. Salvage the Bones, Jesmyn Ward

A testament to the scenery and spirit of rural Mississippi, Ward’s National Book Award-winning novel takes place in a coastal town only days before Hurricane Katrina. Esch, her poor and pregnant teenage narrator, is our truth-teller, caught in the crosshairs of catastrophe while she blooms all the same.

9. An Unseemly Wife, E.B. Moore

Moore is a poet and visual artist, and both talents show in the muscular perfection of her portrait of Amish life. In 1867, Ruth Holtz is forced by an idealistic husband to leave the community she loves for land in the west — with deadly yet life-affirming consequences.

10. Winter’s Bone, Daniel Woodrell

Set in the impoverished, drug-infested Ozarks, Woodrell’s eighth novel finds its heart with sixteen-year-old Ree, a fierce protagonist vying to protect her own. The novel captures the greatest threat to our rural communities, not simply poverty and isolation but the desperate attempt for something greater at whatever cost.

Tension of the Frame: How Point of View Can Heighten Drama in Fiction and Film

Any time you tell a story, you make choices about what to include and what to leave out. It’s like taking a picture; you look through the viewfinder and see which composition best conveys the impression you want to give of the landscape, the fish tacos, or the new haircut. But sometimes it can be useful to make the edge of that composition, the frame of the camera, a point of tension by reminding the viewer of what they aren’t seeing.

Take the opening shot of Denis Villeneuve’s Sicario. The camera looks down on a quiet housing development from a grassy overlook in Chandler, Arizona. It appears to be a typical establishing shot, inert like a still image, until a SWAT team silently enters from the corner of the frame and the camera pans revealing a sniper set up on the hillside. Without a single cut, our first impression of the scene changes and this seemingly neutral landscape becomes charged. The implication is clear: don’t trust the frame of the camera because you don’t know what is lurking just beyond its borders.

The implication is clear: don’t trust the frame of the camera because you don’t know what is lurking just beyond its borders.

In fact, the entire opening scene plays out this way. A SWAT vehicle bursts through a living room wall, disrupting an otherwise peaceful scene. As Kate Macer (Emily Blunt) moves from room to room, we know that danger lurks behind every door. The seconds before she turns a corner are excruciating because we can’t see what will come next. We long for the camera to switch to a different perspective so that we aren’t limited to the borders of the frame. Even once the house is cleared and the characters begin to relax the danger isn’t over. The horror they discover behind the walls and the unexpected scene ending both reinforce the lesson of the opening shot. What we can’t see is just as important as what we can.

This opening makes the viewer anxious about the frame, worried about what dangers lurk just out of sight. Not only does it add tension, it also resonates thematically with the story. In the film, Mexican cartels move drugs across the border into the US, and a shadowy government task force crosses legal and moral lines in attempting to bring them down. Frames, lines, and borders are all sources of conflict in the movie. By challenging our tacit acceptance of the camera’s frame, Villeneuve suggests we interrogate those boundaries and look beyond the limited scope of any single point of view.

Frames, lines, and borders are all sources of conflict in the movie.

Sicario may be a well-crafted thriller but no film in recent memory uses the tension of the frame to greater effect than It Follows. In the movie, Jay (Maika Monroe) becomes infected or cursed (however you want to think of it) after sleeping with her boyfriend and spends the rest of the film being followed by a creature that can take the form of a friend or stranger. The creature will walk slowly toward her, no matter where she is, until she either passes the sexually transmitted infection/curse on to someone else or dies.

Horror movies always make us wary of what we can’t see, but we typically have a good gage for when a jump scare might be coming. It Follows is so effective because the creature could approach at any time and it could take any form. As a result, every shot is loaded with apprehension. No matter what is happening on screen we’re always searching the corners of the screen for someone walking in Jay’s direction.

There are some showy camera moves that use the tension of the frame to play on our emotions — one especially horrifying 360-degree rotating shot comes to mind — but director David Robert Mitchell knows that simple techniques will work just as well. For instance, when the camera pushes in for a close up during a discussion with a friend the tension increases because our field of vision is even more limited. In this way even normal conversations shot with conventional over-the-shoulder framing become excruciating to watch. We are always worried by what we can’t see.

…even normal conversations shot with conventional over-the-shoulder framing become excruciating to watch. We are always worried by what we can’t see.

It’s tempting to read into the technique, as many have, and claim the movie is making some statement about sexual promiscuity and unforeseen consequences. But It Follows resists simple interpretations. Instead, from a craft perspective it shows that the tension of the frame can drive an entire narrative and make conventional techniques feel new again. Most of the time we don’t even notice what we aren’t seeing. It Follows not only reminds us of what lies outside our field of vision, the film weaponizes it.

Several books this past year have also gone out of their way to remind us about what typically stays outside the frame of a story. In Fates and Furies, Lauren Groff uses the tension of the frame to breathe new life into the old idea that every marriage has two sides. The first half of the novel tells the life story of Lotto, an over-confident young actor who marries the beautiful Mathilde and becomes a world-famous playwright. The second half switches to Mathilde’s point of view and methodically undermines everything we learned in Lotto’s story. The limitation of their perspectives becomes the engine of the novel.

Lauren Groff uses the tension of the frame to breathe new life into the old idea that every marriage has two sides.

It seems like such a simple structure, but it works in complex ways. During the first half of the book, we want to know what is missing from Lotto’s point of view. Whenever he looks at Mathilde we wonder what she is thinking. That not-knowing provides slow-burn underlying tension that keeps us reading. During the second half of the book we have a deeper understanding of the marriage than Mathilde because we’ve seen what she can’t see — Lotto’s point of view. Dramatic irony is always tinged with a kind of sadness — it was key to O’Henry’s famously melancholy stories — and it works well here to remind us of our own limited perspective on the world, of the power stories have to help us transcend that limitation. As one passage in the book puts it, “The lives of others come together in fragments. A light shining off a separate story can illuminate what had remained dark. Brains are miraculous; humans storytelling creatures. The shards draw themselves together and make something whole.”

But more importantly, Groff uses Lotto and Mathilde’s dual points of view to show that no perspective is neutral. Lotto’s life as an actor and famous playwright seems fated because he can’t see how being a privileged white man makes his life so easy. Mathilde’s point of view illuminates the ways she is limited just by being a woman in a world that is still patriarchic and sexist. This is the genius of Fates and Furies. The tension of the frame takes on political power. It implicates Lotto and by extension the reader who identifies with his naïve perspective. Groff shows us we’re not just limited by how we see the world; we’re limited by how the world sees us.

Groff shows us we’re not just limited by how we see the world; we’re limited by how the world sees us.

Finally, The Story of My Teeth, written by Valeria Luiselli and translated by Christina MacSweeney, teaches a similar lesson about perspective and storytelling. But rather than just showing one perspective and then the another, Louiselli and MacSweeney take the unraveling of those points of view, the unraveling of the process of storytelling, as their subject.

The book is narrated by Gustavo “Highway” Sánchez Sánchez, a security guard who works at an art gallery run by a Mexican juice factory. Highway tells the story of his “dental autobiography,” how he quit his job, trained to become an auctioneer, won Marilyn Monroe’s teeth in a bidding contest, and eventually had them transplanted into his own mouth.

This would be a fascinating story on its own but it’s not the story Luiselli wants to tell. As the book progresses we come to learn the narrator isn’t actually Highway. Highway is dictating the story of his teeth to Jacobo de Voragine, a local writer and tour guide. Voragine then retells Highway’s story from his own perspective, revealing places where Highway lied or stretched the truth. Like Fates and Furies, the book makes us aware of the limitations of a single point of view. As Highway is told at one point, “Don’t you realize…the schism between the perception you have of yourself and the perception other people have of you is irreconcilable?”

Finally, in an afterward, Valeria Luisella explains that the entire novel was written in collaboration with the workers of a juice factory outside Mexico City.

But then the book starts to unravel further. In the next chapter pictures of real-life locations in Mexico are combined with quotes from famous writers and thinkers. The following chapter, written by the translator of the book, Christina MacSweeney, consists of a timeline combining real historic events alongside the fictional events of the novel. Finally, in an afterward, Valeria Luisella explains that the entire novel was written in collaboration with the workers of a juice factory outside Mexico City.

Each section pulls back another layer, revealing what wasn’t in the frame before. We’re used to thinking of a book as a product of a single author but The Story of My Teeth challenges that assumption. The lines that separate character and narrator and author become sources of tension and blur the boundary between truth and fiction until that binary distinction is shown to be meaningless. The novel is less the story of Gustavo “Highway” Sánchez Sánchez and more the story of how stories are told, what gets left out, and who does the telling. As Voragine says, “When Highway first began to recount his stories to me, I thought he was a compulsive liar. But then, living with him, I realized that it had less to do with lying than surpassing the truth.”

As writers and storytellers we’re often taught the many ways conflict can be created within a narrative by focusing the obstacles that push back against a character’s desires. But every story also contains hidden conflict between what is and isn’t shown, between who is allowed to tell the story and who is not. By revealing the frame as a source of tension and making the viewer or reader aware of what they can’t see, we can not only make our stories more thrilling, we can expose the many dangers inherent in our default setting: the belief that I am the center of the world, that my perspective is the only one that matters.

TED WILSON REVIEWS THE WORLD: ANTONIN SCALIA

★★★☆☆

Hello, and welcome to my week-by-week review of the world. Today I am reviewing Antonin Scalia.

Although he looked a lot like an Italian pizza chef (not to be racist, but he probably still made a pretty decent pizza), Antonin Scalia was actually one of America’s most famous judges. Not Judge Judy-level famous, but pretty high up there. He was a member of the very exclusive Supreme Court.

There’s a very popular hobby in America where if someone has a different opinion than yours, you summon as much hatred as you possibly can and direct it at that person. That person might favor a different sports team, religion, or politician. Scalia’s opinions have always been quite polarizing and caused people to spend a lot of time yelling at him instead of spending that time with their families or learning a new skill.

Recently Scalia passed away while on vacation. That seems like one of the best ways to die. Either vacation, or while eating jellybeans. If I choked to death on a jellybean I would be thinking, “I wish someone was here to give me the Heimlich, but at least this is a delicious way to go.”

The internet said Scalia was found with a pillow over his face. Some suspect murder, but I wonder if he wasn’t screaming into the pillow out of frustration over all the means things people were saying about him, and then he just accidentally smothered himself to death. The only people who know the truth is Scalia and his murderer. And if anyone was watching through the window, that person too.

Now that Scalia has left a vacant seat in the Supreme Court, President Obama is to appoint a new judge. The Republicans are upset because they are worried Obama will appoint someone with an opinion different from theirs, so they have angrily announced that they will not consider any nominee at all.

If Obama pulled a funny prank and was somehow able to resurrect Scalia and nominate him, he would be calling the Republican’s bluff and make them look like hypocrites. If they still refused to accept Scalia’s nomination, it would really hurt his feelings.

Obama’s ability to resurrect Scalia would also have profound implications for man’s existence and the nature of death.

BEST FEATURE: His cheeks. Scalia had puffy, rosy cheeks like an angry cherub!
WORST FEATURE: His butt. Not to be mean but it wasn’t that great.

Please join me next week when I’ll be reviewing Hawaii.

With Margaret the First, Danielle Dutton Offers Readers a Fascinating and Unique Portrait

The problem with the “contemporary novel set in the past” is that it often encourages us to judge the past according to the standards of the present. This is fine if the novel is nothing but a contemporary one in historical clothing, but if it biographically treats a historical figure whose behavior was, for all her idiosyncrasies, a product of her time, then it runs the risk of unfairly comparing her against modern-day expectations, mores, and conventions. To a certain extent, this is what happens to the Duchess of Newcastle in Danielle Dutton’s second novel, Margaret the First. Painting the life of Margaret Cavendish as she grows from the daughter of prominent Civil-War-era Royalists to the first ever woman in England to write published works, it frames her as a social pioneer of sorts. Yet even though she emerges as a figure who demonstrates that women were much more capable than Stuart England ever gave them credit for, her overall detachment and passivity mean she falls far short of qualifying as a proto-feminist, of being someone who displayed the kind of social engagement and activism we expect from our contemporaneous crusaders for equal rights.

In other words, even though Catapult have described Margaret the First as a “contemporary novel set in the past,” Margaret Cavendish was certainly not a ‘contemporary feminist’ lost in 17th Century Britain. Still, the novel and its acute prose illustrate why the Duchess was such a fascinating and unique figure, seaming lucid realism and surreal fantasy into a portrait of a woman who transcended the stiff conformity of Ye Olde England largely because her dreamy lightness had never inhabited it in the first place.

Dutton brings this out subtly yet affectingly in the early years she reimagines for Margaret. Her father dying when she was only two years old, the majority of her family perishing in quick installments after the outbreak of the English Civil War, she finds herself without a strong male influence during her infancy, and then without a family influence as she settles into adulthood. As Dutton appears to hint, it’s this removal of roots that enables her rootless self and equally rootless thought to develop, to nurture the possibility that the “world was not so easily explained by a tutor’s reason.” Without strong familial presences to shape her life, she begins reading and daydreaming a great deal, plunging into such childhood reveries as that of “an invisible world” housed in “river-foam bubbles,” where the “Bubble-children grew up and bore children of their own.”

In many ways, the novel softly backlights her whimsical character as an escape from the stresses and anxieties of being prematurely bereaved from a parent. For example, when she’s sent at the age of nine to visit her older sister Mary in London, she dispels the exaggerated fear that her mother might die while she’s away by entertaining herself with the pleasant image of “a floating dinner on a barge upon the Thames.” Yet at the same time, her flights of fancy are also an escape from the political situation that’s erupting around her as the novel opens, this situation being the overthrow of the monarchy by a certain Oliver Cromwell and his Roundheads. As she’s forced to flee England’s turmoil and sail to Paris, she uses Twelfth Night as a springboard to envision her new situation: “washed ashore in a strange new world and dressed like a man.”

This quote is key, because it underlines the complexity with which the Duchess is invested in Margaret the First. Not only do the strains and traumas of her unsettled existence activate her escapist, blue sky thinking, but they end up providing her with the material and inspiration for a new identity of her own, one that doesn’t simply defer to family and to men. Slightly earlier in the novel, she pictures herself “married to a celebrated general, but that days after the wedding my husband would fall in battle, so that I […] would have no choice but to rally his troops and lead them onto the field.” Here, the pain of her father’s demise returns to her in the figure of a fallen general, yet at the same time it points her towards a nobler, more glorious life, in which she can pursue the independence that’s already been foisted on her by fate.

And she does eventually accede to this nobler existence, coming to marry the then-Marquess of Newcastle (William Cavendish) in 1645 and writing the first of her books in 1653. The latter was called Poems & Fancies, a collection of poetic and prosaic musings on natural philosophy, love, honor, death, and other worlds. As Dutton humorously envisages in a two-page chapter, its publication in London generates a “tidal wave of gossip” among the general English public, partly because it addressed odd themes like “vacuums and war,” partly because Margaret’s odd “spelling did astonish,” and partly because it was just downright odd that “a lady had published at all.” Yet it nonetheless comes to the attention of such luminaries as the Dutch mathematician and astronomer Christiaan Huygens, thereby providing Margaret with enough motivation to dive further into her newfound career.

From here the novel becomes more layered and engrossing, delicately implying that as her public reputation balloons and she publishes more “various and extravagant” tomes like The World’s Olio, Margaret becomes more disconnected from the everyday world around her. Unable to bear children for her “ceaseless, sleepless” husband, who’s occasionally so busy he appears “to her a stranger dressed in her husband’s skin,” she loses many of her links to mundanity and her worldly future within it. She falls “asleep by day, the bed as dark as night,” and when she wakes, Dutton brusquely suggests that “her dreaming filled the chamber.” These abstracted tendencies are partly the fallout from her unstable circumstances, which see her shipped from London to Paris to Antwerp and then to the secluded Welbeck Abbey in Nottinghamshire, where “[e]ach hour that passed with no ink from her quill was a quiet affliction, a void.” Even so, she takes very little interest in people when she has the chance to meet them, save for ‘devotees’ like the poet Richard Flecknoe who “knew her work and praised it to her face.”

It’s because of this self-absorption and mild vainglory that the force and resonance of the book is diluted somewhat. Because of her distanced vanity, the reader can’t help but suspect that her writing is not so much something she employs to address the world and change its prejudices for the better, but simply another route she uses to absent herself from it. Even if she was writing “all-female plays for an all-female troupe,” she “never meant them to be staged,” and neither does she really speak to another person about the role of women in English society nor encourage any of the women she encounters to think or act for themselves like she does. It’s because of these failures that sympathy for her is often lost, irrespective of Dutton’s artful ability to invest her character with plenty of intriguing nuance and dimensionality (e.g. the “she felt a certain stirring” line that appears in the account of her plays insinuates that she may have harbored lesbian tendencies).

Of course, it may be rejoindered that Cavendish was alive at a time when even aristocratic women would have been laughed out of the room if they’d argued directly that the sexes should be accorded equal rights. However, given that the book is “very much a contemporary novel,” it’s hard to avoid holding her up to the standards of today and feeling for her (or not) accordingly. In some respects, Dutton may indeed be prodding us toward a recognition of Cavendish’s faults, what with all the references to the Duchesses’s obliviousness and disconnection she inserts throughout the life-spanning text. At one point, the following two sentences are placed above and below each other, emphasizing Margaret’s remoteness from the very life of her country in the most succinct and staccato two paragraphs imaginable:

Cromwell was dead.

I was at my desk.

Later, she attends one of her husband’s plays in a topless dress, without seemingly realizing that the sight of her naked breasts in a theater would have caused a tizzy. But even without such examples of her maladroit ignorance of and indifference to society, her divorce from reality is highlighted by her attitude to science, which as Dutton vibrantly depicts was still fledgling at the time. She completely disdains it, calling “microscopy a brittle art,” despite the suspicion that she’s uncomfortable with it simply because its matter-of-fact coldness and brute reductionism threatens the fantastical world she’s built around her. In fact, it’s via science that Dutton presents the most abiding image of her incapability or unwillingness to translate the alleged progressivism of her writing into actual debate or discourse. She becomes the first women to visit the Royal Society near the very end of the novel, but rather than comment intelligently on what was presented to her or criticize “their artificial delusions,” she “said nothing!”

With this nothing, she ends up identifying herself as someone whose interest resides mainly in her eccentricity, and not in any attempts she could have made to contribute substantially to national conversations. As the novel concludes, she’s neither a progressive nor a feminist, but rather a titled aristocrat who was simply able to take advantage of her privileged status to indulge her taste for colorful literature, without ever seeking to extend this privilege to other members of her sex. However, rather than confirming her as the “Mad Madge” of the (newborn) newspapers, Dutton’s profile constructs her as a fully formed, complicated human being, as a woman whose interests and inclinations stem from a complex personal history. It’s this profile that’s the star of the novel as much as its subject, since it deftly weaves together primary and secondary sources to form a wholly integrated, believable and gripping account of a woman who didn’t belong to the times in which she was born, not least because these times were too volatile for her to ever plant herself in them.

Yes, she may not have effected any radical change during her own life, but this same account does movingly relate that she was buried in Westminster Abbey, where her dedication reads, “This Duchess was a wise, witty and learned lady, which her many books do well testify.” This reveals that she managed to win over at least some admirers before her death, and that Stuart England immortalized her as an example and a role model to the generations of female writers that followed her. Thanks to Margaret the First and Danielle Dutton’s elegance with words, this may continue for many more generations to come.