“Howl” in Italian

6295

“Howl” was first translated into Italian by Fernanda Pivano, who at her funeral in 2009 was called “Signora America, signora libertà, signorina anarchia.” She became famous over the course of her life partly for translating Hemingway (with whom — as with Allen — she became a good friend), Fitzgerald, Faulkner, Kerouac, Burroughs, David Foster Wallace, and more. As one online commenter put it, “We grew up literally drinking her translations, before even trying to understand the nimble English jargon used by Allen, Jack and the others.”

But that is not method. That is the “who,” not the “how,” and certainly not the “Howl.” Pivano’s correspondence with Allen Ginsberg in relation to the poem’s translation is instructive. In their letters, Ginsburg answers Pivano’s questions about “Kaddish” and other poems, describing his mother’s “paranoiac complains … used as surreal fragments”; defining cultural references (“Woody Woodpecker is an allied cartoon character, hero of a series of cartoon disasters in technicolor”); explaining how “the LSD poem” was “written at Stanford’s Mental Health Experimental Lab and I’d asked the doctor to bring me various things to look at while under state of drug — Gertrude Stein on phonograph, some Wagner records.”

This is all part of the inquiry that French poet and translator Yves Bonnefoy identified as essential to capturing the spirit or essence of a work in translation: You don’t want your car to take you to the supermarket and back; you want it to sail from the woods to a farm to a city to a beach clogged with kites and back again. So it is with language.

“Howl,” of course, begins:

I saw the best minds of my generation destroyed by madness,

starving
hysterical naked,
dragging themselves through the negro streets at dawn looking
for an angry
fix,
angelheaded hipsters burning for the ancient heavenly
connection to the

starry dynamo in the machinery of night

“Urlo,” the title of “Howl” in Pivano’s Italian collection Jukebox All’Idrogeno (and it seems to be out of print, too), is a scream or a shout that seems almost thrown and begins:
Ho visto le migliori menti della mia generazione

distrutte dalla pazzia, affamate nude isteriche,

trascinarsi per strade dei negri all’alba in cerca di droga rabbiosa,
hipsters dal capo d’angelo ardenti per l’antico contatto celeste con la dinamo stellata nel macchinario della notte

A rough translation back into English would read:

I saw the best minds of my generation

destroyed by madness, starving naked hysterical,
dragging themselves at morning through the negro streets angrily looking for a fix,
hipsters from the head of an angel burning for the ancient paradisical contact with the starry dynamo in the machinery of night.

There are details here worth pointing out: the first is “pazzia,” as in “madness,” though it also means “a mad scene.” Then there is the question as to why “starving hysterical naked” become “starving naked hysterical”; does there need to be greater rhythmic emphasis placed on hysteria when the poem is called “Urlo?” There is “looking for an angry fix” approximated as “rabbiosa di droga,” being so hooked on drugs that you’re rabid for them. There is “dal capo d’angelo” or “from the head of an angel,” and one wonders if a silent, implied verb would be appropriate here, i.e., “Plucked from the head of an angel?” “Who emerge from the head of an angel?”

It should also be said that it’s nice to see “stellata” and “notte” play off each other so, even if notte doesn’t constitute the entirety of the line.

While writing this, I’ve stumbled across phrases like “hipster aureolati” or “hipsters dal corpo d’angelo” (from the body of an angel) while wondering why a phrase like “hipster con la testa di un angelo” or “hipster celeste” is somehow comparatively better or insufficient.

As a reader and a writer, my immediate impression is to say, “Yes! Yes!” to some of these phrases, especially with “hipster aureolati,” which I love, but I double-checked with Agnese Peretto, who did very well on the Italian literary-reality show Masterpiece — which I wrote briefly about here — and she told me that “Aureolati è una parola troppo difficile per un italiano normale” — that is to say, that ‘aureolati’ is a difficult word for the average Italian, and that it would be “meglio” to go with “con la testa di un angelo.”

Sometimes the language slows Ginsburg’s rollicking verse down (think of the changing nature of ‘santo’ with lines like “Tutto è santo! tutti sono santi! dappertutto è santo! tutti i giorni sono nell’eternità! Ognuno è un angelo!”), but sometimes Italian and “Howl” is a wonderful fit wonderfully done, especially when you read lines like, “Santa la soprannaturale ultrabrillante intelligente gentilezza dell’animo!” (Holy the supernatural ultra bright intelligent kindness of the soul!)

Or — in other words — not only is Ginsberg with us in Rockland, but he’s with us in Rome, Tuscany, Firenze, Milan, Naples, Sicily, Palmero, Bologna, Florence, Venice, and one or two other places as well.

INTERVIEW: Lauren Wallach, author of “A Higher Purpose,” now on Recommended Reading

by Maru Pabón

In this week’s Recommended Reading, “A Higher Purpose,” author Lauren Wallach draws from her experiences growing up in Brooklyn, a belief in lived symbolism, and strong female characters from Fellini films. The result is a strikingly intimate story, which I had the chance to discuss with her via e-mail.

Maru Pabón: In “A Higher Purpose,” the unnamed narrator seems to be fixated on occurrences of doubling in her own life: the peephole mirror, her relationships with Pablo and Paul, the co-lab stories. Could you talk about this recurring motif of pairs or doubles?

Lauren Wallach: After thinking about this question for a few days, I mentioned to a friend that I have been “doubling” and what to make of that, how to explain it. He responded, “like fractal geometry.” I didn’t know anything about fractal geometry, so I watched a TED talk, which provided a very interesting cauliflower analogy: when you break off a piece of cauliflower you don’t get a piece of cauliflower, you have a little cauliflower. The fractal shape is rooted in something called “self-similarity” in which the shape is made of smaller copies of itself. The copies are similar to the whole: same shape but different size. Fractals appear in nature, in art, in music, and maybe in this story!

That fractal geometry explanation is there to say that the doubling occurred for me in life–who knows why–and I observed it. Coincidences and parts of life that naturally “double” are a great fascination to me. And so is the continuous forgetting and understanding that nothing is as it seems. For example, the idea of looking through a peephole only to see oneself; this is not logical, it’s some sort of mistake, and this is something that appears as a symbol from life. The idea of reflecting, doubling, without explanation. I believe that symbolism can exist in lived life just as it might in art or literature.

One of my new favorite children’s books is by a Zen Buddhist, and it’s called “Is Nothing Something?”

MP: Your writing style also makes use of this doubling by repeating words and phrases. What might the repetition signify?

LW: I do repeat words and phrases a lot. It’s not a conscious decision. When I edit, a lot of repetition gets cut out. But some things that are repeated need to remain, like anything else that feels necessary for the story. So I am not sure why. But if I were to psychoanalyze why, I could say that perhaps it’s out of an unconscious need to ritualize certain moments or ideas, sort of like a an incantation, as if the more something is reiterated, the truer it will become. Or, our memories and minds are constantly repeating words, phrases, faces. It could be a natural progression putting what’s in a mind into words on a page.

Hitchcock's_cameo_appearances._Rear_Window

MP: The story’s narrator often expresses a desire for someone to observe her or notice her. Do you feel there’s something about New York that brings out that desire to connect?

LW: I don’t think New York brings out a desire to connect more than any other place. I do think New York and certain other cities are unique in how one may be seen. It is very easy to be completely anonymous here. It’s also very easy to be seen in a place that is meant to be private. Sometimes, because of apartment/window proximity, it is very easy to see into someone’s home. You can see another person when they are completely alone, and they can see you when you are completely alone.

I think the narrator, on a certain level, has a sense of these differences. I think she would rather be seen through the messed up peephole in her room than have people stare at her in the restaurant on Halloween night.

MP: How did growing up in Brooklyn influence your writing?

LW: I’m not completely sure. I can think of one very specific story from my childhood in Brooklyn, involving a strange man that me and my friends called “The Comer”- a terrible name and not what it sounds like. He became a mythic figure for us. I was waiting for my friend one day on the stoop and no one was around and this man appeared and motioned with his finger for me to come towards him. Nothing happened though. We just stood like that for a little while, I pretended not to see him, even though we were just a few feet apart, and then eventually he wandered off. But he would always reappear. And my friends and I knew to look out for him. His presence evoked a lot of fear in me. When we’d see him we’d run away or if he was close or observe from a distance. Did Brooklyn cause me to become obsessed with writing about creepy, odd interactions? Maybe.

I do think topics that fascinate us are often themes that begin in our childhood. But as a child, my world was mostly within a few blocks radius. So more accurately I would say the block I lived on had an influence on my writing because of my experiences on that block.

MP: Why did you decide to reference in such detail the character of Cabiria from Nights of Cabiria?

giulietta_masina_stars_in_i_nights_of_cabiria_i__1_4db6801d36

LW: I was Cabiria for Halloween, and gave this moment to my narrator. Usually for Halloween I pick characters that I have an interest in and respect for. For Cabiria I have great love and respect. And I feel that is honored in writing about her and dressing as her. And again with the doubling, I had the outfit already, before I conceived of “becoming” her.

MP: Is that your favorite Fellini film? If so, when did you first watch it? Why is it important to you?

LW: It’s a close tie with La Strada. I love them both. I first watched Nights of Cabiria just about a year ago even though I had seen Fellini’s films years before. There are so many intricate reasons why this film is important to me and why I like it. One thing is I love contrasts in characters. Cabiria is a prostitute. And yet she longs for love. She also is more honest, loving, full hearted than anyone else in that movie. Bad things happen to her. Especially at the end. But she endures. She has this strange smile on her face and she is crying a little. Two scenes that stand out in my mind is 1. When she is hypnotized on stage at a magician’s performance and 2. When she is with a rich actor client and they go on the dance floor and she has a moment where she completely ignores him and does her own solo dance out of nowhere. She is always both honest and funny, completely herself. Cabiria’s pain feels meaningful. It’s what she endures for being able to be who she is, which is actually a gift.

MP: You teach a creative writing workshop for teenagers. Can you talk a bit about what that’s like? What is a piece of advice or caution that you often give to your students?

LW: The creative writing workshop for teenagers is a free workshop that I just began this summer at BookCourt. We meet once a week, and we might continue on into the school year. (They are wonderful writers.) The theme of the class this summer was “looking closely.” We’re exploring how the details from our memories and those around us can represent and reveal ourselves as writers. How the small details that you choose to give can allow the reader into the narrator’s mind. In our class we’ve already experienced quite a few moments where seemingly mundane details have emerged into something a bit more magical. There was one very hot day when only one of my students came to class. We both had never brought any food or drink of any sort to class, but on this day, we both had brought ginger ale for the other to drink. This was a powerful moment for both of us. And I think it was a great example. It’s being aware, being in tune. Once your mind is there anything can happen (on the page).

MP: What are you currently excited to be working on?

LW: I have been working on a collection of interconnected stories or linked passages that will take the form of a novella. I’m also beginning to embark on a variation of a horror story. The sort that stops short of the actual “horror.” (And yes it will involve lots of looking into windows…)

New Murakami Means a New Round of Murakami Bingo

This week saw the release of a new Haruki Murakami novel titled Colorless Tsukuru Tazaki and His Years of Pilgrimage. The novel is about “the remarkable story of Tsukuru Tazaki, a young man haunted by a great loss; of dreams and nightmares that have unintended consequences for the world around us; and of a journey into the past that is necessary to mend the present. It is a story of love, friendship, and heartbreak for the ages.”

The novel sounds a bit like a collection of Murakami cliches, which means it’s time to bust out your Murakami Bingo board (created by Grant Snider and available to purchase in his poster shop) and mark off as you read.

Murakami bingo comic

VIDEO: Author Lee Child Weighs in on Amazon

Author Lee Child (whose work was most famously adapted into the Tom Cruise film Jack Reacher) spoke out on the BCC about Amazon’s tactics. You can watch the video clip above.

The Book Seller reports that some self-published authors attacked Child for his comments with the blogger at The Passive Voice saying it was “interesting how little many of these big-selling trad pub authors understand about the book business.” Lee Child responded in the comments:

I get that it feels all smug and gnostic to say that authors like me understand little about the publishing business, but — with no due respect at all — it’s absurd. I have navigated through it for twenty years, in 99 global markets, learned from both success and failure, and I’m still vertical and still in print. By definition I was a debut, and then a midlister, and finally a bestseller. I’ve seen it all, and you’ve seen none of it. Again, with no respect at all, you’re full of it.

Excusing the Sins of the Father

What justifies parental neglect — or even abandonment — of a child? Severe mental illness? Desperate circumstances of poverty or war? Most would make allowances in these cases, though even in such horrific environments many parents have loved and cared for their children.

What about a child hurt or abandoned in pursuit of literary achievement?

In the July 22 2013 issue of The New Yorker, critic James Wood reviewed recent books by the now-adult children of Saul Bellow, John Cheever, William Styron, and Bernard Malamud, posing the question, “Can a man or a woman fulfill a sacred devotion to thought, or music, or art, or literature, while fulfilling a proper devotion to spouse or children?” Wood’s answer is, amazingly, a categorical no.

“How, really,” Wood asks, “could the drama of paternity have competed with the drama of creativity?”

While the full callousness of that sentence sinks in, let’s consider the wider context. This is, after all, a long-standing challenge for those devoted to art, philosophy, or similar fields, the mastery of which clearly requires tremendous amounts of time and energy. For centuries a traditional solution has “worked,” more or less: Some underling handles domestic tasks, including the care of children. The “underlings” in question have pretty much always been either servants or wives, with an obvious societal conflation of the two. This was of course still true in the period Wood focuses on, which relegated wives to mere appendages in service to the “important” work of their artist-husbands. And of course many women-artists of the 50’s and 60’s were vilified if they even questioned commitment to parenting. This was, in part, what artists like Sylvia Plath struggled against, as seen in her plaint as a nineteen-year-old: “I am afraid of getting married. Spare me from cooking three meals a day — spare me from the relentless cage of routine and rote. I want to be free” — or in the image of her maternal self as “…cow-heavy and floral/In my Victorian nightgown…”

But we can’t accuse Wood of sexism, as the inclusion of women in the “sacred devotion” quote above makes clear. He seems, however, not to have thought this through, since his very “feminism” could lead, for instance, to writer/writer households in which both muse-bespelled parents neglect, ignore, or otherwise damage their offspring. (I don’t mean that feminism has led to neglect of children; I’ll let the reactionaries harp on that one, while most parents in the real world continue to do their best with the actual conditions of contemporary life). And note that Wood’s support of female equality is based, of course, on the value of fairness to an oppressed group — even while he’s happy enough to write off another even more vulnerable group. This alerts us to the reality that his overall argument is, to a large degree, simply dismissive of children. I can’t help thinking of the Kenyan proverb that when elephants fight, it’s the grass that suffers.

“How, really, could the drama of paternity have competed with the drama of creativity?” My God — how could it not? Human beings are continually wounded, even destroyed, by wretched parenting; if you don’t see drama in that, you’re not looking very hard. And I can’t accept “justifications” based on a perceived superiority of art over living, breathing children, with their aching need for committed parents. (Wood, by the way, is hardly alone in his view of artist-fathers; writer Allan Massie begins a 2012 piece with “Writers often make poor fathers…,” as if this sweeping (and sexist) generalization is merely a fact we must resign ourselves to).

In fact, a true vision of the overwhelming importance of parenting is one of the crucial ideas that should guide a parent. A mother or father is the sun in the sky of childhood; that relationship shapes the child in myriad ways, especially in the parental love that allows a child to grow in acceptance of self. Holding up “the holy centrality of writing” over the potential cost to the child works blatantly against this. At one point Wood even states that “…their fathers had literary existences that were religiously absorbing, selfishly independent” — apparently unaware of the irony of posing “religious” and “selfish” as equivalents, since most religions, of course, value altruism, particularly when applied to those who are most vulnerable. Like, say, children.

And since Wood evokes the sacred, the religious element here is worth further examination. A strange reaction to Wood’s essay, on a Christian site called Mockingbird.com, begins with a relevant anecdote: Faulkner’s supposed response, when his daughter asked him to give up drinking, that “Nobody remembers Shakespeare’s children.” But the unidentified writer goes on to make this astonishing (if only half-coherent) statement:

“God’s grace frees the writer/artist from having to justify himself enough for him to put down his pen/paintbrush and spend time loving his family. Likewise, God’s forgiveness allows the neglected children of narcissistic workaholics to accept their parents as human beings.

I include this bizarre argument as an example of just how awful justifications based on the “sacred” can be. As a spiritual person myself, I believe that spirituality should involve thinking as well as the more mysterious workings of faith. Appealing to the sacred can easily become, after all, a convenient way to fuzz things over with some kind of ethereal glow. In any case, when sacred reality is used to justify direct injury to human beings, we don’t have spirituality; such an argument is, by definition, anti-religious.

Consider another point. Does Wood’s justification of harmful parenting apply to any committed artists, thinkers, etc., or only to those whose work ends up being great? He never really says. The overwhelming majority, of course, fall far short of greatness, no matter how hard they try. So by Wood’s reasoning we’d find ourselves defending such damage to children on the basis of mildly successful or even indifferent work. Most of us, I think, would recoil from that, especially if we witnessed this kind of family anguish up close. But the alternative doesn’t make sense either. If Wood means that only great artists can be excused for bad parenting, then we’re excusing them exclusively on the basis of talent, which is to say, on the luck of the draw. It’s equivalent to asserting, for example, that morality doesn’t apply to good-looking people.

I don’t mean to suggest that the parent-artist life is easy. I’m a creative writer myself, obsessed with my work, and I absolutely consider art a sacred pursuit. Since I’m also the father of three, that belief puts me through nine kinds of hell on a regular basis. But I also live in a world where children — God knows how many — are hurt, some of them terribly, on an equally regular basis. Yes, the artist’s work-life balance is hugely challenging. But when Wood concludes that “[p]erhaps the storyteller is especially ill suited for happy family life,” what I hear is an attempt to take artist-parents off the hook for the damage some inflict.

To me, though, the most harrowing part of the piece is Wood’s harshness toward Greg Bellow, son of novelist Saul, whose Saul Bellow’s Heart is, in Wood’s words, “a fake narrative of psychic closure.” (And Wood doesn’t even consider that the acceptance expressed by the other writers’ children may partly be an matter of making a virtue of a necessity).

When Greg was eight, his father announced he was divorcing Greg’s mother; anyone who knows children recognizes that this is a particularly vulnerable age for such a burden. Greg writes of the “sadness born of losing the parent who understood me best.” And even though he was supposed to see his father on a limited but regular basis, Saul was often lax about showing up, nor did he take any interest in Greg’s own children. Wood can’t believe that Greg “still displays an unconscious hostility toward his father’s writing” — but that’s hardly a surprising reaction on Greg’s part. Wood even brings up an early Bellow short story about a young father who “imagines the ‘curse’ of having a “dull son’ who disappoints him.” This is pouring salt into a wound. I don’t believe Wood meant it to hurt Greg Bellow. But then we often hurt each other based on elaborate justifications. And Wood’s emphasis on the huge difficulties writers face — an astute point which more people need to understand — illogically conflates the struggles of that life with some kind of pass when it comes to parental responsibility.

Equally surprising, Wood never even mentions one blazingly simple solution to the whole problem: If your sacred obsession requires so much of you — don’t have kids.

Art is a kind of Rilkean angel that visits the world, demanding immense, life-devouring devotion of those who serve it. But love and parental nurturance are sacred forces too, and in their absence innocent children are hurt, may well wither, grow bitter — or worse — and so add to all the great wrong and suffering in the world.

So what’s a writer to do? Find a way to make it work. Of course this double commitment will lead to conflicts and frustrations. But you can work harder, you can get creative with scheduling, you can fortify your heart with the good you’re working in your own family. I don’t think any genuine artist will ever be fully satisfied with the arrangement. But it’s long past time to reject justifications for neglect or abandonment. And it’s time to generally expect more of men, writers and otherwise.

The good news is that many male writers now exemplify the domestically-committed father, from Michael Chabon to Jason McBride to Dan Barden to Brian Gresko (with his female co-founder M.M. De Voe ) at PenParentis.org. Wood, on the other hand, despite admitting the relevant historical differences, seems to be stuck in the ‘50’s, a “golden age” built on the backs of children and wives, one dramatically out of step with changing gender roles today (which Adam Gopnik, with admirable civility and eloquence, pointed out during his podcast discussion with Wood). I can’t help thinking of V. S. Naipaul’s 2011 crackpot declaration that women writers are inferior because of their “sentimentality…[their] narrow view of the world.”

So is there something going on beneath the surface here? In his discussion with Gopnik, Wood makes what I consider a telling admission. As the conversation finishes, Gopnik, laughing, brings up the possibility of Wood’s and his own children writing about the two of them as fathers, saying that “hopefully” those portraits will be more positive. Wood replies, “My fear is almost the other way round, which is that I think — I hope — my children will write nice books about me — but I fear the cost will have been that we didn’t write good enough books.” Wood himself, we gather, is a loving father; after all, it’s a lot easier to justify shooting someone than to actually pull the trigger. But he seems almost to regret his good parenting because it dimmed his literary luster.

Gopnik, however, with a wonderful blend of urbanity and wisdom, replies, “Well, that’s baked into the cake.” Whether he means that it’s a matter of genetically-based ability or, more generally, that “some things just aren’t meant to be,” he’s suggested another glaring error in Wood’s argument: That artistic or intellectual greatness is, ultimately, a mysterious thing, and we can’t make our way to it through formulae, including the “selfish obsession” strategy Wood so confidently upholds.

Bellows, Cheever, Styron, Malamud: Those male artists’ “storm of assertion cleared a brutal path,” Wood writes, honest here, at least, about the brutality involved. “The history of that private destruction is briefly alluring, sometimes appalling,” he continues. “In two or three generations, that story will have faded from memory, outlived by what it enabled.”

In other words, there’s nothing wrong with sacrificing your child on the altar of art. No angel is coming to stay this Abraham’s hand. And Isaac’s young heart will be offered up. But that destruction will soon be forgotten, which makes it all right.

A Higher Purpose

by Lauren Wallach, original fiction recommended by Electric Literature

If anyone asks me how many times I have moved in the last year, I am embarrassed. Five times. I don’t know why I keep moving, but there is always a concrete reason on the outside. Not everything needs an explanation. There might be inside reasons. But the outside reasons are all very reasonable.

I recently moved into a room with my cat, Theodore Valentine, in an apartment where another cat lives. The room has two doors; one big heavy one that leads outside to the main hallway, which I never use, and one flimsy wooden door that leads to the kitchen and the rest of the apartment. It’s a nice size and I try to pretend that the rest of the apartment isn’t there, that this is all there is, just my room and my cat. But then the other cat scrapes at the door. I get little notes on the kitchen counter.

Two windows face a parking lot — it’s a room with lots of sky and sun. I don’t have any curtains yet. The windows lead into the closet door mirrors, so it’s like a double sky and the room feels much bigger. There is a toilet attached to the room. Not a full bathroom, just this one toilet. The door has a peephole and a heavy metal latch that slides side to side. When I moved in I was told the peephole had a double-sided mirror in, so inside sees out, but outside sees itself.

One time I tried to look into the hallway but all I could see was a miniature representation of the apartment and my face. Had they installed the peephole incorrectly? I went into the hallway and peered into the peephole. At first it was the same experience as from the inside, my own reflection, a mirror. But as I looked further in I could see past my eye, into the apartment, into my room. I saw the toilet. Where I pee every morning and every night, where I go to do the things I don’t want anyone to see me doing, in front of the windows that have no curtains.

I described my room to Pablo in a story we wrote together, a “Co-lab” he called it. This was Pablo’s proposal to me after we hadn’t talked in almost a year: a writing collaboration. We were each to write two very short stories, and then put these four stories together, separately, but also as one. This was my first story to Pablo.

I liked describing my room to Pablo in our story because I began to feel like he knew my room. It made me feel less alone. As if I had a visitor already.

Around this time, soon after I moved in, a smell began. It came from the canal. Slowly everything became pumpkins. The smell was both the canal, a cool salty garbage wetness, and pumpkins. After my shower I would put on the pumpkin body butter. On my arms. My legs. By October there were pumpkins everywhere. We had an event at the bookstore, a book about pumpkins. The author left his bag of small pumpkins, which he said he’d be back to pick up. But he never came back. We spread out the pumpkins all over the store. One morning I found one small pumpkin that had been chewed and gnawed away. All the rumors about the rat were true. My coworkers had seen the rat, but I never had. I had only seen evidence: rat shit. But still, it wasn’t until the eating of the pumpkin that it became a reality to me. Perhaps I had thought, maybe it’s not shit. (I could deny shit that was very small, but I could not deny a chewed-up pumpkin.)

I had the most beautiful sky from my new room. Every room could be said to be “new” at some point, but I had only been here for a month and a half. It was still new. I hoped to not move for a long time. I enjoyed this room. The parking lot below. The hum of the massive water tank on top of an adjacent roof. I was on the top floor. I saw all the most beautiful cloud formations. The morning sunrise. Theodore Valentine and I watched it together. When it got dark I had one red curtain to cover one window. I decided that my room would no longer be new once I had a real visitor over. Then I could move.

I called it the “Co-lab” too, now. “I have an idea for the next Co-lab,” I wrote to him. “Co-lab!” Pablo exclaimed. We always got excited about the Co-lab. I told him we will take the pictures we’ve been sending to each other on our phones, and make a small book of them. We will write small stories next to each picture. Pablo said, “That’s a wonderful idea.” Though we continue to send each other photographs, we do not start any new stories.

The theme of the original Co-lab was “control.” Pablo suggested it. I added the idea of summer, as we were just leaving it behind. Summer control. Or control in the summer. My mind was blank. What control did I have? I grew cold, thinking summer was coming to an end. My black leggings were lost in the last move. I had nothing to wear. There was cat vomit on my blankets. I did not know whether it was from Theodore Valentine, or the roommates’ fat cat. I lived with a couple. (Theodore Valentine rarely threw up, so I had my suspicions.) I slept practically naked with a thin floral sheet. Soft cotton that is like silk, very expensive, but mine was just old. The oldest cotton sheets. White. Yellow flowers. So peaceful.

This apartment was in an area of Brooklyn that wasn’t entirely its own neighborhood, but was in between two other neighborhoods. One was the neighborhood I grew up in, and the other one was my future neighborhood, and where the bookstore was. I explained this move to people as having a “black cloak” lifted from me. Perhaps the cloak had been draped over my shoulders.

Men were reappearing in my life. I saw Paul on Court Street and we began to talk again. Paul had disappeared from my life many months ago after the subway argument. An argument that became my second Co-lab story.

There was a man I was seeing who always used to think that we were arguing when I thought we were just having a conversation. Why are we arguing? he’d ask while I basked in the glow of having just made a point. When we actually did argue it was on the subway. Like the conversations though, it couldn’t go on. Not here, he’d say, you’re drunk. I slid over two seats, as our acquaintances across were signaling us to move closer, and turned to see where he was. He was staring at the empty seat between us. It had strange scars and marks. Engravings. I couldn’t decide if they were grotesque or interesting. We both stared at the seat. He wouldn’t sit in it. And so we rode this way, the seat between us, until I got off at 14th Street.

He never remembered that subway seat incident. There are many things he doesn’t remember. More and more each day. I feel it is my mission to be his memory. Because it’s one thing to be alone and it’s quite another to be the only one who knows and not be alone. I think. I’ve estimated that he doesn’t remember about half the things that were said or that happened.

We were debating subjective vs. objective truth. Très classic. Because of his objection to objectivity, it didn’t matter that he didn’t remember. He believes in interpretations of moments and doesn’t trust my way of thinking.

His name was Paul, which I wouldn’t have mentioned, except it seems relevant.

The same name but in a different language. I had added the line: Something about him reminded me of you. In the final version, Pablo did not include this line.

Pablo’s two stories involved a cowboy and his sister. They were well written and funny, but there were certain things I wanted to know. That I wanted him to reveal about himself. For example, I wanted to know what his room was like. I wanted to be inside of it the way he had been inside of mine. I wanted someone to remind him of me. I wanted to know who he was thinking of. Pablo put our stories together and sent them back to me with a title: Tight Grip: Four Summer Stories. I didn’t know how I felt about Tight Grip as a title. I told him, I don’t know how I feel about this title. In fact, I didn’t know how I felt about the story at all. What was it even about anymore, this strange collage? I told him I think it needs to be longer. I told him it’s not finished yet. I told him that a new title, the right title will appear to us if we continue. Pablo told me that he could only conceive in small parts. We would not make it longer; we would not continue. I still wondered about the title.

When I lived on Court Street, after I had moved out of my father’s apartment, I could see inside a movie theater from the windows. I lived here in the winter only, and I particularly liked to see into the movie theater on very cold or snowy nights. I could never see an actual theater, only the hallway. The concession stands — popcorn, escalator, cardboard human-sized displays, people, outlines, shadows, figures. When I moved into this new room, I could still see bodies in a building. I was reminded of the theater and that image because it was becoming colder now and because once again I was across from a big building. This one wasn’t a theater. This one was a textile studio, a “center” they called it. You couldn’t tell it was a textile center from the windows I saw into. But when you walked by on the street, you could see the entire place full of looms.

There were other large buildings near here, which were more interesting to me than the textile center. There were many cheap hotels in this neighborhood, and a casket warehouse. Everyday I bicycled to work I passed the casket warehouse, right before the small bridge, next to the canal. I passed it in the afternoons on my way home, too, but their doors were shut, and I never noticed it — there were no obvious signs. In the mornings the gates were open. I would look inside and see rows and rows of caskets. Sometimes a casket would be on the street with a man by its side, wheeling it from or to a truck. It was a strange feeling to see all those new caskets. I found it ironic that just over on the other side of the canal there was an event space that held weddings. In the mornings the casket warehouse was open and the event space closed, and at night the wedding parties were happening, and the casket warehouse was closed. I would love to have my own event over the canal one day. (Once, many years ago, I danced on a small boat docked in this canal. Another time, I stood in the rain over the canal and heard a song from a wedding party, Wise men say, only fools… Once I took a photograph of the snow falling over the canal and saw a cat walking on the ledge and saw two ducks in the water. In the photograph there are no animals, only the snow, the water, the darkness.) I wrote in my diary about how I wanted a man from the casket warehouse to befriend me. It almost became a story. I wrote that the man’s name was Pablo and he became my new friend and replaced Pablo. So that there was no more Pablo. Only my new friend at the casket warehouse who would take me in and let me explore and we would go out for a drink. Soon after I wrote this, a man at the casket warehouse began speaking to me. Nothing intense. It wasn’t until it was much colder when this began to happen. He was all bundled up in a winter jacket and a scarf. He had an incredible smile that seemed like out of a movie. “Good morning young lady!” he would say to me. Or he would say, “Be careful on that ice!” Sometimes he would call out to me after I had already reached the bridge, “You have a good day now, young lady!” “Bye!” I would call back, waving. And he would wave from his distance. I enjoyed this interaction. He made me happy.

With time, the new apartment was not very good for me. The fat cat was always trying to get into my room. When I wouldn’t let it in it would scrape at my door. I found Theodore once with blood on his little white fur face hiding under the bed. After that I always kept my door shut. The cat would continue to scrape. This was a big, slow, fat cat. I liked this cat at first, but soon I did not like this cat. I realized in time it was not the cat I actually disliked, but the roommates, who left me strange notes insinuating that I was the reason the cats were not friends. “The cats have to become friends ASAP,” one note read soon after I moved in. It was an aggressive note. I knew I couldn’t stay there for very long.

I have a small porcelain clown with a cloth body, dressed in a silk green jester’s outfit. My brother gave me this clown a few years ago. He said it reminded him of me. I connect to clowns. Not big scary clowns. Subtle, small clowns. Like Gesolmina from Fellini’s La Strada. When I walk across the floor of my room the little bells on the clowns hat shake and chime, ring. For the longest time I didn’t know what the small ringing sound was. I was both happy and sad to find it was the clown in the end. Happy that I had gotten to the bottom of the mystery. Sad because, it was only the little clown.

This year Pablo wasn’t going to be anything for Halloween. He had recently moved back to Mexico City. He said he wouldn’t be going to any parties. He had been invited to a party in Brooklyn, which he could not attend (because he was in Mexico). A magazine’s birthday party. He asked me to go for him, and I went. Three times he asked if I was going. By the third, I felt it wasn’t so much a question, but a request. “So are you going to this party or not?” “Yes,” I said, “I will go.” We were talking in Gchat. He sent over a smiley face with sunglasses, which I took as a big deal. I had never seen Pablo send a smiley face of any sort before. I felt good to be going to the party for Pablo. The party was just another “literary party,” and I wouldn’t know anybody. But now that Pablo had asked me three times if I was going, and sent a smiley face with sunglasses, it was important. I love it when things begin to feel important. Especially when someone else is the one telling me it’s important. An importance I had not been aware of, floating around in the world.

I said, “Do you want me to go around and tell everyone how great you are?” He said, “I want you to wear a beard and tell everyone you’re me. AND tell them how great I am. AND get funding for my show.” “So you have a beard now?” “Yes,” he wrote, “Huge beard.”

There was a dance class I wanted to go to before the party; I knew I would be late. I wrote to Pablo, “Going to be late to the party, but ‘we’ will be there.” He said, “Tell the ladies of the magazine I say hello!” Pablo told me the show he created, a monologue, was about being lost and sad. This is also why he went back to Mexico. This is also why I have to be him tonight. Lost and sad. The ladies bothered me. “There won’t be men?” I asked. “There will be men…” and he said some other things, but I liked just this part. Maybe I would find someone tonight.

At the party I told people I’m Pablo. They looked at me with sly smiles and say, “What a cute Pablo.” I had a photograph taken of me with two paper chickens. Chickens were the theme. I wanted to send the photograph to Pablo, but I didn’t. I told him about the photograph. I sent him a photograph of the note I wrote on the big birthday card. It said: Pablo wishes he were here.

“Who will you be this year?” Pablo asked. It was almost Halloween. I told him I would be a variation of a Fellini character. He didn’t care that much for Fellini. He said he would give it another try. This reassured me. No matter how many times Pablo disappeared or was silent, he always had a way of reassuring me throughout time. In this instance, he said he would give Fellini another try. I was reassured.

On Halloween, I was not a variation of a character though. I was an actual character. I was Cabiria, from Nights of Cabiria. The movie is described like this: A waifish prostitute wanders the streets of Rome looking for true love but finds only heartbreak. Even though La Strada is my favorite movie, I decided I did not want to dress like a clown. I did not want to dress like Gesolmina, who is either wearing rags or a raggy clown outfit. I wanted to dress like Cabiria, and the truth is, I had the entire outfit already sitting in my closet. Just from life. I was only a little worried that I connected so thoroughly with these two characters who are both destitute and abused. Because they are also very strong and serve a higher purpose. They are connected to a higher order, to the under (or over) current. I know probably most people would not say they are strong characters because they get tricked by men. Their higher purpose is to expose something inside of a person. To be open. To break open. It can be found inside Gesolmina’s song that she plays on the trumpet. It’s the song that has no name. Nobody knows where it came from. It’s the song that reminds the Strong Man. Reminds him of her. Makes him remember. When he remembers her he inquires. When he inquires he learns she is dead. When he learns she is dead he can feel. He has let her in. Guilietta Masina has now become my favorite actress. With some research, I found out we were the same height, 5”2. She was married to Fellini, and this reassured me.

I am not a prostitute but one time I made money having men touch my feet. A foot fetish club. It was in the basement of a restaurant with hookahs that we could smoke for free. An experiment. I didn’t stay very long, and left after I had made the amount I had designated for myself. I found the experience disturbing. But I was glad I did it, as if I was always meant to carry around this sort of secret. It was disturbing to give someone pleasure and to feel none of that same sort of pleasure. But one time I sat next to a different sort of man who didn’t know what to do. I don’t think he had a real foot fetish. He put my legs in his lap and he touched my feet and we talked. I liked the feeling. To be touched.

I smiled to myself, inside, when Pablo told me he liked women’s shoes. He was upset when he found himself staring at the woman in front of him on line at the grocery store, admiring her shoes. I remembered when we met he admired my black Italian ballet flats.

“Do you believe in god the mother?” Two girls were standing in front of me on Court Street. I thought about it. “Yes,” I said. “Do you want to learn more?” they asked. “How would I learn more?” “Right here,” they said. “The Bible?” I asked. “In my bag,” she said. “Will you read me a quote?” I asked. “It will be two quotes,” the other said. “Two?” “Yes.” “Ok,” I said, “two.” They read me two quotes. The wife of a sheep. “Do you want to learn more?” They asked. I shook my head no. “Just remember,” one of them said, “this isn’t a coincidence that we stopped to tell you about god the mother. Everything has a reason.” I smiled as I walked away. Even though I didn’t believe I was meant to learn more from the Bible or from those girls, I liked what she said at the end.

Pablo sent me a shrine. This was the first photograph either of us sent each other. La Virgen de Guadalupe. The shrine is very colorful. Bright pink and many bright green plants including cacti. Guadalupe is on top of what looks like a small stone staircase that has water running down it, a small waterfall. A statue man bends on one knee to praise her. “Why did you send this to me?” I asked. “I don’t know,” Pablo said, “It’s a nice shrine.”

I spent two days preparing and shopping for my Halloween costume. They both were on days that I saw the therapist. One week, then the next. I had begun to see the therapist again. I can’t say my therapist because I did not feel like he was mine. I didn’t think he was the therapist for me. But because I knew the time and effort it would take to find another, and even then I might not connect to them either, I was temporarily still seeing this one. I had written him a letter several months back, explaining why I was ending our sessions. “It’s not your fault,” I wrote. “I think I need someone who is at least half a mystic.” In the last session he proposed that maybe he was more of a mystic than I thought. I despised him in that moment. I was continuously frustrated by him. But the more I was frustrated by him, the more I was able to connect to myself. I went in feeling doubtful and insecure about my decisions. He would say all the wrong things and ask all the wrong questions. I left so angry that I was able to believe in myself again. I was brought back to a deep place within myself, where not a single other person knows what is right or what is wrong. Not even psychology knows.

My father worked near where the therapist worked. We had a plan to meet for coffee before a session because I had left certain articles of clothing at his apartment, which I now needed. Two Thursdays in a row we did this. It felt like a permanent ritual, but it only lasted these two weeks. The first delivery was hats. These were my velvet hats. Many years ago I made hats. I used to sell them at the flea markets in Brooklyn, and at small boutiques. They came in black, purple, and crushed raspberry. Inside was lined with fleece, very warm. Sometimes I would attach a small antique pin to the side. I only needed one hat in particular, my favorite one, the one I used to wear, the black one with the gold pin. In the days proceeding our date to meet, my father kept telling me he could not find the black one. “I can only find a purple one and a wine-colored one,” he kept saying. “The black one has to be there!” I said. Each day, in the days proceeding, he would say, “Only purple and wine!” Finally I said, “Ok, bring whatever you can find.” “I’ll bring the purple and the wine,” he said.

I found him standing on a crowded street corner. 31st and Broadway. He was holding a bag with dark material peeping out from the top. When I reached him he handed me the bag. We stood still, face to face, while people rushed passed us on either side. A maze of people, we created a still center and did not move. I looked in. “The black one!” I exclaimed. “You found it!” “That’s the wine colored one,” he said. “No it’s not. It’s the black one,” I said. “It looks like wine to me,” he said. I suddenly saw that he was right. As I removed the hat from the bag, I saw its color had changed. It was no longer black, but had a purple-red tint.

The second delivery was on Halloween. The fur coat. My short, champagne colored fur coat, with the short sleeves and the pearls sewn into the collar. This was the coat that Cabiria wore. On this day, it was unusually warm. Sticky. Outside it started drizzling. I was wearing gold ballet slippers. I put my black scarf around my head to protect from the rain on my way to the subway. I walked over the canal and called my father. “Hi,” I said. “Hi,” he said. “Did you remember to bring the coat?” I asked. “What do you mean did I remember?” He sounded hurt. “I thought it would be funny if you forgot it, all this planning.” “How could I forget?” He said, “I couldn’t sleep because of this coat. I was up all night afraid I would forget.”

The canal was always so beautiful no matter when it was. Now it was green and dirty, and the rain fell lightly on it. “So where am I meeting you again?” he asked. “That café nearby, I forget the name, near 31s and Broadway.” “Right by Macy’s!” he exclaimed, suddenly very happy. It made him happy that it was by Macy’s, a place of the past, somewhere familiar, old timey, so familiar, like nothing ever changes sometimes.

At the café, my father told me about a story he read. It was a strange, dark story, where nothing good happens. My father smiled. “It reminded me of you,” he said. This made us both happy. In all the weeks my father and I haven’t seen each other, we were being connected through the darkness. In the story, there is a woman who works in a sanatorium. She begins to date the doctor, and the doctor falls in love with her and proposes. Just before they are to get married, he says he can’t go through with it, he fires her, gives her a ticket home, and that’s the end of it, the woman is left to wonder her entire life, why. “Isn’t that sort of thing always happening to you?” My father asked. “It is,” I said. My father typically does not like sad stories or movies. He only likes sad songs, but for everything else, he wants a happy ending. “Did you like the story?” I asked. “I like happy endings,” he said, “but,” he paused, “she reminded me of you.” “The writer or the main character?” I felt as if the difference between the two would change me. He paused, uncertain. “I guess both.”

Inside the coffee shop I sat with my two bags, one of hats, one of my usual things, and my father sat with his umbrella. It started to rain torrentially. I realized my favorite part about going to see the therapist was seeing my father before. I didn’t even like the therapist. But I liked seeing my father before.

It was dark by the time I got home. The air still moist and muggy. My hands full of bags. I had bought the perfect wig for Cabiria. I made my way up the stairs to my apartment. I put the key into the door but it would not open. The new bottom lock had been accidentally locked, though it was supposed to be left open. My key to this lock was inside my room, I had never attached it to my keychain. I looked around the dirty hallway. I looked over at the other door: the heavy door with the peephole leading to my room. I have those keys, I thought. I had those keys on my Betty Boop key chain. It’s the gambler Betty Boop. She sits on three dice and fans open a deck of playing cards. She also wears a crown. There were four keys to the peephole door, the door I had written about in our story. They were shiny and unused. I had opened the door when I moved in, and also when I inspected the peephole. But I had never opened it with a key. I looked at the door and looked down at the keys. I looked at them closely and saw, for the first time, that there were words on them. On all four, the same two words. Each key had written on it GRIP TIGHT. Pablo’s title reversed. But the same.

I sent Pablo a photograph of my hand holding the key so that GRIP TIGHT was visible. (Betty Boop was also visible.) This was the second photograph to Pablo. The first had been a photograph of my accordion, after he had sent me La Virgen de Guadalupe. I bought the accordion in the summer and learned two warm-up songs and only one real song: My Bonnie Lies Over The Ocean.

At first Pabo was unimpressed by the coincidence, “I don’t think much about those sorts of things, as you know.” On another day he sounded frightened, “What are we supposed to do with that?” On another day he teased me, “You get disillusioned a lot, don’t you?” And once, “You’re the first person I thought of.”

These are the questions I wanted to explore with Pablo: What does it mean that Pablo’s title was on my key. That my key had the words to the title Pablo chose. That he has the key to my “room,” a chamber of my mind. Or that I hold his key. But it’s my key. But his words. Reversed. Or that I have the key to open a door to a room in him. Or that I have the key but am locked out and can’t get there. That I only knew I had his words with me all along because I was locked out. Had I not been locked out. Or that I choose not to open that door. But I do. Or that he does not let me in. But it’s my room. I’m already there. I’m sitting inside it. I’m getting dressed. I’m changing.

On Halloween night someone said, “Love the blonde Betty Boop.” “I’m not her this year,” I said. Even though a lot of people consciously did not know Cabiria, they seemed to unconsciously know who I was. They knew I was someone specific, someone relatively meaningful.

I felt as though I had become Cabiria. I wished for a sexual experience that night but it didn’t happen. Yet even this fit with being Cabiria. (Even though she was a prostitute, she never actually had sex with anyone.) I had the short blonde wig. The old short fur jacket. I wore a long pencil skirt with very subtle sparkle to it. I had my homemade velvet top with a great amount of cleavage. I had makeup and deep red lipstick. I had five inch heeled platforms. They were outrageous and Cabiria would not have worn them. They were much too impractical. However, if she had them in her closet, on an excited night, maybe she would have.

After I dressed and had a small glass of vodka and vegetable juice, I left my apartment and went down the stairs. I brought my gold ballet slippers that I kept in my elephant purse, just in case. I first went into the restaurant below the apartment where one of the roommates waitressed. “Stop in so I can see your costume,” she had said. It wasn’t crowded, a few tables full. Everyone stared when I walked in, as if they knew I was a prostitute. They stared and hushed and looked away. Don’t they know it’s Halloween? I wondered. I walked to the end of the restaurant, walked back, I leaned on the bar, waiting for the bartender to notice me. A couple sitting at a table stared at me incredulously with that type of smile on their faces. “The bathroom’s there,” the man said with a smirk, pointing. “I’m not here for the bathroom,” I said. “I’m Cabiria.” I couldn’t tell if they understood my meaning. The bartender came over. I asked for my roommate; he said she left already.

I took to the street. Halfway up the block, just across from the Holiday Inn that plays music outside, like a little club where no one ever goes, right over a massive driveway for trucks to unload, I fell.

I felt myself go down in slow motion as the music played in the background. I fell to the right. Since it was in slow motion, I had time, a little time, to plan out how I would land. It felt like an eternity before I landed. That long extra distance because of those shoes.

The objects leftover from Halloween that I bought and never used, sitting in bags inside my apartment: small trumpet kazoo, wooden flute, black wings, sheer gold fabric, red flowers on gauzy red material (one flower I cut out and used, pinned to black skirt).

Pablo said once: “What is interesting is that there are no explanations as to why these two people are here, or anything about the context of where they are.” He was talking about us.

There is a concrete wall just before the canal, just before the bridge. Some artists drew stencils into the wall of little images and little scenes. A cluster of small ghosts. One that stood out to me, which I photographed, was a small painting-stencil of a woman dancing with a silhouetted faceless man. He is an outline filled in white. That is all. She is in full color, wearing a dress that falls off her shoulders, smiling at the imaginary person taking the imaginary picture. There is no person. There is no picture. There is only me watching the couple on the wall over the canal.

The therapist liked to pose questions to me like, “Why did you think things would be different this time?”

I had discovered an old dream in an old diary from years ago. The dream had predicted the future that already occurred. “Pablo was in one of my dreams last night,” I had written. “We were going to work on something together, a collaboration, and he wanted to meet again, he wanted to keep a dialogue going. I agreed of course, to have a dialogue…” When I told Pablo about this found dream he said, “Yes, we always know what’s in our subconscious.” “But it was yours,” I said. “We also know what’s in other’s subconscious’s.” “Really?” “Yes.”

Damn, I said. Ow. I looked around. Nobody had seen me. I saw people in the dark distance but no one was close. I saw a dark, brown-red wetness coat over my stockings. There was blood inside my hands. Damn these shoes. I took them off and put on the gold ballet slippers. I felt more like Cabiria being my normal height. I adjusted my wig.

There was music playing from the Holiday Inn across the street. I walked on and just a few feet from where I fell, an older woman passed by, looked at me, “Nice hair,” she said. I was shocked. I felt a surge of something positive again inside me. We looked into each other’s eyes. I nodded at her, she at me. It was suddenly as if nothing had happened. Nothing at all. I adjusted my wig. Everything would be ok. Yes. Everything was back to normal. But now the woman was gone. I was suddenly scared to be so close to the earth. Lightning strikes, maybe once, maybe twice. And it lights up the night. Oh, there was the music still. But where was Pablo? I smelled meat cooking. Hotel lights. Where was anyone.

CRITICAL HIT AWARDS: Winners Picked by Janice Lee of HTMLGIANT and ENTROPY

Welcome back to the Critical Hit Awards for book reviews. This is a round-up, a recommended reading list, and — why not? — a terribly prestigious and coveted prize. Winners receive a bang-up gift from Field Notes, our beloved sponsor. Nominate your favorite recent review by tweeting it at @electriclit with the hashtag #criticalhit, or cast your vote in the comments section below.

Our guest judge is Janice Lee, Reviews Editor at HTMLGIANT and Executive Editor at ENTROPY.

Electric Literature: The book reviews that you edit at HTMLGIANT and ENTROPY cover a huge range of literary forms and writing styles. Is there any kind of book that “gives better review” — that lends itself to more exciting criticism?

Janice Lee: I think it’s definitely more about the perspective and engagement with a book, than it is about the book itself. Of course there are certain types of books I’m drawn to as a personal bias, but if someone’s got a really interesting and critical perspective on, say, Fifty Shades of Grey, that can make for a really interesting piece of cultural discourse. Reviews that are exciting are exciting because the reviewer is really going above and beyond on the minimum level of engagement. Whether it’s a personal, emotional, critical, philosophical, intellectual, theoretical, political, poetic, or technical take (or ideally some combination of the above), I’m excited to see the manifestation of someone’s relationship with a text.

Often the reviews that are most exciting to me actually end up saying more about the reviewer than the actual book.

That gets me excited. In my own criticism, I’ve strayed away from more critical and intellectual essay-like approaches, and my reviews often end up like mini-memoir pieces. They’re personal. Because if the book really had an impact on me, it made me feel something and I want to convey that relationship.

How often do you disagree with the final assessments in the reviews that you edit?

Probably pretty often. I mean if it’s matter of whether they liked or disliked the book, and I felt the opposite, sure that happens sometimes, but what’s more important to me is if the level of engagement is there, if it’s smart, if it’s genuine, if it’s interesting. Every relationship with a text is absolutely unique, and of course we have similar experiences sometimes. I don’t have to agree with the reviewer in their conclusions, but I do want to be able to empathize with them, and if the writing is solid and genuine, the empathy will be there despite differing opinions.

Two of the winning reviews you picked have great opening lines. Is there a difference between a great opening line for a book review and a great opening line for other types of writing?

Sure. I mean a great opening line is a great opening line, but when you sit down to read a book, there’s already some amount of commitment there. You’ve got the book in hand and you have the intention of following through.

Book reviews though, especially online, I think aren’t often read all the way through.

This is the reality of writing published online in general, so I think a great opening for a book review both serves to help a reader get engaged with a critical piece of writing, i.e. the review, and perhaps also interested in the subject of the review, i.e. the book.

Let’s say you read a book and hate it. Do you tell everyone it was terrible, or do you ignore it so it doesn’t get any more attention?

I usually tell people it was terrible. I might not write a review of it, or proclaim it loudly, but if it comes up, I’ll be honest. What I’m more adamant about spreading and telling everyone though is if I’ve read something incredible. The last time I remember that happening was when I read The Book of Monelle by Charles Schwob (Wakefield Press), newly translated by Kit Schluter. I told everyone I knew who was literate that they had to read this book. I believe in trying to spread more good things than bad.
There’s a lot of bad and mediocre literature out there. I don’t feel the need to shout about it whenever I encounter something bleh. I’d rather use my energy in shouting about the really, really awesome stuff.

And the winners are…

Vanessa Place on Seascape by Heimrad Bäcker for The Constant Critic

Seascape

Opening with the question, “Have you ever killed anyone?”, Place’s reviews drags biography, poetics, morality, even excrement, into a review that reveals as much about the contextual narrative of the book as it does about the book’s content. As she says in the review, “Note that this has not been so much a poetry review as such to date, but a rather linear historical exegesis, and a complication of guilt,” calling into question notions of reading and the role of ethics in poetry. To me this review exemplifies the kind of contextualization, complication of subjectivity, and notification of a guilt that a great review ought to.

Hannah Manshel on i will never be beautiful enough to make us beautiful together by Mira Gonzalez for The New Inquiry

I Will Never Be Beautiful Enough

This review opens with the statement, “Having feelings is hard,” and indeed, the review proceeds to expand on the perceived role of flatness in Gonzalez’s poetry. I think the review really does a fantastic job of delving into the messiness of emotions but pulling at the importance of the intention and gesture behind the work, acknowledging too the significance of feelings in general, especially in criticism. Reviews, I think, tend to focus on overly intellectual readings, providing more history and theory surrounding the writing and avoiding the “feelings” a reader might have during and around the reading of the book. But I think the empathetic gesture is a crucial one.

Megan Milks on the heroine of Green Girl by Kate Zambreno for the Los Angeles Review of Books

Green Girl

To be perfectly honest and at risk of exposure, I will admit to you that this is not my favorite book. But this review exemplifies to me the kind of engagement — simultaneously intelligent, critical, and emotional — that I think great reviews ought to have. It opens up articulations, questions, themes in such a way as to become an incredibly well-written essay on its own, without simply existing as a “book review.” Milks even works the narrative of her own personal expectations surrounding the narrative of the book. An honest and generous meditation.

***

Congratulations to our winners! Please contact Brian Hurley to claim your Field Notes prize.

Read a good review lately? Nominate it for a Critical Hit Award by tweeting it at @electriclit with the hashtag #criticalhit or cast your vote in the comments section below.

***

Janice Lee is the author of KEROTAKIS (Dog Horn Press, 2010), Daughter (Jaded Ibis, 2011), and Damnation (Penny-Ante Editions, 2013). She is Co-Editor of [out of nothing], Reviews Editor at HTMLGIANT, Editor of the new #RECURRENT Novel Series for Jaded Ibis Press, Executive Editor at Entropy, and Founder/CEO of POTG Design. (http://janicel.com)

Brian Hurley is Books Editor at The Rumpus, Founder of Fiction Advocate, and Curator of the Critical Hit Awards.

Gilbert Sorrentino: The Lost Laureate of Brooklyn

The last thing Gilbert Sorrentino did before he left California was sell his car. The novelist, a favorite of other writers if not the average American reader, called it the happiest day of his life: like many a native New Yorker, Sorrentino didn’t drive, not really. He had finally learned at the age of 52, the year before the born-and-bred Brooklynite and long-time Gothamite took a job teaching writing at Stanford. He stayed there 20 years, though his novels never lost their disparaging references to California, its culture and its weather. When he retired from teaching in 2002, he did something most people of his generation who left Brooklyn never did — he came back, back to Bay Ridge, the neighborhood where he’d grown up, the childhood setting that had occupied much of his literary imagination.

Most people who have heard of that guitar pick-shaped neighborhood in the southwest corner of Brooklyn know it as the setting of Saturday Night Fever, a series of disco boulevards cut with modest homes for Catholic families — an outdated conception akin to Williamsburg’s being a gritty industrial neighborhood. Maybe others know it’s now home to a strong Middle Eastern community, offering the best falafel south of Atlantic Avenue. But the one thing casual observers and even long-term residents would never associate it with is a literary pedigree.

Of course the borough at large has such a reputation, different neighborhoods boasting individual laureates: Williamsburg with Betty Smith and Daniel Fuchs; Boerum Hill, Paula Fox and Jonathan Lethem; Park Slope, Pete Hamill and Paul Auster; Brooklyn Heights, Truman Capote and Hart Crane. And so on. As the editors of a local literary magazineonce joked, it’s more notable nowadays for authors’ bios to proclaim that they don’t live in Brooklyn rather than that they do.

post-157530

So who writes for Bay Ridge? The most hard-pressed might come up with Hubert Selby, Jr., who grew up there and rose to fame writing about its rough-and-tumble northern industrial annex; the author bio on the back of his debut, Last Exit to Brooklyn, boasts that he graduated from PS 102, an elementary school on Ridge Boulevard. Like many down-heeled families in the 20th century, his moved around: I’ve read he lived on 68th Street, that he lived on 72nd and Third. His still-notorious first novel is set on the outskirts of the neighborhood, near the Brooklyn Army Terminal, in the general vicinity of 57th Street and Second Avenue. (Today, we consider this Sunset Park, but back then — before the middle-income housing towers on 65th Street created in 1972 a feeling of stark neighborhood finitude — the borders of Bay Ridge were more nebulous, and certainly extended farther north.)
Selby depicts a Bay Ridge in stark contrast to its present-day reputation as a nice place to raise a family: it’s packed with thugs, crooks, lowlives, preyed-upon transvestites — even factories! While humanizing those on society’s bottom rungs, Selby doesn’t romanticize them: it’s a brutal book full of beatings, rapes, domestic abuse, and sexual frustration manifest as rage and violence. If nothing else, it functions as a corrective to those who’d romanticize the years after the war, instead exposing the underbelly of the Eisenhower era.

Selby would publish several more novels during his life, most of them after he too moved to California — Los Angeles specifically, where he would teach writing at the University of Southern California before dying in 2004. He took to the state maybe in a way Sorrentino didn’t. None of his subsequent novels would be so essentially set in the old neighborhood, though some would be set in other parts of Brooklyn — like his other most famous book, Requiem for a Dream (1978) — or other parts of the city, like the poorly received The Willow Tree (1998), set in the South Bronx.

That’s in contrast to Sorrentino, who was Selby’s childhood friend and later also his colleague — the man to whom Selby would dedicate his lasting masterpiece. The first page of Last Exit to Brooklyn reads “To Gil” — his fellow PS 102 graduate. “My first memory of Gil was a tall, skinny kid with a crossed eye walking down 71st street going to school,” Selby wrote in 1981. After the war, Selby hung onto Sorrentino and his pals, bullshitting with them at the Royal Diner on Bay Ridge Avenue and in nearby bars, drinking beers after hours in parked cars. Sorrentino encouraged the chronically ill Selby to take up writing; because Sorrentino was then working at an editor at Grove Press — the notorious publishing company that also published the works of Henry Miller and other essential mid-20th century authors — he also edited Last Exit, and even wrote that bio on the back. (Sorrentino’s first editing assignment at Grove had been The Autobiography of Malcolm X.)

cover_custom-349c7707e4ef0b400af35c00f5e60cc282618de9-s6-c30

Sorrentino would eventually begin publishing his own work, both poetry and fiction. Pantheon published his second novel (and fifth book), Steelwork, in 1970. The cover of the first edition showed a stylized image of the street signs at the intersection of 68th Street and Fourth Avenue, the locus of Sorrentino’s Bay Ridge, which usually doesn’t extend farther than Senator to 72nd streets, Third to Fifth avenues. It’s confined in its own way, like Selby’s. (Gerald Howard, in a 2011 article in the Review of Contemporary Fiction, identified at least one address where Sorrentino grew up, between Fourth and Fifth avenues on Senator Street, a block between 67th and 68th streets named for Henry C. Murphy, the 19th-century Brooklyn mayor and state senator who once lived at the street’s west end, on an estate that’s now Owl’s Head Park.)

Steelwork’s main character, basically, is Bay Ridge — or at least Sorrentino’s corner of it. In dozens of short chapters, set from 1935 to 1951, he sketches out its denizens, people of all kinds — kids, drunks, workers, vets — most of whom share a commonality with Last Exit’s lowlives: they’re addicted to alcohol and tremendously sexually frustrated, fantasizing at home, at school, or on the corners about neighborhood girls, sometimes even cruising for men in the local parks. Many of these characters would reappear in later books.

Sorrentino would publish 18 novels, a story collection and a novella — plus eight volumes of poetry and another of criticism — repeatedly returning to the neighborhood. One of his late books, Little Casino (2002), like Steelwork, is made up of vignettes — in this case, 52, like a deck of cards — about the neighborhood, including a story in which a child is crushed by a scow when he hops off the 69th Street Pier. Crystal Vision (1981)is set almost entirely in a local candy store, its 78 vignettes — like a deck of Tarot cards — depicting a group of eccentric men as they meet daily to shoot the shit and share strange, Tarot card illustration-inspired stories. Red the Fiend (1995) relates the story of a boy growing up on 68th Street, where the horrifying abuse of a tyrannical grandmother turns him into a little monster. Aberration of Starlight (1980) picks up those characters — first introduced in Steelwork — a few years later on vacation in New Jersey, near Budd Lake, and though it’s not set in Brooklyn, there are plenty of nods to the neighborhood. We learn, for example, that the kid attends PS 170 — four blocks east from the author’s own alma mater.

1121670

Gilbert Sorrentino is far from a household name, but he’s pretty well-known within literary circles; he has a reputation as a writer’s writer. Few of his books are like the others: he was constantly reinventing his style, which can be frustrating for critics; that might be why he never achieved the literary stardom he deserved. He’s known as a postmodernist, for an avant-garde style; his most popular book is Mulligan Stew, though it’s not even that popular: if you Google “mulligan stew,” the first page of results has several links to dog food but none to the novel. The New York Times Book Review described it in 1979 as “raising experiment to the level of high intellectual comedy… [a] neo-Joycean concoction [that] endlessly animates meaning’s comic self-contradictions.” It’s a funny novel, but not a light one. The Miami Herald called it “relentlessly bookish,” which I’m pretty sure was meant as a compliment. “He was the best French writer America had,” his friend and later-in-life publisher John O’Brien wrote in an email.

“He mined his Brooklyn boyhood in several novels… but the paramount subjects were innovative uses of language and structure,” read his Washington Post obit, though you could easily reverse that. His Brooklyn novels are structurally experimental, but they also adopt a realist style; they’re full of local detail and color. A chapter about movie theaters in Steelwork begins, “They went to the Alpine because it was there,” as true in 1941 as it is in 2014. In Crystal Vision, the characters argue, with hilariously excruciating specificity, about the names of the series of parks that stretch about a mile from Fort Hamilton Parkway to the shore:

You know the name of that park is not really Triangle Park, Irish Billy says. It’s really Leif Eriksson Park.
I thought it was Owl’s Head Park, the Drummer says.
No, Owl’s Head Park is the part of the park down by the Narrows, Irish Billy says.
That’s Bliss Park, Cheech says.
You’re all wrong, Professor Kooba says. The park from 8th Avenue down to Colonial Road is Leif Eriksson Park. Then, the little part of the park from Colonial down to the water is Owl’s Head Park. Triangle Park and Bliss Park are time-honored neighborhood names — not official names.
The way I always call it, Big Mickey says, is this. From the water up to Colonial, Bliss Park. From Colonial to 4th Avenue, Leif Eriksson Park. From 4th to almost 5th Avenue, Triangle Park. Then just at 5th you have the softball field. Across the street from 5th to 6th, you have the playground and the big softball field. From 6th to 7th, that’s the 6th Avenue Park and from 7th to 8th, that’s the 8th Avenue Park or else you can call it the end of Leif Eriksson Park if you want.

There are copious such hyperlocal references: to Fontbonne girls, uniformed Catholic high-schoolers that have served as the object of many generations of adolescent male fantasy; to the hoity-toityness of people who live on Ridge Boulevard, the avenue that marks the start of the neighborhood’s tonier residential area; to obscure side streets, like Ridge Crest Terrace; and to a slew of mostly forgotten bars, since replaced by other bars, including Lento’s, Carroll’s, up on Fifth Avenue — whose sign was only recently taken down, though the space has been long-shuttered — the Melody Room, where the bank on the northeast corner of 72nd Street and Third is now, and Henry’s, on Fourth Avenue near the Bay Ridge Avenue subway station. (According to long-standing local apocrypha, the neighborhood holds a Guinness World Record for most bars per capita.)

These might float right over the heads of casual readers, but a familiarity with the neighborhood isn’t necessary for enjoying Sorrentino’s work. He’s a moving, smart, sincere, funny and inventive novelist, firmly principled and unforgiving of aesthetic bullshit. If he’s a “writer’s writer,” and Bay Ridge is not a neighborhood known for its writers, you can imagine his work has appealed mostly to people from elsewhere.

But there’s something tragic in that. Sorrentino died of lung cancer in Brooklyn in 2006; he remains widely uncelebrated in his own neighborhood, his own borough, despite the fact that so many of his books are set there, and he lived so much of his life there. The Fort Hamilton High School Alumni Association doesn’t list him in its Hall of Fame. The libraries don’t stock his books, and neither does the local bookstore. I spent 30 years in Bay Ridge as a bookish neighborhood enthusiast without ever hearing his name, until a poet mentioned it to me in passing at an open mic in a bar. Sorrentino gets one mention in Evan Hughes’s comprehensive and otherwise wonderful study, Literary Brooklyn — in passing, during the few pages dedicated to Selby.

Unlike Selby, who left and never looked back, Sorrentino returned, getting a co-op on Shore Road. One of his final interviews, with Gerald Howard for Bookforum, took place at the Bridgeview Diner, a 24-hour neighborhood institution “featuring several acres of faux marble and silvered mirrors,” as Howard wrote — a nice stroll from Sorrentino’s new digs.

The writer deserves a wider audience in general, but that needs to start in his hometown. We need to claim him as our own, keep his books — almost all of which are in print, thanks mostly to the Dalkey Archive Press — in stock at the Bookmark Shoppe and the Bay Ridge Library (on the same block as PS 102), talk about him when we talk about arts in the neighborhood, declare him our laureate emeritus. Because not only does his work speak deepest to us who understand its place better than any other reader, it also shows us that our own voices and stories, our own experiences of the neighborhood, are valid: something the residents of so many other neighborhoods have been told, but not us. (Admittedly, Sorrentino’s Bay Ridge is both familiar and foreign; it belongs to my grandparents. But we won’t get a Sorrentino for our own age until we accept the original.)

There was a time when if you wanted to make it, you had to leave Bay Ridge: Tony Manero’s driving his car across the Brooklyn Bridge at the end of Saturday Night Fever. And that goes for Brooklyn in general: the list of famous artists born in Brooklyn in the 20th century is impossibly long; the list of those who died here is not. But Sorrentino shows us that you can stay here, in mind if not always in body, and still create a powerful and meaningful body of work. It’s just harder to sell it to all those who underestimate the neighborhood and its residents — and our ability to produce respectable art. When Bay Ridge reclaims Sorrentino, it will reclaim itself.

[Editor’s note: Electric Literature’s weekly magazine, Recommended Reading, recently published Sorrentino’s short story “The Moon in Its Flight.” You can read it here.]

REVIEW: Green Girl by Kate Zambreno

In Kate Zambreno’s Green Girl, the green girls are shopgirls, envious, young, unsure women who work behind counters in fancy department stores. Women who define themselves through the glittering images of movie stars and snippets of literature they’ve internalized before they’re mature enough to know who they want to be. These women are still navigating the world, learning to find themselves beneath their own skin. They sell clothes and perfume, disinterested, imagining what their pensive faces will look like to others. Kate Zambreno writes these green girls with ethereal beauty and gritty, sweaty reality. Green girls are fragile, hollow. They are trying to fill themselves.

The protagonist of Green Girl is Ruth, an American living in London and working for “Horrids” Department Store pushing “Desire” — the perfume of an American pop star. Ruth’s story is narrated by her dead mother, who watches from afar, interjecting with as much fascination as cruelty. But Zambreno uses subtle shifts in narration: at times it feels as though Ruth is talking in third person about herself, and other times it seems like a first person plural narrator. Though Ruth goes through a series of jobs and different shops and a series of men, she’s haunted by one man — “HIM” — from her past. Her actions are influenced by sadness as well as the tediousness and mundaneness of youth: When everyone says you are supposed to be living life to its fullest, but life leaves you used, slapped, raw. Green Girls becomes a meditation on the faces women wear as much as it is about Ruth herself. “Green girls and their costumes, their trying on of brazen identities.”

Ruth’s identity is defined by a hyper-awareness of what she looks like from the outside. While she often is referred to as dead inside, or demonstrates deep sadness, she is constantly aware of how others perceive her. “Sometimes she narrates her actions inside her head in third-person,” the narrator muses. “Does that make her a writer or a woman?” Ruth is not just concerned with writing, or narration, but a sense of her own image. Ruth’s mother interjects: “My hunger artist her art is herself she is fast fasting away she would like to disappear.” Ruth is the juxtaposition of both not wanting to be seen and wanting to be lauded for her perfection. She is the carefully calculated photo, the shapely curve of a body against negative space:

“She takes pictures in her mind. She stores them away for someday, these images, these experiences, to later document, once she has figured out why she did them in the first place. She watches the world, yet cannot yet articulate her role in it. She cannot fathom the depths. For now she writes dear diary entries in her childish hand dotted by exclamation points. What is it with young women and exclamation points and smiley faces! So afraid of appearing somber, always wanting to appear light and happy and sparkling, even when they are dying inside. Not ever being able to escape the mask that smiles. She wants to write, really write someday. But she is not fully formed. So she does not write. Not really. Unless attempting to live is a form of attempting to write.”

For Ruth, the idea of image or story is more powerful than reality. Almost as though something is more real in its captured form; images in her mind hold more weight than interaction with people. Her references are from classic films; classic heroines both define her sense of self and devalue it. “[Ruth and her roommate, Agnes] put on a show. The show that green girls know so well. Posing for the invisible eye. They wait for their photos still wet touch don’t touch Ruth is laughing in every frame drunk drunkener than drunk drunk Agnes is serious poised she knows how to pose for her picture she knows her good side.” Ruth “is the voyeur of herself.” She will never be the carefully cultivated woman she wants to become.

Pain plays an important role in Ruth’s life, almost as a way to make herself feel the world around her. Since her senses are sometimes dulled to what is inside, she is incapable of experiencing life unless it is in extremes. “The green girl needs to externalize her own suffering. This is how she will wear her grief. Or maybe she is just bored.” In all of her relationships she is a voyeur, experiencing her own life through numbness. She cuts off all her hair in a low moment, and still struggles to define the internal state that plagues her so:

“Is it masochistic? An act of self-flagellation. There is a finality to it. To cut off one’s breasts in one mean gesture. To surrender oneself to vague and distant eyes. To say, this is the new me. I have been born clean. See my face. I wipe the paint from the mouth of the pretty girl. Wipe the paint from your mouth. This is me. I have no shield of feathers to hide behind. I am ugly and true. I have cut off my lovely, my darling. Cut it off. Cut, cut, it off. I stand a monument to pain. I stand naked to this world. When Mia Farrow cut her hair off, Salvador Dali called it “mythical suicide.” What happens to a woman when the eyes are no longer on her? Is that in a way a tiny death? Or a sort of freedom? The locks shorn off. Is one unlocked? The rape of her locks.”

Even in this instance, she understands her own actions only by association with actions others have taken. She cuts off her hair because that is what extreme women do when they are sad. Her story is told through allusion. Mia Farrow. A quote by Dali. Even in painful extremes, she struggles to communicate her own experience. Cutting her hair is not enough to satisfy her longing, to help her understand the world. When she finally convinces her boyfriend to have sex with her, it doesn’t fulfill her sense of self or desire. She wants to hurt, to be used and torn to pieces in order to truly feel something.

“She did not desire to be loved and cherished and caressed. She desired a beast. Someone to destroy her. Her own Jack the Ripper. Her own serial killer. She did not want to make love. She wanted to be fucked — over and over again repeating her own disappearance.”

Internal states — loneliness, depression, yearning, etc. — are wholly unquantifiable to Ruth. So she looks for pain from the outside in order to give her experience meaning. She wants her outside ruined the same way the inside is wrecked — only then will she feel whole.

Ultimately this book asks questions of its reader; for what are these green girls if not figures we have created? We want to worship the slender, sculpted form of youth and we want to criticize its recklessness and naiveté. Ruth’s mother says, “[H]ow gorgeous I too find them, gorgeous and disgusting.” Zambreno’s novel touches this phenomenon so acutely. She manages to portray the externally desirable image Ruth and her ilk aspire to be, while showing Ruth for what she is: a human capable of sweat and blood and filth. Zambreno seems to ask what society’s responsibility is to these girls we’ve created. On the subway, “They push push against [Ruth]. It reaches a fever pitch. It is a crush. It is a circus. It is too much pressure. Leave me alone! She wants to beg. She hides behind sunglasses and hats and phony disguises. She is a train wreck. We gape at her. (Why don’t we try to save her?)” Ultimately, the message seems to be that we want to ogle, and we also want to condemn. These green girls are failing, and we stand by as they collapse.

“You speak like a green girl,” Polonius says to Ophelia in Hamlet (and in one of Zambreno’s quotes that open a chapter), “unsifted in such perilous circumstance.” Ruth is unsifted, and though Green Girl shows her in conflict, she stumbles. Zambreno touches on a subset of society — a girl, in particular — and makes her universal and individual at the same time. Ruth is all contrasts and costumes and limbs. Zambreno invites us in to her life as a voyeur, but we finish the book with the feeling that she is our own creation.

Green Girl (P.S.)

by Kate Zambreno

Powells.com

A Is For Apocalypse: Children’s Books for the Modern Age

by Matthew Nolan

With world crises and drastic climate change ahead of us, it’s important that we prevent our young children from growing up with a false sense of security. Publishers have already cashed in on our impending doom, selling dystopian stories to teens and adults. Now they should target the toddler demographic by rebranding some classic picture books. Here are some suggested titles to prepare the next generation for the future.

pat down the bunny
gitmo seuss
where the wild things are surveilled
goes bust cover
alexander-and-the-terrible-horrible-no-good-very-bad-day-book-cover-600x455
runawayBunny
Goodnightmoon
mike
parachute book
Harold crayon apocalypse
Post-Apocalyptic Puppy
Ice cap melting book