Sunday Sundries: Literary Links from Around the Web (May 24th)

Looking for some Sunday reading? Here are some literary links from around the web that you might have missed:

The Millions takes a look at “sheep lit” (books about sheep and shepherds)

Planning a literary road trip? Use this Google map of famous novels

Vulture wonders when books got so freaking enormous

Alexander Chee discusses the problems with wunderkinds and why it isn’t bad to be a late bloomer

Michael Moorcock calls The Vorrh “one of the most original works of visionary fiction since Mervyn Peake” (see our interview with The Vorrh author B. Catling here)

Has Mulan Kundera’s reputation been irreparably damaged?

VICE talks to master crime author James Ellroy “about the bygone days of the LAPD”

A comparison of the bookshelves of Bill Gates and Osama Bin Laden… for some reason

Need a quick read? 24 books you can read in under an hour each

Lastly, Flavorwire has a great list of “22 Thrilling, Imaginative, and Twisted Genre Books By Women”

INFOGRAPHIC: 24 Books You Can Read In Under An Hour

You think you don’t have time to read? Think again. There are plenty of awesome stories you can read in the time it takes to wait for the doctor or take the subway to work. This infographic, created by Ebook Friendly, lists 24 that you could literally read in 24 hours. Admittedly, many of these are closer to short stories than novellas or novels, but they are well worth your time. We can especially recommend Jim Shepard’s “Safety Tips for Living Alone” which was originally published here, in Electric Literature’s Recommended Reading!

And for more great short book recommendations, check out our list of 17 amazing books you can read in a sitting.

24 books to read in under an hour (infographic) | Ebook Friendly

Via Ebook Friendly

TED WILSON REVIEWS THE WORLD: MARRIAGE

★★★★☆

Hello, and welcome to my week-by-week review of everything in the world. Today I am reviewing marriage.

Marriage is defined as when two people agree they love each other so much that they want to live in a house together, and probably don’t want to have sex with anyone else, at least not for a while. Some people practice what is called an open marriage, where they do get to have sex with other people. This arrangement is typically for people who have so much love to give, it can’t be contained to just one person. Examples include Bill Murray, Bill Cosby, Whoopi Goldberg, Princess Diana, and my neighbor Doug Vogelsang.

I only ever had a regular amount of love, so when I was married I practiced a more traditional marriage; the kind where we spent so much time with each other that our personalities began to bleed together and I couldn’t tell where I ended and where my wife began. She would finish my sentences before I even started speaking. A plate of food would arrive in front of me without me even knowing I was hungry. It was like there were two of me, but one was much more attentive to my needs than the other. It made kissing my wife kind of weird because it was like kissing myself. I was a pretty good kisser, it turns out.

Of course any marriage has good and bad times. In an ideal scenario they balance each other out, but sometimes the bad times are so bad that the couple needs to stop being married. When things are really good, nothing changes. The couple remains married and can’t get more married than before. Not unless before all the couple had was a Wicca ceremony.

Fortunately my wife and I only separated because she died, and they have laws against being married to a dead person. I spent a lot of my marriage secretly wondering who would go first. On the one hand, I hoped it was me, so I wouldn’t have to feel the pain of losing her. But at the same time, I wanted to spare her the pain of losing me by letting her go first. That’s the advantage of divorce — it makes marriage more like a TV show with a finite ending instead of getting cancelled without warning.

All in all, if you find the right partner, marriage is pretty great. Especially if that person is willing to clean your ears for you.

BEST FEATURE: Having someone to pluck the hairs from parts of your body you can’t reach.
WORST FEATURE: Growing so close that you’re willing to fight over things you don’t even care about.

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

A Google Map of All Your Favorite Books

Have you ever wanted to visit the locations of your favorite books? If so, plotting your next literary vacation just got easier with this handy Google Maps mash-up by Lovereading.co.uk.

How about a road trip that starts getting nostalgic in New England with Louisa May Alcott’s Little Women, moves to getting creeped out in New Hampshire with Stephen King’s Doctor Sleep, then relives Arthur Miller’s The Crucible in Salem, Massachusetts, Jhumpa Lahiri’s The Lowland in Rhode Island, J. D. Salinger’s The Catcher in the Rye in Agerstown, Pennsylvania, before moving over to NYC to check out the restaurants in Bret Easton Ellis’s American Psycho. After that, you can swing over to Long Island to see the house that inspired The Great Gatsbywhich just went on sale for a cool $3.9 million!

The map is hardly restricted to the North East though. Lovereading.co.uk has mapped books across the entire globe. Click around and explore it here.

book map

F. Scott’s Fitzgerald’s “Great Gatsby House” Is on Sale

Great Gatsby

While it may not be possible to live inside of The Great Gatsby, you can now buy the house that F. Scott Fitzgerald wrote the novel in. Well, at least if you have $3.9 million to spare.

The 5,000-square-foot house is located in Great Necks Estates, about a 45 minute drive from Manhattan. F. Scott and his wife Zelda lived there in the early 1920s and it is where Fitzgerald is believed to have written his Great American Novel, The Great Gatsby. The novel of socialites and lavish parties was inspired by his own time going to lavish parties with socialites in Long Island, where the house is located.

You can see the listing and interior photos at Coldwell Banker’s site, where the house is listed as a single family residence with 7 bedrooms and 6.5 bathrooms.

F. Scott and Zelda Fitzgerald

F. Scott and Zelda Fitzgerald

The Figure in a Field: What About This: Collected Poems of Frank Stanford

The best track on Lucinda Williams’s album Sweet Old World is the song “Pineola,” which describes the funeral for a man who “shot himself with a .44.” Later in the song, Williams sings, “Born and raised in Pineola / His mama believed in the Pentecost / She got the preacher to say some words / So his soul wouldn’t get lost.” That soul belonged to the poet Frank Stanford. According to a New Yorker profile of Williams by Bill Buford, Williams and Stanford met in Fayetteville, Arkansas, in the spring of 1978, and the two had an affair that lasted until his suicide a few months later. Stanford was twenty-nine at the time, and though he had already published nine books of poetry, as well as his 15,000 line epic poem The Battlefield Where the Moon Says I Love You, he was working as a land surveyor. The details of his suicide are as mysterious as they are simple. Stanford was married to a painter named Ginny (Crouch) Stanford, and in addition to his many other flings, Williams among them, he was also having a long-term affair with the poet C.D. Wright (Stanford and Wright together ran the small press Lost Roads Publishers). One day in June of 1978, Stanford came home to find every philanderer’s nightmare: his wife and main mistress in the same room, untangling his web of lies. As Buford tells it, Stanford was so distraught that he drove to procure a pistol, and when he returned home, he went into the bedroom and shot himself.

These Byronic details are central to the legend of Frank Stanford, and because there is no definitive biography, other such details — the time in a Mississippi orphanage, a childhood spent exploring the Delta with his adoptive father, the years moving from hotel room to motel room after dropping out of college — are left for his surviving lovers to share. The central motif of all these stories is Stanford’s good looks and charisma; Buford quotes the writer Ellen Gilchrist as saying of Stanford, “To know Frank then…was to see how Jesus got his followers. Everybody worshipped him.” The cover of What About This: Collected Poems of Frank Stanford, published by Copper Canyon Press, features a photograph sure to recruit Stanford more disciples: Stanford, with his curls and boyish features, is crouched in a field of wildflowers, holding a book. The photograph also shows Stanford dressed in jeans and a work shirt, which hints at how Stanford has long been portrayed in the history of American poetry — as a primitive. The poet Dean Young writes in his introduction to What About This: “Many of these poems seem as if they were written with a burned stick. With blood, in river mud.” But Dean Young also points out that Stanford’s swaggering poetry, a poetry that fights only heavyweight challengers such as death and love, stands as a much-needed contrast to our contemporary poetry, a poetry of “rigor and suspicion” that has “deadened the nerves and made poets fear the irrational.” Stanford’s poetry is an American poetry free of what Young calls “a long century of self-consciousness and irony.” What About This contains all ten of Stanford’s published collections, many of them until now out-of-print, as well as a selection of his unpublished manuscripts, an interview, a few prose selections, and snippets of A Battlefield Where the Moon Says I Love You. Taken together, these 745 pages represent an achievement matched only by Whitman’s Leaves of Grass in the history of American poetry.

In an interview with Irving Broughton, Stanford’s friend and champion, Stanford responds to a question about readers and critics not comprehending his work by saying, “If a person is quiet enough inside he might be able to catch on to what I’m trying to do in my poetry.” However, what makes this collection so remarkable are the feelings that even ten minutes spent dipping into Stanford’s world arouses in the reader, and none of those feelings are quiet. His poems are full of knives and water moccasins and blood; of dwarves and midgets and mysterious riders; of jukeboxes and picture-shows and whiskey. The one image that appears consistently in Stanford’s work is the moon. In a famous early poem “The Singing Knives,” the moon is “a dead man floating down the river.” Later in the same collection, Stanford writes, “The cloud passed over the moon / Like a turkey shutting its eye.” If early collections like The Singing Knives and Shade do suffer from a Rimbaud-like obsession with death, they still contain remarkable individual poems, particularly when Stanford shifts from the narrative to the lyric. The poem “Night Time” from Shade contains the stanza:

When I was twelve I had to

wash my mouth out with soap

for taking the deaf girl to the woods

and holding a lantern

under her dress

The young Stanford dealt with this tension between the narrative and lyric, between the allegorical and the personal, by simply keeping them separate in his early work, but by the time he reached his peak with the collections Field Talk and Constant Stranger, he had combined the two impulses into a unified voice by converting his own history into allegory, by making himself the star of his own myth. The poem “Spell” from Field Talk is a perfect example of this mature voice:

I aimed to get some of my blood

back from the Snow Lake mosquitoes

my belly was full of lemonade

and my hair had Wildroot on it

I took to the thicket at dawn

not knowing where I was from the man in the moon

there were trees with so much shade

you shivered

Likewise, in Constant Stranger we find the same narrative form of his early work, but here Stanford allows for moments of lyrical exuberance inside that form. In the poem “Blue Yodel of the Desperado,” he writes:

I wanted to ride down to where I come from

On an Appaloosa

And take you away for good

I wanted to tie your hands with my belt

And watch you stare at the campfire

In the mountains not saying a word

In the essay “With the Approach of the Oak the Axeman Quakes,” Stanford writes, “We go back to the poetry, the poet. I see a figure in a field. There is genuine moonlight shining on his crowbar. He is prying stumps out of his ground. Poetry busts guts.” This is the exact effect reading Stanford’s best work elicits: that of watching a poet wrench his own personal history into the world. And that work, that effort, just like the poetry it produced, makes the reader sweat.

What about This: Collected Poems of Frank Stanford

by Frank Stanford

Powells.com

An Interview with Hanya Yanagihara

Hanya Yanagihara’s A Little Life is an unsparing novel that follows the lives of four college friends as they achieve the successes they once dreamed of and strived for. There is a fairy tale quality to the wealth and fame these men achieve, but like all fairy tales, there is an underlying darkness.

The darkness at the center of this novel emanates from Jude St. Francis, a successful lawyer by any measure, but a man who remains an enigma to friends and family nearly to the end. The reader bears witness to the aftermath of the childhood abuse Jude St. Francis suffered, and barely survived, with the understanding that the brutality of the witnessing cannot compare to the experience itself. Unable to heal himself, or be healed by others, Jude is a character that calls into question the redemptive narrative arc we too often expect from stories of trauma. Yanagihara would argue that this isn’t a story about trauma but about life. Either way, she asks the tough questions: how do we live, and why?

Yanagihara and I corresponded through e-mail over the course of a few weeks as she traveled in Sri Lanka, Hong Kong, and Japan. We discussed trigger warnings, empathy, the limits of psychology, and suicide.


Adalena Kavanagh: A Little Life centers on the friendships of four men, and your previous novel, The People in the Trees, also mainly centered around male characters. You have said that men often have a smaller emotional vocabulary than women do (an idea a female therapist also shared with me, coincidentally). Could you speak more about that and why you have chosen to write primarily about men?

Hanya Yanagihara: My best friend — who’s a man of tremendous depth of emotional perception and intelligence — disagrees with me somewhat on this point. But I do think that men, almost uniformly, no matter their race or cultural affiliations or religion or sexuality, are equipped with a far more limited emotional toolbox. Not endemically, perhaps — but there’s no society that I know of that encourages men to put words to the sort of feelings — much less encourages their expression of those feelings — that women get to take for granted. Maybe this is changing with younger men, but I sometimes listen to my male friends talk, and can understand that what they’re trying to communicate is fear, or shame, or vulnerability — even as I find it striking that they’re not even able to name those emotions, never mind discuss their specificities; they talk in contours, but not in depth. But in order to name emotions, you have to be taught to name them. It’s like that famous study of depression in Japan: the respondents self-identified a set of symptoms that here would be the means to diagnose them with clinical depression. There, it was merely a set of symptoms. I’m not saying this is bad or good; only that when it comes to matters of the self, and self-identity, society teaches you what’s allowable to feel and communicate.

I do think that men, almost uniformly, no matter their race or cultural affiliations or religion or sexuality, are equipped with a far more limited emotional toolbox.

As a writer, it’s a great gift — and an interesting challenge — to write about a group of people who are fundamentally limited in this way (and who happen to be half the world’s population). Male friendship, by which I mean a friendship between two men, is by its very nature different in scope and breadth than one between two women, or between a woman and a man. In The People in the Trees, one could argue — as I would — that the narrator, Perina, behaves the way he does in part out of a grotesque and misshapen interpretation of loneliness. I had intended him, in many ways, as a fundamentally naive character, one who allows himself to mistake perversion for love. In A Little Life, one of the things I most enjoyed exploring is how these men’s friendships, while close by anyone’s definition, are also built upon a mutual desire to not truly know too much. Again, I’m not saying that’s a bad or good thing — one needn’t confess everything to a friend to be known by him — but I do think that a friendship between two women (once again, for better or worse) is yoked by shared confessions.

The way Jude handles his past is meant to be particularly male as well. I don’t know a single woman who hasn’t at least worried at some point in her life — if only fleetingly — that she might be in sexual danger, that she might be preyed upon. It’s something we grow up knowing, because for many women (as history and mythology have taught us), it’s a real threat. Parents worry that their boys might be killed in an accident or in some act of violence; they worry their daughters might be raped. Plenty of males are preyed upon in the same way, of course, but there remains a certain and specific shame surrounding the subject. If you’re a woman and you’re sexually assaulted, it takes away nothing of your rights to womanhood — I don’t think men feel the same way.

AK: Regarding your character you say, “one could argue — as I would — that the narrator, Perina, behaves the way he does in part out of a grotesque and misshapen interpretation of loneliness.” This strikes me as a very empathetic treatment of a character that most would find it hard to have empathy for. Why treat those characters society would deem monsters with empathy at all?

HY: Well, from a literary perspective, you have to: if you’re a writer, you must be able to summon empathy for all your characters, even and especially the despicable ones. You needn’t like them, but you must respect them — even if you don’t respect every aspect of them. If not, that character becomes simply a catalog of his pathologies, and that’s a hollow character. Actually, that’s not even a character: it’s just a pastiche of bad behavior. I tried to keep this in mind in A Little Life when I wrote the characters who make Jude’s life so awful — Caleb and Brother Luke and Dr. Traylor. They were always much more complicated people to me than they are to him; he sees them one way, of course, and so he should. But I tried to make all of them a little mysterious to the reader, to suggest that there were other lives they led, that they were someone else entirely to the other people in their life. Caleb, especially, should come across as someone with nuance, with an unseen but suggested other persona: Jude is meeting him as an adult, and so even he’s able to see that the way Caleb behaves with him might not be the way he behaves with other people: he has a sister he’s close to; he has a job where he’s clearly respected; he finds a boyfriend after Jude. This, of course, is exactly what he fears: that Caleb’s behavior towards him is indicative less of the core of Caleb’s identity, and more a set of responses that’ve been inspired by Jude himself. (Because Jude encounters Brother Luke and Dr. Traylor as a child, he’s much less able to see who else they might be besides his abusers — and so too, therefore, the reader; in Jude’s childhood sections, I tried to tilt the semi-omniscience that informs his adult chapters to something more intimately his point of view, which is by necessity narrow and childlike. But I always knew they were someone else, that they had other lives, other interests, other qualities, or I wouldn’t have been able to write them authoritatively. One hopes, as a writer, that your readers can sense as well some of what you’re not saying about your characters, that one senses the totality of their conception.)

Once we start calling people monsters, we start sacrificing our sense of curiosity, our obligation to ask how they became that way.

In life, though — that is to say, not on the page — does everyone deserve empathy? Maybe not. I certainly wouldn’t argue that everyone deserves compassion; I think it’s a privilege you can lose. But I do think that everyone is much more complex and difficult to comprehend than their actions suggest. Once we start calling people monsters, we start sacrificing our sense of curiosity, our obligation to ask how they became that way, and why they did what they did: life, and certainly fiction writing, is about being endlessly fascinated by the human condition — naming someone a monster is lazy; it allows you to stop thinking and questioning.

AK: In your first novel, The People in the Trees, one of the characters is accused of sexually abusing a boy, and in A Little Life, the main character, Jude, suffers sexual abuse as a child and teenager. What drew you to this subject, and where do you see your work fitting into a cultural climate where trigger warnings are being debated on college campuses?

HY: I suppose I’m interested in the subject first, because the act of sexually abusing a child is the ultimate abuse of power. Second, I think it ruins people. Some in big ways, others in small ways. But it means that in the long road to defining oneself as a human, one must also negotiate around an enormous and often immovable rock.

As for trigger warnings: I’d never heard of this term before (it’s been a while since I was in college)! All I can say is that I think it’s very dangerous to isolate oneself from information or art or history or news because the subject is painful. I understand the instinct. But being a curious person — which I think is the ultimate goal of being alive — means allowing yourself to be intellectually and emotionally vulnerable as much and as often as you can. I’d argue that despite its cost, it’s the subjects that makes us the most uncomfortable that we have to challenge ourselves to brave more, not less, often. As regards sexual violence, well, were we to avoid that topic, it’d mean avoiding not only much of art, but also history itself: it’d mean avoiding the world. Much as I hope the reader is there in this book to bear witness to Jude’s life and his suffering, we equally owe it as humans to witness other humans’ suffering as well, and not turn away because it makes us uncomfortable.

AK: Those in favor of trigger warnings would argue that those who have been victims of trauma have the right to opt out of an experience that would further traumatize them. What would you say to a student who wanted to exercise their right to opt out of experiencing your book, if it was assigned in a class?

HY: I’d say we never really know how we’re going to react until we start reacting. To try to preemptively shield yourself from an experience — to say, in essence, this book is about something that I fear is going to really upset me, so I’d better protect myself by not exposing myself to it at all — is not only limiting, but also means you might be preventing yourself from experiencing something else, something you thought you never would, or never have. It also reduces art to a single topic, and to a single reaction: I would hate it if this book were dismissed as a book about abuse. Abuse is part of it. But I hope it’s also about other things as well. All books are. This is an obvious point, but no one book is about one thing (unless it’s a very boring book). The point of reading, especially fiction, is not to have confirmed what you already think or feel, but to make you think anew about what you already think or feel.

AK: Having known several women who have suffered sexual abuse, Jude’s psychology of self-loathing, shame, and tendency to blame himself for the abuse he suffered struck me as one of the most accurate portrayals of the mindset of an abused person I’ve read. Did you do any research to build this character? Was it difficult to write this material?

HY: No, I didn’t do any research; Jude came to me fully formed, and writing his sections were always the easiest. He’s a very consistent character — or is meant to be — which is, arguably, part of what dooms him.

AK: The way you reveal Jude’s childhood is relentless and seems to mirror Jude’s inability to forget what happened to him, despite the immense success he achieves in his life. In this way you resist the comfortable narrative arc of abuse followed by healing. Jude resists therapy, to the frustration of his friends and family (and this reader!), and one of the main questions the book seems to address is whether talk therapy works — what do you think the limits of therapy are?

HY: One of the things I wanted to do with this book is create a character who never gets better. And, relatedly, to explore this idea that there is a level of trauma from which a person simply can’t recover. I do believe that really, we can sustain only a finite amount of suffering. That amount varies from person to person and is different, sometimes wildly so, in nature; what might destroy one person may not another. So much of this book is about Jude’s hopefulness, his attempt to heal himself, and I hope that the narrative’s momentum and suspense comes from the reader’s growing recognition — and Jude’s — that he’s too damaged to ever truly be repaired, and that there’s a single inevitable ending for him.

One of the things that makes me most suspicious about the field is its insistence that life is always the answer.

This book is, obviously, a psychological book, but not one about psychology. I didn’t use psychological language, and I didn’t want to — nor encourage the reader to — diagnose Jude in clinical terms. As for the limits of therapy: I can’t speak to them, only that therapy, like any medical treatment, is finite in its ability to save and correct. I think of psychology the way I think of religion: a school of belief or thought that offers many, many people solace and answers; an invention that defines the way we view our fellow man and how we create social infrastructure; one that has inspired some of our greatest works of art and philosophy. But I don’t believe in it — talk therapy, I should specify — myself. One of the things that makes me most suspicious about the field is its insistence that life is always the answer. Every other medical specialty devoted to the care of the seriously ill recognizes that at some point, the doctor’s job is to help the patient die; that there are points at which death is preferable to life (that doesn’t mean every doctor will help you get there, of course. But almost every doctor of the critically sick understands the patient’s right to refuse treatment, to choose death over life). But psychology, and psychiatry, insists that life is the meaning of life, so to speak; that if one can’t be repaired, one can at least find a way to stay alive, to keep growing older.

Obviously, this is reductive, and many, many people think otherwise, including my own dearest friend. He argues that therapy shouldn’t be indicted as a dishonest profession simply because therapists won’t tell patients they can kill themselves. And that the therapist’s role is to make one’s life better, at least in some measure, through self-examination. But I’m not convinced. However: maybe there is in fact a therapist or psychiatrist out there, who thinks that life is, for some people, simply too difficult to keep pursuing; who will give a suicidal patient permission, as it were, to die.

AK: I never thought of psychology in this way, but I can see your point — it is a belief system, one that won’t “work” unless you believe that it does work. There are moments in the book when characters wonder if they had only pushed a little harder, if they had just asked the right questions, they could have helped Jude with his demons. I thought you had given readers a key or clue early on in the book when Jude’s social worker encourages him to talk about his experience of abuse but he is unable to. She says that if he doesn’t talk about it at that moment he never will. I was left feeling that because he had not processed his abuse early enough, he was unable to heal, but from what you are saying, that might have been a naïve interpretation on my part. Was that conscious on your part — to give the reader false hope that something could have been done if only it had been done early enough?

HY: I do think that there are moments in our lives in which the door opens, and you can make a choice to walk through it: that you can name what’s been unnameable, or that you have someone close to you whom you can truly trust to accompany you. I was talking about this with my friend, and he said that what he found so haunting about Jude’s story is that the reader can’t help but wonder what would’ve happened if he’d been psychologically helped — or more accepting of help — earlier, if he wasn’t left to interpret his life by himself; if he had been encouraged to take other lessons from it than the ones he does. I do think that Jude’s life would’ve ended the same way no matter what. But I also think that he could have had a happier, or at least less tortured, life as well.

But I also think there’s a point in which it becomes too late to help some people: that there’s a time past which the damage has calcified so completely that there’s no undoing it.

AK: You say, “But I’m not convinced. However: maybe there is in fact a therapist or psychiatrist out there, who thinks that life is, for some people, simply too difficult to keep pursuing; who will give a suicidal patient permission, as it were, to die.”

Just to push back a bit, you could also argue that the urge to suicide is a symptom of illness, and not a rational choice someone makes. What do you think of that argument?

HY: Sure, and in the West, that’s exactly what we think: that suicidal thought is a symptom of a sick, or at least troubled mind. But I do think that that’s something of a cultural and religious construct. In America, we think there’s something shameful about it; we react to suicides with something approaching rage: What was he thinking?; It’s the coward’s way out. But in Asia, suicide isn’t viewed in the same way. Or it wasn’t, for many years. Here, we associate suicide with despair. There, you might say that the cause can be, sometimes, culturally sanctioned. This is not to say suicide isn’t just as devastating and often perplexing in the East as it is in the West — only that I don’t think there’s a single way to consider its meaning.

AK: If you’ve been following the literary conversation over the last few years you might have noticed that women who write complex texts and characters are often asked about likable and unlikable characters, in a sometimes accusatory way, as if by writing complex characters they are being willfully difficult instead of merely being thoughtful writers. I think your answer, that to call someone a monster is lazy, is a good response to that line of questioning. That said, you yourself have said that there is a fairy tale quality to A Little Life. There is also allusion to Christianity in the text, often in a sinister way, since Jude’s first abuser is a monk. What was your inspiration for this, and what texts or mythologies are you alluding to?

HY: We think of fairy tales (and fables, and folk tales: I’ll lump these three in a group, though they’re quite distinct from one another) as very simple stories, and while narratively, most of them are indeed fairly linear and straightforward, the lessons they impart about the world and how it works are often more unpredictable than we credit them. Many others have written far more brilliantly about these types of stories than I ever could, but I will just say that there is, in a significant number of these stories — across cultures, across countries — a stubborn lack of redemption. Sometimes the good child is rewarded, and the bad witch punished, but just as often, they’re not: or what must be endured by the hero or heroine is so terrible, so grotesque, that happiness, usually in the form of marriage or a reunion, seems almost meaningless, an unsatisfying answer to outlandish feats of survival.

This book adheres to many of the conventions of the classic Western fairy tale: there’s a child in distress, who’s made to face challenges on his own. The era is suggested rather than named. There are no conventional parental figures, in particular mother figures. (Like many fairy tales, I hope this book is defined as much by its absences as its presences.) And yet, unlike a fairy tale, this book concerns itself more with the characters’ emotional response to these challenges and events than the circumstances themselves; I tried to meld the psychological specificity of a naturalistic contemporary novel with the suspended-time quality of a fable. Part of fairy tales’ lasting power is attributable to the fact that they never address their characters’ inner lives (a relatively modern literary concept, that); the particulars of the plot are generally far more important than the characters themselves. With A Little Life, I tried to do the opposite.

AK: It’s interesting to me that you would contrast a non-Western idea — that suicide is sometimes culturally sanctioned, as you say — with characters so clearly rooted in Western life and culture. There has been much talk about the lack of diversity in literature, meaning most books being published in America are by white writers, about white characters. Without calling attention to it, your book has several non-white main characters, which I think could serve as a model of how to write non-white characters without having the text be about capital R race. Was this is a conscious choice on your part?

You have to ask yourself: why am I making this person someone other than who I am, and who else are they to me besides their otherness?

HY: I think the only key to writing about characters who aren’t your race — or gender, or sexual orientation, or religion, for that matter — is not letting that otherness become the character’s defining trait. Race is part, a huge part, of who a character (or person) is, but where writers (and people) get into trouble — rightly — is by making race all of who that character is, as if “black” or “Asian” or “Jewish” or “white” comes with a certain and unchangeable set of characteristics. (By the way, yes, the book has several non-white characters, but the fact that it’s only them you singled out is telling: the universal “we” or “you” in a novel isn’t a white person — or at least, it’s not to me.) I can’t stand it when I’m reading a book and in comes a character who’s gay and I know that that character is therefore going to be sassy and snappy and deliver bitchy-but-wise pieces of romantic advice (this still pops up in fiction more than you might think; sometimes as broadly as I’ve described it, other times more subtly). You have to ask yourself: why am I making this person someone other than who I am, and who else are they to me besides their otherness? If that’s the only thing you can see of them, and the only thing you have determined about them, then chances are they’re not a character: they’re a symbol of your own discomfort. And symbols are boring to read.

AK: Oh, I don’t think white is the universal we or you, either, and I try to write against that. If I name the race of one character, I name the race of the white characters as well. This might be because I’m biracial Asian but I’d hope not. That said, as you stated, writing non-white or non-straight, or characters that are often “othered” by American culture, and publishing, is often done using stereotypes. I was pointing out how well you write these characters. Does it bother you to have these things pointed out? I have been uncomfortable with the term “diverse” books (it kind of makes my skin crawl), meaning books by non-white authors, and about non-white characters, but I’m not sure how else the publishing industry, and the literary community, can consciously promote these authors (with the best intentions of being inclusive, and not marginalizing writers) without using that sort of term. Do you have any suggestions?

HY: When I was in book publishing, now almost two decades ago, publishing houses marketed books by non-white writers (or gay writers) much more aggressively to a specific audience: books by Asian American authors were sent to Asian American magazines, books by gay authors to gay magazines, etc. Those were the days of identity culture at its most blunt and insistent.

These days, that happens far less often. Part of this is due to the splintering of the very idea of “identity culture,” a term that now sounds both quaint and so full of meaning as to be devoid of meaning altogether, and part of this is because what was once considered genre fiction (back when ethnicity was considered a publishing genre) has become so diffuse and complex in its content and practitioners that marketing to an imagined group of readers who you hope are united in their interests simply because of their race seems silly. I suppose the only thing a house can and should do when publishing a book by any kind of minority is to treat them as nothing more or less than a single representative of the American culture at large.

VIDEO: What Bill Gates Thinks You Should Read This Summer

Looking for some summer reading? Microsoft co-founder and philanthropist Bill Gates has some suggestions for you! Over at this blog, Gates says: “Each of these books made me think or laugh or, in some cases, do both. I hope you find something to your liking here. And if it’s not summer where you live, this list will still be here six months from now…”

Watch the video of Gates talking about his picks above. Here are his six book picks (his seventh is the XKCD blog) in no particular order:

OnImmunitycover

On Immunity by Eula Biss

DarrellHuff

How to Lie With Statistics by Darrell Huff

Whatif?

What If? by Randall Munroe

Shouldweeatmeat

Should We Eat Meat? by Vaclav Smil

RichardDawkins

The Magic of Reality by Richard Dawkins

AllieBrosh

Hyperbole and a Half by Allie Brosh

Midweek Links: Literary Links from Around the Web (May 20th)

Looking for some interesting reading to get you through hump day? Here are some literary links from around the web to check out:

william shakespeare face

A historian claims to have found the only picture of Shakespeare drawn in his life (above)

Haruki Murakami says, “I’m a fan of losers.”

Does viral fame sell books? Not necessarily…

Rainbow Rowell talks about the power of fan fiction

Why Jonathan Franzen’s “bad” sex writing isn’t his fault

Kazuo Ishiguro interviewed at LARB

How ebooks frustrate Iran’s censors

Did you know not every Norwegian writer is named Knausgaard?

Miller Field

by Tyler Sage, recommended by Leigh Newman

During my last two years in high school, our hitting coach was a man named Stubbs Chapman. He appeared in our small town one spring and volunteered to work with the team, a short man with a big belly and a square, doughy face, a wearer of khaki pants and windbreakers, a cigar smoker with a strong sense of the metaphysical and that easy, relaxed feeling of camaraderie particular to ex-athletes. No one was quite sure what he was doing in our town, but he enjoyed a brief moment of legendary status because he had played in the big leagues and because of the things that happened when he hit a baseball.

On occasion, in the course of his instruction, Stubbs would step into the old batting cage at the public field where we practiced. He would ask one of us to get ready to operate the ball machine, which meant plugging the heavy cable into the outlet on the side of the concrete machine shed, and would then begin to make fine, abstruse points about hitting in his Mid-Atlantic drawl. When he nodded at the kid with the power cord the machine would start its old grinding hum and the balls would begin to zip past, one after another. He ignored them at first, continuing to talk, gesturing with his hands, discoursing on timing, or the rotation of our hips or the path of the barrel of the bat. As each ball passed, we listened less closely, and become more and more anxious for him to hit one. Even our head coach, who taught history at school and was a Little Bighorn buff, would drift over to watch. Finally, his delicate castle of hitting knowledge constructed, Stubbs would shoulder the bat and wait casually and easily for the next ball to spring forth. And when it did, he destroyed it. He still, at sixty years old, had such enormously fast hands that he could wait for what seemed like an eternity before beginning his swing. Then he would flick his wrists and that sound would ring out across the field. He hit them where he wanted, pull or opposite, driving them back at the machine or lifting them into the netting; and it was not just the smoothness of his stroke that stayed with you, or his perfect balance, or even the speed of those hands. It was the sound. So much in baseball is encapsulated in that sound. We had long ago learned in the outfield to base our first pure instinctual reaction on it: the pure crisp click of a well-hit ball pushing us back towards the fence, the skimming clunk of a ball that would try to die in front of us, the faint sliding hiss of a ball that was going to slice away towards foul ground. But we had never heard anything like Stubbs Chapman. He hit a baseball with a crack that was final and without reverberation. It was the most perfectly wooden sound I have ever known, a sound natural and grained, hard and in no way touched by a human hand. If I am struggling to describe it here it may be because, like so much in baseball, it is a sound of youth and thus always residing in some golden and useless past that can never quite be reclaimed.

Stubbs lived in a room in Dan Smiley’s grandmother’s house and drove a beautiful old diesel Mercedes and was almost perfectly out of place in our town, which comprised wheat farmers and refinery workers and their families. He was there for two springs (no one knew where he went for the rest of the year) and he stopped coaching us after the penultimate game of my senior year. It was always unclear whether he left town because Dan Smiley’s grandmother threw him out or because I humiliated him with the ball machine.

That machine had been donated to our town park by a nearby AA team several years before and I spent a fair amount of time in the cage that spring, not really working on things so much as just enjoying the feel of hitting. I was going to be drafted that summer, I knew, and I liked to imagine one of the pitchers I watched on TV trying to blow a fastball past me, and me turning on it and smashing it down the line into the left field stands. Stubbs watched some of these sessions and tried, at first, to offer me his wisdom. I had little interest. I hit .636 that year, and had never hit lower than .500, except for my .494 as a freshman. What I would have liked was for Stubbs just to stand there and admire what I could do, and perhaps even complement me on it. But he tried to change things–pulling my hands in to shorten my stroke, reducing what was a rather grandiose leg kick–and then, when I would not listen to his instruction, he took to simply standing and watching, his cigar in his mouth, and giving an occasional grunt, as if he’d yet again seen something that confirmed his analysis. And when he got in the cage himself, he made sure that we both knew how much better he was than I. He did this by completely ignoring me. He included the other kids in the points he made, singled them out for criticism or praise, made eye contact with them as he talked. But he ignored me.

Our teams, during this stretch of years, were terrible. When I was a freshman we nearly won a state title, had two seniors drafted, and sent several more on to play college ball, but by the time I was a senior we were headed towards the bottom of our conference. We took regular beatings from all the other teams and there were only two of us who would go on to play past high school. In our second-to-last game of the year, we were three-hit by a lousy pitcher. All of the hits belonged to me, two line drive singles and a long home run.

Often, when we lost games like this, Stubbs started off practice with a hitting lesson. As I’ve indicated, these were imperious and wordy and I usually did not understand (or listen to) them, because for me the act of hitting was not something to be tampered with or even discussed. It was a magical, reflexive, purely physical act, and I hated to see someone try to reduce it to ideas or language. I also hated to lose, at anything, and I hated the feeling of not understanding something. And so the Monday after the humiliation, I snuck over before warm-ups and disabled the governor on the ball machine. This was a safety device that the town had installed to ensure that the balls coming out of the machine did so at no more than eighty-five miles an hour. We had figured out within a week of its installation, of course, how to disable it. Ungoverned, the baseball popped out of that machine at something over a hundred, from a distance of fifty feet, and there was no warning other than a simple click. There were simply the spinning wheels, then that click of the ball dropping out of the chute, and then the ball ripping through the air and striking the netting, and the faint spinning trail of our bats in its wake.

When Stubbs arrived at the field on that Monday afternoon, I’d already taken the governor off, and was stretching with the rest of the team. He stood for a moment talking to the coaches. The other men nodded seriously, and Stubbs assumed a distant look, somber and meditative.

“My grandmother was screaming at ol’ Stubbs last night like you wouldn’t believe,” said Dan Smiley. “I think she kicked him out.”

We turned, interested. Dan had moved here from Oklahoma at the end of middle school, and he still moved and talked even slower than we did. He squinted out at the mountains.

“Money, I guess,” he said after a moment. “My mom says he’s broke.”

“Maybe he got your grandmother pregnant,” someone suggested.

“Maybe you can go fuck yourself,” said Dan slowly and equitably.

The head coach shouted across the field at us, circled his hand above his head, and pointed at the batting cage. We ambled over, one of the freshmen running ahead so that he could be the one to plug in the machine when it was time.

The coaches came slowly across the field. Whatever it was that Stubbs had been explaining to the other men, it seemed to have no effect on him. There was no lessening of resolution in his stride, no erosion of that pervasive and rock-like certainty. Stubbs took the cigar out of his mouth and dropped it in the trash barrel next to the shed. He paused to look out at the mountains, like we all did from time to time, hanging there green and white over the edge of the yellow wheat horizon, and then reached down and took a bat from one of us.

“Boys,” he said, “what happened Saturday, and what I’ve been seeing all season, sitting up there in the stands as I do with all of your parents and the folks that love you and the one or two college scouts that may,” here he paused to look us over, “or may not have been in attendance, and may, or may not, have been so disappointed that they won’t ever pass through this town again, what I’ve been seeing might be described as a spiritual failure.”

He gripped the bat with both hands and held it in front of him for a moment as if he were measuring it, or weighing it, or assessing some other value we could not fathom.

“Let me emphasize this,” he said. “I’m not talking about dropping your elbow as you come into your swing, or waffling the bat head coming through the zone, or keeping your head still, or your hands still, or even about the fact that a pitcher like that one on Saturday, on an oh-oh count, or a three-oh count, or an oh-two count, on, let’s just be honest, every goddamn count, is going to throw what passes for his fastball because has no other pitch that he can put into this county, let alone this strike zone, and yet all of you were up there sitting back like you were worried about not getting out there ahead of his curve, a curve, as you might have heard me just mention, that he did not even possess.”

Stubbs did not look at me. Every time I’d come up on Saturday I’d known what the pitcher was going to throw, and I hadn’t let him off the hook even when he once tried to walk me: one of my singles I’d had to golf from about six inches off the ground, because I knew he wasn’t going to give me anything to hit. But Stubbs did not acknowledge this.

“No,” he said. He raised the bat in front of him for a second examination, sad and contemplative.

“The deeper failing around here is the spiritual one. Hitting a baseball is a mechanical processes–that’s true and will always be true. But it is also a spiritual process. Hitting is a kiss. It is a caress. It is an act of violence. All in one. All united. Have you ever seen the ball floating towards you and reached out and kissed it with the bat? Have you ever asked it to fly for you, not told it, asked it, and in the following instant, as the ball took flight, understood that you were indomitable? If you have not, and I would say from Saturday’s evidence that you indeed have not, it is not because of a failing of the hands or the hips, or even of the mind, but of the spirit. This spiritual failing, before all else, is what you need to think about.”

He undid the horseshoe latch and stepped into the cage. We watched him.

He turned back to us and leaned for a moment on the bat as if it were a cane.

“So how can you begin to address it?”

We waited. It was a perfectly clear late spring day. The sky was empty and from the playground we could hear the faint shouts of younger kids and on the horizon the snow caps were like the crystals of some distant chandelier.

He smiled, faintly and with a touch of bitterness. “To correct the spiritual, you must engage with the spiritual.”

He nodded at the freshman, who reached down and plugged in the big power cord. The twin wheels of the ball machine began to spin, and the balls rattled down the chute. The first passed behind Stubbs like a rocket. He did not turn, but he must have been able to hear the difference, in the higher-pitched whine of the wheels, and in the shortened interval between the pop of the ball being released and the hiss and rattle of it being received by the old mesh backstop. In my memory, there is the faintest hitch in the smooth flow of his speech at this point, but I do not truly know if this is real or something I’ve added. In my memory there is that faintest acknowledgement of it in his posture, a stiffening, or bristling, as if he is aware that a gauntlet has been thrown down. But I do not know if this is real. What I do know is that Stubbs continued to talk about the swing of the bat as a singular, time-defying, space-compressing, spiritual act that is the closest we are, any of us, allowed to a true perfection, while behind him the balls passed, one after another, in a ridiculous blur. And watching this, a terrific apprehension came over us. His speech on spirituality, his thoughts on the nature of hitting, whatever wisdom it was that he was offering us, went unheard.

Then he turned and stepped across the path of the balls and took his stance. He shouldered the bat and made a final, fine point, and we leaned forward and someone, I think it was Drew Pearlman, reached out his hand as if to say Wait! and the ball exploded out from the spinning wheels. Stubbs swung. He swung late, and he missed. A silence seemed to fall over the park. There were no bird calls, no sound of wind, no rushing of traffic from the highway. There was only the whining of the wheels. Stubbs’s eyes hardened and he reloaded the bat on his shoulder, flexed those old hands. Another ball came and he swung again and missed again, and the machine began to make the clicking sound it made when it was empty. No one spoke or moved.

He twisted the bat in his hands and regarded the machine. He turned and looked exactly at me.

“James,” he said, “be so good as to put another bucket of balls in the hopper?”

It is a strange and terrifying thing to see human decline made manifest, to watch a moment of public humiliation. Stubbs managed to foul a few of the next bucket off, and even to drive one with the old clean perfect cracking sound. But when he missed he did so more and more awfully, taking huge awkward cuts, falling off balance, all of his mechanics exposed. He was an aging man, small and with an oversized belly, still tied to his silly dreams of the child’s game. And it was not so much the ball machine that did this too him. This was worst of all. It was a thing inside of himself. It was the despair and frustration visible in every inch of his clenched jaws and jittery feet. It was the clarity with which he perceived himself in that moment, and the clarity with which we witnessed this perception: the fear of age and incompetence and loss, the shirttails pulled free of his trousers, the sweat on his forehead, the tap of the bat on the ground as if he were at a real plate again, playing again in a stadium before thirty thousand fans, and then another overmatched swing, another overmatched and desperate grunt.

I will mention my own baseball career only briefly. It began with me being drafted in the eleventh round and deciding instead to go to college, as more and more good players were doing, on the chance that I would be drafted again and make more money. It ended over a decade later with me striking out in a small stadium in North Carolina on three pitches against Ricardo Suarez, a nineteen-year-old kid who talked to himself incessantly, wore a stringy, gallivanting mustache, and was seemingly headed for the bigs. He pitched me inside-out, starting me with a back foot breaking ball at which I flailed miserably, following that with a sneaky little backdoor curve, and finishing me, after a long enough look that we both knew that I knew what was coming, with a belt-high fastball. I took my cut, knowing somewhere in the course of that swing that it was the last I would take, and walked back to the dugout. I’d never been able to hit Suarez. He had my number and we both knew it and he stared me down all the way off the field.

At the beginning, though, I was cocky, and I was talented, and I was lazy to the point of contempt about my talent. What was there I could not do? I could hit and throw and field any position. The game was easy for me, easier for me than it was for almost anyone I ever played with, including the men I knew who went on to have long major league careers. The problem was that it took me too long to understand about fear; and by the time I did begin to understand, my career in the minor leagues, increasingly filled as the years went by with frustration, incomprehension, and rage, was over.

I am not speaking only of the fear of failure, although that is a part of it; in some nearly indescribable way I was also afraid of joy. I was afraid that the joy involved in the act of playing would be lost through trying too hard to manage or craft the act, and then I would have neither joy nor ability; I was afraid that this joy was the most pure of all the things I had, and that it was not enough. I was afraid that someone like Stubbs might not only be better at it than I, but might be better exactly because he did not love it as much or as purely. And the more I focused on this, the more the joy slipped away. I was afraid that it was not enough, and it became not enough. With each at bat that ended in a strikeout, with each coach adjusting my swing or my stance, I watched the joy and the ease slip away, and I watched the fear grow; and with each incremental increase in fear it became more and more difficult to remember how it had felt to not be afraid.

While this may sound unique, and maybe even grandiose, it is neither. Ballparks are littered with old players who have stories like these, ghosts and fears and tics that in the end were simply too much to overcome before age took its toll.

A year ago I came to this city, perhaps without knowing or remembering that it was the one in which Stubbs had been born and raised, and I ran into him again. We were both in the stands at a city-league high school game.

It is a poor city, and one of the few in our country that is shrinking. There are no grand projects, no urban renewal success stories. The fields are not well maintained, the uniforms are often secondhand, and it is a long, long way from the bright high-definition lights of the games on television, a long way, even, from the college campuses with their green lawns and winding paths and brick quads, their clean spacious stadiums and training rooms done out in team colors, their hallways featuring framed photos of All-Americans. The fields here are like gladiator pits, I found myself thinking one evening in a set of mostly empty bleachers under moist gray skies, full of bile. Gladiator pits where year after year they come and they struggle and one or two make it out while the rest end up on the corners and in the bars, driving delivery trucks and working as steamfitters, with that great green dream still hanging over them, in front of them. At this point, I thought I heard my name being called.

I turned. Several rows behind me, also sitting alone in the bleachers, was Stubbs. He was old and frail and wearing his windbreaker even though it was a warm spring night. His head was bare and his hair mostly gone and was still smoking a cigar, that might, for all I knew, have been the same one he’d been smoking the last time I’d seen him, sitting in his Mercedes after practice on the day he was defeated by the ball machine.

“Hello, Stubbs,” I said.

“You must be scouting,” he said. “And you must not be that good at it if they’ve got you all the way down here.”

“You look a lot older,” I told him. “And not all that healthy. I almost didn’t recognize you.”

He stood and, instead of stepping down over the rows empty of benches, walked all the way out to the aisle and down to my level and then came in to sit next to me. His composure and grace had grown fragile but were still there like an afterimage.

“I followed your career a little bit,” he said.

“ch as it was.”

“So you haven’t gotten over it.”

“I wouldn’t say that.”

“There’s no shame. You should be proud to have made it as far as you did.”

“You don’t have anything else to do with your time these days?” I burst out. “Just come and sit alone and watch the kids play?”

He ashed his cigar carefully. He still had those same hands, strong and alive beneath that spotted papery skin.

“I organize a little, old-time league,” he said. “Ballplayers who come out just for the love of it. I’m always on the lookout for new players. Same as you.”

“I’m not scouting. I’m out of the game.”

“So why is it that you’re here?”

There was the ping of a metal bat and a foul ball was lifted into the air towards us. We turned to watch. The ball clattered into the bleachers.

“You were a wonderful talent,” said Stubbs.

“There were a lot of us who were.”

He smoked.

“I snuck a double off of Sandy Koufax once,” he said. “He tried to come inside on me and I pulled it down the line. I was a talent, too.”

“Then what the hell were you doing out there?” I asked. “How did you end up in a town like that with all your talent, coaching a team like ours?”

“Clarissa Smiley. She was one of my chickadees. I had them all over, from my playing days. There was a time there when I just drove around visiting them, seeing who still had time for me.”

“You were broke.”

“Don’t tell me that you didn’t pick up a few chickadees? All those little towns, all those long trips?”

“You were broke.”

“You never had problems?”

“I never hung on like that.”

He laughed. “So that’s why you’re sitting here. Because you’re over the game. I’ve seen you here a couple of times, you know.”

There was nothing I could say.

“Why don’t you come out and play with us Sunday?” he asked. “Four o’clock. It’s an old-timey thing, like I said, you know, Miller Field, there’s not much there anymore, but we got some ballplayers that come out. Four teams in the league, pretty good action. I always like it when good players come out.”

“I don’t think so.”

He examined his cigar, exactly the way he used to look over the baseball bat when he was giving a lecture.

“You scared?” he asked.

“Not anymore.”

“I think you are. I think you’re scared of a bunch of old men, and you with that sweet stroke of yours.”

“You really want me to come out and run around with a bunch of geezers.”

“It’s not all geezers. There’s a couple of young fellows come out. A couple of kids with futures. And I’ll tell you what–I still got contacts with some organizations. You come out and play, and I’ll make a couple of calls. Smart as you are, I bet I could get someone to take a look at you. Scouting, maybe something in the front office.”

“I don’t think so.”

“I’ll look for you this weekend.”

“I can’t make it, Stubbs.”

He shrugged and stuck his cigar back between his teeth and we watched a catcher throw the ball into centerfield as a kid stole second.

The truth is that I wasn’t all that surprised to see Stubbs, because I seem to be plagued by people from my playing days. I ran into Teddy Grovatt once at a dump outside of a town in Ohio. I was throwing away a couch and stopped to check in at the trailer on the way up to the pit and there he was, sitting with his feet up on the desk, his fingers stretched across the mouth of a mug like it was a baseball, a distant look on his face. I’d seen him take a home run away from Jose Canseco once, when Canseco was a star doing an injury rehab stint: Grovatt climbed an outfield wall in South Carolina and grabbed the ball just before it touched the hands of a little kid in the stands. It was one of the greatest plays I ever witnessed. Grovatt never got past AA ball. I caught a glimpse of Emilio LaPorta, the definition of a crafty left-hander, washing the windows of a bank in Milwaukee. I looked up and there he was on that platform dangling down the outside of the building, grinning in through the glass, pointing at me. Emilio whom I’d played with for parts of three seasons, and who hadn’t made it through his single inning in the bigs, giving up a pair of doubles and a home run and getting sent down the next day. Even Ricardo Suarez, who ended my career–I found him dead drunk on the back of a commuter bus late one night in New Jersey, disheveled and stinking and with a bottle of booze rocking back and forth in his hand on the turns, who’d had filthy stuff but who had completely fallen apart every time they pushed him up even as far as AAA. He was snoring and with his fly half undone and those old fingernails that he used to dig so sharply into the ball were long and untended. I got off at the next stop without waking him.

The guys I knew in the minors always called me Professor. They thought it was funny that I’d gone to the college I did, and used to think up crazy things to ask me. But in studying, because it had been so difficult, and because I hadn’t truly loved it, there had been no danger. There was no reaction in ideas; they did not come like a ball, smooth and fast off the bat and like magic into the glove and from the glove into the hand and from the hand to the first baseman, all without thinking. Ideas were dense and slow and impassible. There were paragraphs that I could read and reread and still not quite make the words fit together, still not quite remember the sense of the first sentence by the time I’d battled through to the last. There were whole chapters that were made up of these paragraphs, and whole books that were beyond me, entirely out of my range. But because they were difficult, and because I struggled, they were safe. I could slink around in the back row of an architecture class, the easygoing farm-kid jock, and no one ever had to know that I was trying like hell to understand every book and every slide, not just read them or see them, but really understand them. I could sit in a literature class and watch the discussion go back and forth like a ping-pong game and never let on that I was cataloguing every comment that I did not comprehend, every reference and throwaway joke, so that I could work through them after class, laboriously, one by one, edging my way towards understanding. This was difficult. There was no joy in it. Baseball was easy. And because it was easy it terrified me, and because it terrified me I loved it, and because I loved it it would not leave me alone. It would not leave any of us alone.

So I went to graduate school after I quit playing and I lived my life, was married and divorced, took an adjunct teaching job and then another, realizing at some point that I had joined the ranks of that strange fraternity of ghosts, all of us exiled from the game and gone on to different things but still haunted by the field, haunting the fields, seeing each other but not really interacting, nodding or exchanging a word or two but not really saying what it was we wanted to. The field and the flight of the ball and the dirt kicked up by a slide and the goddamn feeling of it all, the immortality. Do you remember? Yes, I remember.

Miller Field is a decaying and abandoned stadium that dates from the time when the city had a Negro League team. It sits on an industrial flat above a stretch of river choked with trees, between a defunct tire factory and what must once have been an institutional building of some sort but is now little more than a collection of toppled brick walls and empty windows covered in vines and underbrush. Across the river rises a steep bluff. One half of the top of this bluff is covered by a cemetery, and the other half is covered by row houses, from whose empty backyards a few children dully watch the games. I parked in the cracked lot and walked in through a hole in the chain link fence, past the old ticket booths and turnstiles, down a tunnel under the sagging wooden grandstand. The first thing I heard was the sound of Stubbs hitting a ball. That old, pure, perfect crack. It set my teeth on edge. The field was short to right and long to left, a patchwork of dirt and scrub grass. An old-fashioned scoreboard stood in dead center, and someone was in there resetting the numbers to zero. Men in motley blue and gray uniforms were stretching and jogging and playing catch. I recognized a couple of them: Vonn Thibodaux, who’d played for years in independent ball and had been a player/coach on a team I played on in AA, Errol Jones, who’d been a high draft pick and with whom I’d played short season before they jumped him straight to High A and he blew out his knee, a few more.

Someone was fooling around on the mound, throwing balls to Stubbs, who was lifting them to a couple of high school kids in left field, cigar in his mouth and eighty-something years old, and still with that goddamn stroke. Pure and tight and quick. There were some people in the only section of old wooden stands, along the first base line, that appeared safe enough to sit in. A few wives or girlfriends and some young kids and a few others that must have wandered in from god knows where. The sky was overcast and the light was gray and I stood watching and debating myself for a long time before I walked down past the last rows of broken seats and climbed the low railing onto the field.

When he saw me, Stubbs grinned, his cigar in one hand and the bat in the other.

“I thought you might show up,” he said.

“I’m happy on the other side of the fence,” I said, realizing as I spoke how deeply untrue that was. “I just thought I’d come out and see the circus.”

“Well,” he said. “Hopefully we’ll be able to squeeze you onto one of the teams.”

He went back to hitting balls and I put on my cleats and threw some grounders back and forth with a kid named Tyson Henry, who was seventeen and hoping to get a look from a community college out in California. He was plenty cocky, and he moved all right and had a decent arm, but his footwork was lousy. When they saw me, Vonn and some of the other guys came over to say hello, and we fell into talking bus breakdowns and stadium peculiarities and legendarily wild pitchers and the Cuban catcher we’d all known whom no one could understand in either English or Spanish, and this kid Tyson stood to the side and watched disdainfully. He was, it turned out, a cousin of Vonn’s, and after a while Vonn turned to him and put his hand on my shoulder.

“This here,” he said, “is the Professor. I saw him foul three balls in a row into the radio booth of a stadium down in Tennessee, because he didn’t like what the announcers had said about him the last time we came through town. Always claimed that he didn’t really mean to, but you should’ve seen those two radio men hit the deck. Once, twice, three times in a row. And then he hit that next pitch into the gap and came into second standing up. Laughing. He loved playing the game more than anyone I ever knew.”

The kid Tyson looked at me. “That’s your career highlight?” he asked. “A double in the minors?”

“Hah,” said Vonn. “Look out for this one. He’s a giant killer.”

“You better work on your feet, son, if you want to make it anywhere,” said Errol.

“What’s the matter with my feet?”

“Everything.”

The kid swore and looked at Vonn.

“One two three four five,” said Vonn, moving his fingers like a shortstop moving to his right, collecting the ball turning, planting and throwing, all in rhythm.

We went on like this until Stubbs called softly across the field that it was time to play. He huddled for a moment with Vonn, who was the captain of our team.

“How you feeling?” Vonn asked me when he came back over to the dugout.

“Feeling fine,” I told him.

“Stubbs says he wants to see if you can still handle short. Says he’s got everything set up for you. You guys know each other or something?”

“I’m playing short,” said the kid Tyson.

“You,” said Vonn, “can play second.”

“Let this old fool play left. I can play short.”

“You don’t have the quick or the feet or the arm for short. I hate to break it to you, kid. Maybe we’ll get some double play balls and you can work on your footwork on the turn.”

“There’s nothing wrong with my feet.”

“You look like you’re wearing clown shoes out there.”

The kid swore and stalked off.

“He might actually stick at short if he can get himself to college,” said Vonn. “But he doesn’t need anyone telling him that now.”

“What did you mean Stubbs has everything set up for me?”

“He said to put you at short and he said wrangled up a special pitcher for you to play against. Old friend of yours.”

I looked over at the mound. There was Ricardo Suarez, taking his warmup pitches. He had grown a beard and let his hair get long, even though he was balding. As a young man he’d always had a haughty demeanor, aloof, like the son of some South American dictator; now that demeanor had fallen into a kind of feral and aging aggression. He was over there throwing as hard as he could, talking to himself intently; his eyes brimmed with a bright dead luster. I looked across the diamond and there was Stubbs, small and scrubby, looking back at me from the first base bag.

“Stubbs is playing?” I asked. “How the hell old is he, anyway?”

“It’s his league,” said Vonn, studying me. “You two got some history, don’t you.”

“Yeah. I knew him when I was a high school kid.”

“Looks like he hasn’t gotten over it yet.”

“Are any of us?”

Vonn smiled. “He offer to get you back in the game? Tell you about all his contacts with the teams, and about how he can snap his fingers and get you a job?”

I looked at Vonn and he laughed.

“And then you show up and he’s got you at shortstop and he’s got old Ricky Suarez for you to try to hit. That’s all he has to offer. There ain’t no mythical job out there under the bright lights.”

I looked at the field, at Suarez and Stubbs and the broken old outfield fence and I felt a feeling that had not come into me in a long time. “He’s a cocky old son of a bitch, isn’t he,” I said.

“Nine innings,” Vonn agreed. “Nine beautiful innings before we have to go home.”

Baseball players do not forget. From a lifetime built around a single, repeated encounter, we are endowed with a memory that encompasses every encounter. The pitcher and the batter stand at either end of an endlessly repeating, minutely calibrated struggle: what will he throw next, and what did he throw last time, and what did he throw the first time I ever saw him, and on, and on, to infinity. In the duration of this moment, there is only action and reflex: grip the ball and throw it, read the pitch and either swing or don’t. But this still, perfect center is gnawed on and attacked and shrunk from and battled with by the mind. The damned mind. The baseball player with no mind, the pitcher with no thought and the hitter with no memory, would be perfect. There would always simply be the next pitch, the next pure execution. But this player does not exist, and in the attempt to find him we are doomed to remember each and every success and each and every failure. Ask us to tell you the first pitch we saw in any given season, and we will be able to. Ask us to recount the sequence of pitches that resulted in a looping double off of a particular adversary on a hot and oddly humid day in April of 1998 and we will do so. A fastball inside to move me off the plate, another because the first caught the corner, consecutive sliders down and away first to try to get me to chase and then to set me up, and finally a high fastball to put me away: but in this last instant I had no thought. I was pure and perfect and I saw the pitch and roped it.

The game began with Suarez plunking our leadoff man, the kid Tyson. It was not intentional, but the ump, an old guy who looked like he’d last called a competitive game in the 1950s, gave him a warning anyway. The next hitter was Vonn. Suarez talked himself into a frenzy, rubbed the ball a few times, and sent along one of his old fastballs, which explode out of his hands late and as if he has no idea where they’re going. The kid Tyson took off to steal second and got thrown out by a mile. There was a tepid cheer from the stands. Vonn glared at him as he trotted off the field.

“Sit down,” he told him. “You run like a dope.”

“All right there, Ricky,” called Stubbs from first, “let’s make some mincemeat out of these boys!”

Suarez gave him a look and then reared back and threw a madman curve. It landed in the dirt and Vonn took a big cut.

“Goddamn,” he yelled at Stubbs, “where the hell do you find these guys?”

“The dust bin!” cackled Stubbs. “The scrap heap! And I give them back all of this! Let’s have some old-timey baseball here, boys!”

There was some more jawing, and Suarez muttered obscenities to himself and then missed so high with his fastball that Errol, who was catching, had to jog over to the old wooden backstop for the ball.

“That’s right!” yelled Stubbs. “Here we go!”

And then Vonn hit a one-hopper to the fat guy at third who couldn’t move at all but had an arm like an express train, and the throw came in like it would knock old Stubbs over but he took it like he was a kid, reaching forward dramatically and with his foot stretched back to the bag even though Vonn had slowed almost to a stop once he saw the ball in the big guy’s glove. And then I was up.

The old box, unevenly lined, a cheap plastic plate stained with some kind of dark rot or fungus, the old tap of the bat on the plate and the cleats. The feeling of settling in to the moment.

“I’d watch yourself,” said Errol. “I don’t have any idea where these are going and neither does he.”

“Son of a bitch looks like that Che Guevara guy, doesn’t he,” said the umpire.

And Stubbs, down the first base line, watching and grinning and chomping his cigar, which had gone out. Remembering that day in the batting cage. All of those years gone by, I saw them now, Stubbs rolling around the country living off his glory years, his good cheer and his distant stories about the men who had played it like it ought to be played, me with my bitterness and my inability to either leave the game behind or admit that I had not left it behind, and what was he after now? Some kind of revenge? Some kind of contest? Some kind of proof of age and talent? He was watching me, grinning and cackling. He was an old earnest man who had never worried about loving the game too much or not enough. The first pitch came in, a show-me fastball, and I cranked it down the line at him. It went foul. Stubbs spit out his cigar. His eyes narrowed. He slapped his fist into his glove and got into his crouch, flabby belly and his uniform sagging off his old man shoulders and a few strands of wild white hair.

“Jesus Christ, Professor,” said Errol, “you haven’t changed at all, have you.”

“Hah ha!” yelled Vonn from the dugout. “Let’s see if you can put one in the bleachers!”

On the mound, Suarez was touching the ball gently and conversing with the overcast sky. He let his attention drift back to earth, bloodshot eyes and a lank, fallen face, and stared me down for a long moment before he started feeding me all the old, nasty stuff. Pitches that bent like umbrella handles, pitches that disappeared from in front of your bat like magic tricks, pitches that you could swear were coming in at a million miles an hour and realized too late were floating in slow and gentle. And all of it came flooding back in around me. The years of it, the pain and the joy, afternoon games in the heat and night games in the cold and windy games in deserted stadiums where no one cared but the players, those long-off days on the plains with the wheat starting just behind the outfield fence and Stubbs’s speech about the spiritual. Have you ever reached out and asked that ball to fly for you? Have you ever considered that this moment is the most spiritual, the most refined, you will ever experience? And the old feeling of failure was back too, the old fear, the feeling of Stubbs and Suarez and all the rest of them who didn’t love it enough but were not somehow punished for that, and for a moment I wanted to yell: What is it you want? Isn’t it enough to just love the feeling of the bat and the ball? Why isn’t that enough? as if I were a kid again. This was my life, the joy and wreckage of it smothering me.

But if there is something to be said in the end, it is this: the game will always give you just enough to keep you coming back. It will never let you go. Because Suarez threw something ridiculous and I reached out for the ball, slipping down and away towards the earth, and I kissed it with the bat and asked it to fly over the head of the shortstop and it did.

Stubbs was waiting for me at first with a look of disgust on his face. He did not deserve this. He was old and should have been granted his revenge, should have been allowed to see me embarrass myself.

“It’s all about the spiritual, Stubbs,” I said.

He ignored me and called out to Suarez, “Come on now there Ricky, all we need is one more out, and we can clear this windbag off the plates!”

We played. Threw balls to one another and dove in the dirt, pushed our aging bodies to see what of the old lost magic they still had in them. When Stubbs came to bat, our pitcher didn’t take it easy on him, exactly, but he didn’t give him any of the really hard two-seamers he was throwing either, and Stubbs cracked a long high shot to the warning track in left, a beautiful ball that would have been in the bleachers of a lot of parks. Our pitcher shook his head and said “Nice hands, old man,” as Stubbs trotted happily back to the dugout. Even the kid Tyson was impressed. “Old father time there sure can hit the hell out of the ball, huh,” he called out to me. “Guy’s got to be one hundred and thirty-seven years old.” I grinned at him, and the next batter hit a hard shot up the middle and it was only after the play that it came to me that there had been no thought, simply the ball, hard and small and fast, taking a single skip in the dirt and me knowing that there was no chance, that it was past me but taking my steps and my dive anyway in that place where there is not time or presence or even vision, there is only feeling, stretching, attempting; and the ball is not past after all, but firm and true in the glove because space has been conquered and the impossible made possible, and the rest is easy: not even needing to rise, I flip the ball from my glove to the kid at the bag who makes his turn, nice and smooth, instinctual, and hammers the ball to first.

“Goddamn,” he said to me as we walked back to the dugout. “I got to admit that was real clean, man.”

“Your feet are fine when you get your balance right,” I told him. “Keep drilling the hell out of them, and don’t listen to these dum-dums.”

And when I came up again I watched Stubbs settle into his crouch, eager and believing. My wreck of a career did not matter to him. He still wanted the cocky kid who’d never listened to him, who had believed that the purity of talent was his and his alone, to be humbled. All he needed was for me to strike out, just once; and he knew the game would grant him this. But when I came up that second time Suarez left something over the plate and I slapped it between Stubbs and the second baseman for another base hit. I stepped onto the bag laughing.

“The diamond’s got a strange sense of humor sometimes,” he said philosophically.

“And I’m going to steal second, too,” I said.

I took off galloping on my old tiring legs, and Suarez’s pitch skittered away from Errol and I made it all the way to third.

Stubbs glared at me. “You’re going to pull that shit in a friendly old-timey game?” he called.

“I’m going home if old Suarez there can’t keep the ball in the bull’s-eye,” I told him.

“Bring it on,” called Errol. “We get a play at the plate and I’m still big enough to flatten you.”

“You’re right,” I heard the kid Tyson say to Vonn behind me in the dugout, “this Professor guy is real crazy about the game.”

And as each inning passed, Stubbs grew more and more frustrated. He could still hit, but most of his strength had left him. The ball still made its glorious sound coming off his bat, but it fell short now, soared more gently, landed softly in reluctantly raised gloves. The one ball he hit with authority was only a few feet to my right, and I caught it easy and smooth.

“Whatever it is between you two,” Vonn asked me as we walked back to the dugout, “you going to give him a break?”

“You think he’d want me to?”

He smiled and shook his head.

By the next inning, Suarez had worn himself out, and Stubbs brought in a skinny kid with a hipster’s mustache and a sense of humor. But nothing mattered at that point. I pulled his second pitch to deep left center. The ball sang, rising and rising as if it would never fall. I was indomitable.

“Would you look at that,” said the pitcher, craning his neck.

“You asshole, Professor,” said Errol.

I jogged down the line. The ball would have cleared the bleachers entirely and been out of the stadium and lost in the brush, maybe even the river, if not for the last and highest metal railing. It struck that railing and bounced straight up in the air and came down among the splintered wood benches. The old guy manning the scoreboard climbed up out of his chair and started over to it. At first base, Stubbs was standing with downcast eyes. He stood like a boy whose team, on the other side of the continent and relayed over an old scratchy radio set, has just lost the World Series.

And to this day I do not know if I took a bad step on the bag or if Stubbs tripped me. I’m not sure anyone in the stadium saw it, either, because there is something in a long home run that you cannot look away from, a kind of majesty or impossibility. I felt the pain in my knee, though, before I hit the dirt, and twisted so I would not land on it. I looked over and saw the ball bouncing in the grandstands, and then I looked up at Stubbs leaning over me with the overcast sky behind him, and his face was a mask of frustration and fear. Dreadful enough that it shocked me.

“You okay?” I asked him, climbing painfully to my feet.

“You,” he said, “how old are you?”

“Forty-two.”

“You still got your whole goddamn life in front of you. The whole of it. I never could understand someone like you. Arms and legs made of gold and a head like a soft peach. You were so busy doing everything except just working with your talent that you wasted all of it you were given. Goddamnit it. Makes me so mad I could spit. And you still got so much goddamn time left, too.”

“Did you really just trip me?” I asked him.

He waved his hand at me. “Keep doing your little trot,” he said.

“Stubbs, I never made it. I never played a game in the bigs. Doesn’t that make you feel better at all?”

He thought about this for a while. “I ever tell you about the double I hit off of Koufax?” he asked.

I swore and turned to limp back across the diamond to the dugout.

“You want a hand there, Professor?” called Errol.

“I think we got a wheelchair here in the dugout,” called the kid Tyson.

“What’s the matter, you too good to touch ’em all?” called Vonn.

And when I came up for the final time, my knee was swollen up and Vonn was standing on second, and the game was more or less tied, because the old guy sitting atop the scoreboard had fallen asleep and forgotten to tally some of the runs. The sky was growing dark and the wives and children in the uncollapsed section of stands were on their feet. Down the line at first, Stubbs was in his crouch, slapping his mitt and speaking openly of my downfall.

“Give it up, you idiot,” I told him. “It’s not going to happen today.”

“Baseball,” he called out, “is a metaphor for hope. And I hope you strike out so bad they feel the breeze in Omaha.”

“Stubbs,” I told him, “I’m not going to hit it into the stands, because then the game would be over too quick. I’m going to knock one into the gap, so you have to watch slow-ass Vonn there crawl all the way around the bases.”

“Bring it on,” he said gleefully, “bring it on.”

And I could not help grinning at him, and the pitcher, an old guy from somewhere in the South who was throwing a knuckleball that danced around like marionette on a string, went into his lawn chair windup, and I settled into myself and waited for it, all hands and hips and nothingness, feeling the old deep groove of something that’s not pleasure because it is so much more than that, is something akin to freedom itself; and I swung the bat easy and pure and true, because, after all, it’s only the mind that’s the enemy.