MY WIDOWER AND PROUST

Header


With apologies to T.C. Boyle

Elatia Harris

In the light from the only good lamp in the room, my widower sits on his end of our green couch, reading Proust.  I used to read it, too — I’d sit in the dark, scanning for the sexy bits, making Proust go fast.  But my widower’s on his thirteenth rereading now.  And in the shadows of the long room, I’m with him, watching everything he does.  If I’d known back in 1984 that I’d still be here, I mightn’t have bothered to die.  Might just have volunteered him for that bother instead.  Then I’d be flesh with a book in its lap in the light.

He’s sixty, my widower.  Already too old to die in his finest raiment — as I did, at a peachy twenty-nine.  However, his hair’s still black.  He hasn’t any new hobbies — just more of what he’s always liked: Proust and booze.  The TV’s still on, too, barely audible.  Over a thirsty sip from a tumbler of wine he shoots it a glance every now and then, though he doesn’t want diverting; if he could, he’d watch a show about a dark-haired man on a green couch who drinks and reads Proust.  There’re no women in his life — I was the last — and no boys.  Absolutely no boys, he swore.  And he wasn’t lying.  I know that now, for I’m inside his head when I choose, wedged into Broca’s area, or strung along those sub-cortical ganglia that are the seat of desire.  I’ve found him out: he doesn’t much like it with anyone, and he never did.  The page turns, the soft yellow musty page.  To him, it’s the rustle of black silk.

I want there to be a knock at the door.  It’s almost Valentine’s Day, and I’ve been here watching him drink alone for more than twenty years.  Mightn’t he welcome some hard-luck straggler from the Reagan era, an old friend whom I died too young to meet?  Robert!  Yes, Robert would be interesting.  Fleeing London, where he owes oodles in all the best clubs, he’d be needing a bed for the night.  Robert’s smashing — a male Princess Diana, wayward and blond, with shiny eyes and an aura of doom. 

Or, Barbara!  She’s pretty interesting, too.  A lunchtime hostess at a local bar and grille, Barbara has plans for my widower.  What a lot of money he must have, to be lunching bibulously every day right under her nose.  Shouldn’t he buy a house for her and her mildly retarded daughter? There’s one that would do nicely — Barbara buses by it on her way to work.  It has a third floor apartment, and she’d let my widower sack out up there.  He’d be like Mrs. Rochester, only quiet.

Oh, I’m antsy, and all set to make more of his life than he does, since I lack a personal fate.  Or, have already dealt myself one.  This world and the world beyond are too alike for my liking, my widower that heavier element around which I orbit still.  I sought only the extinction that knows not of itself, yet I continue in this limbo of limitless insight into precisely those conditions that were fatal to me.  Look — he shifts in his seat, crosses now his right leg over his left; he’ll do it back the other way in another twenty minutes.  Meanwhile, Proust has him by the short and curlies.

Albertine, Marcel the narrator’s shut-in, endlessly rearranges her few possessions, and Marcel’s wretched that her pass-times are those of a common criminal in lock-up when he would greatly prefer that she take in some improving reading.  Well, she can’t.  Settling down to read makes her eyes water; she yawns, lists, and falls deeply asleep.  Ah, Marcel won’t have it.  Though he’d look far to find a woman worse suited to him, he’ll do anything to keep this one awake.  That’s love — a trial to the soul, an assault on taste and judgment.  And my widower on his thirteenth rereading can still spare a tear for Marcel, on the cross for a woman so unworthy.  There’s the tear.  He lifts his chin, lest it trickle onto the page, and he looks at me without knowing it.  I contrive sometimes to be right in his line of sight.  I dangle in front of the tube, transparently, fatelessly, a jellyfish caught in a building wave on a surfers’ beach.  I am that unworthy girl.  My widower and Marcel are one.  He’s got it perfectly worked out.  He lowers his eyes, and reads on. 

I’d like to see something more happen to him — for him, that is.  Though I daren’t let myself hope for much, I’ve got hold of the idea that if his life became eventful I could leave.  Just get the hell out of Dodge.  And go where?  I don’t know; all I seem to know is more and more about the life I exited.  Useless knowledge, if I can’t cook something up with it. 

Come to that, I sure could use a spectral omelette.  Why not whoosh into the kitchen?  It’s just as I left it, but someone’s done the dishes.  And I won’t dirty them — I can’t.  I’ll just go through the motions, like a TV chef whose assistant forgot literally everything, who beats the air with a wire whisk and chats an omelette into being with her wrists.  Horrid, what’s in there — brown-edged deli turkey, a few mushy cherry tomatoes.  Watching my widower beaver away at Proust should irk me more than anything, but, actually, I hate it most when I’m in the kitchen, astrally racketing, and he plows right through me to graze from the fridge.  That’s dinner, and parting me to get it should at least raise gooseflesh on his seeking arms.   

A noise!  A cheerful noise!  I’m perfectly sure it’s the doorbell.  My widower hears it, too.  Without knowing it, he wants company, so he hears the bell, sometimes, when it isn’t really ringing.  I hear him hearing it, and hear also that it doesn’t ring.  This time, however, it’s ringing.  And he’s making for the door, book in hand, his forefinger marking the page.  Maybe it’s only the people downstairs asking him to keep an eye on the place while they take a weekend away.  I ought to drift out and have a look-see.  I’ve been wanting a visitor, too.  God, how I’ve been wanting one.

The scent of gardenias — and a few other things — enters the flat through the crack in the door that he opens as wide as the chain allows.  Moth balls. . . freshly risen croissants fragrant with Normandy butter.  My widower has a most discerning nose, and I’m folded like a condom into those deep cortical wrinkles that sort smells.  Ah!  Could it be the ginger-and-garbage scent of raccoons chowing down on the avocados in the garden?  It’s coonskin, all right, but washed in corn meal and sewn into a fur.  And a live rodent pong: long rats, of a size to be stewed with Aztec spices and gobbled up in Mexico for potency — we’ve been reading about that, too — long rats confined in a cage.  I hear their scaly feet scrambling furiously in the wood shavings. 

He flicks on the dim porch light and meets a pair of feverish eyes.  Wound around the neck and chin of his caller, a white silk scarf sets off rouged lips.  From the narrow shoulders hangs an ankle-length raccoon coat, redolent of mothballs and pinned, in the old way permissible for men, with a gardenia.  One white finger curls under the criss-crossed string of a patissier’s cardboard box.  The other hand closes around the padded leather strap of the cage, which twists and jerks.  The shoulders rise in a gentle Gallic shrug, as if to say, I’d offer my hand, but as you see, I come bearing gifts.  It’s Marcel!  Better than Robert, better than Barbara — it’s Marcel! 

My widower is loathe to shut the door — even for the time it takes to drop the chain and open it wide — on what could easily be a wet-brained fantasy, but is not.  Whose black hair is blacker? — he’s vainly wondering, as he regards Marcel’s lustreless brush, black as coal dust, and notices too the darkened lashes of the pained eyes.  It’s time for me to perform some astral karate — I’ve waited long enough — and I snap the chain. 

Hah!  I’m good with metal that’s been under a strain.  I could liberate the rats, too, but I think I won’t.  I’ll bide my time.  The shiny toe of Marcel’s dancing pump, a flat grosgrain bow at its vamp, rests on the door step.  Under the red silk stocking, his instep is blue with the poorly oxygenated blood veins of the heart patient.  Perhaps he’ll allow my widower to adore his naked foot — foot, not feet, for Marcel would never remove both shoes — later in the evening.  It’s very late now, or Marcel would not be here.

And he is here, slinking ahead of my widower, his long fur swaying as he lowers the croissant box and the cage to the coffee table.  The scent of Normandy butter never brought a maddened rat any relief, I think; that’s the secret of the exquisite adjacence of the two parcels.  Inside the apartment, fit always for no more than one person, we are now three.  My widower thinks to dowse the tube, but Marcel, seated on my shadowy end of the green couch, leans into it, pale face glowing.   

O widower! — who if not you deserves a visit from Marcel?  Your finger still marks your place in The Captive, and you know you should be reading it in French, but have drunk away the knack.  Broca’s area, seat of cognition and language, is flooded clean of French now; a thin layer of ammonia, corrosive to lucidity, separates your shrunken gray matter from its casing.  And you’ve years to go, till the ammonia’s as thick as ground fog, your brain stem an unsheathed serpent blind inside your spacious skull.  In time, in time.

I flutter over to the ficus; I’ve nothing to do with this.  Although it might have been nice of me to rustle up some cafe au lait for Marcel.  That’s all he drinks, widower.  He’s got that ethereal look, but he’s flesh, all right, weighing down the green cushion that used to be mine.  And he’s warm enough to shrug out of that fur. 

Surprise!  He’s wearing a satin Hawaiian shirt, and you’re one of the few ever to see his smooth elbows and small white biceps.  They’re like a girl’s, a fourteen year-old girl’s, the lawn tennis biceps of a Breton princess.  After another greedy sip, your fingers itch to pluck at his shell buttons — but the shirt?  It’s dull, to be Hawaiian, and lacking in palmy vignettes.  Swelling his thin chest, Marcel leans from my shadowy corner into your cone of light, and pulls the shirt tight by its tails.  Behold!  The tactful rosy dawn at Combray, the gray-blue storm of the true Ar-Mor, the dun wall in Delft with its ochreous patch an epiphanial yellow in the precise northern sun.  It’s Marcel, widower, leaning into your light, wearing all the hues of his world, and you do know better than to touch him. 

Again, I’m thinking of food — have we really nothing to offer him?  How pungent the air with pineapple and truffles — that salad of his fiercest longings, lurid yellow and black on glass plates among the gleaming glass knife-rests of Tante Leonie’s table.  I suppose I could cobble it up — you’d want it dressed in walnut oil with ciboulettes, we used to talk of it often — but it’s already a real presence in the apartment, not some olfactory hallucination of yours.  I’m guessing it’s the odor of Marcel himself in a state of arousal, for he’s clamped his kohl-rimmed eyes on the cage of rats.  Noisy in there.  Butter!  They want butter!

Ah!  Wait!  Just who is our guest?  Not Marcel the narrator — there’s been a change!  Wistful, smooth-elbowed Marcel is gone, and it’s Proust himself beside you now, rocking with the acute discomfort of genius, eyes ablaze with a million involuntary memories.  Proust!  Whose seclusion exceeded your own, who looked, when he did go out, like death in life — like last year’s gardenia, a wag of a duchess remarked — yet whose posthumous density and freshness is that of tropical fruit.         

And you’ve cottoned to it!  Gone from your face is that look imploring recognition from Marcel, a bemused being like yourself, mourning the unworthy creature who fled him.  Ah, yes — now you’re in awe.  You should be.  Monsieur Proust of the rats is here, avid frequenter of certain rather specialized brothels.  Oh, he craved nothing carnal there, just to sit after hours in a well-appointed room while an unshockable demi-mondaine with lavish body odor treated rats in a cage to stimulus.  To pain.  Torture, to be exact.  A reliable Parisian spotted him at it, and told another, who also told.  In fact he was often sighted there, until he desisted, and occupied subsequent nights with writing.  That padded strap on the jiggling cage, so easy on uncalloused hands:  I expect he totes it around eternity with him — that, the croissant box, and the gardenia his saintly attributes.  Ah!  He’s about to enlighten us.

Eez not true what zey say.  We both hear the words.  Though the rouged lips don’t move, the sound of his voice is low and clear and we recognize it.  Calm, non-insistent, he might be speaking with gentle regret of the weather, with no more regard for the squealing rats than if they were thunderheads gathering over a picnic in the Bois he didn’t care to attend.  I nevair wanted zem in pain.  Only to watch zem struggle for what zey could not have in a chamber from which zey could not escape.  Voila la condition humaine. 

The scent of pineapple and truffles mingles with the feral stink of the cage, the very odor of Proustian exertion.  For it’s not easy forcing sound through that fine-meshed barrier between worlds — I know — and Proust snuggles down into his fur, flinging a blue-veined wrist across his lashy shut lids.  Surrounding the cage are wood shavings like confetti on the coffee table — a little something to jog your memory in the morning.

Say, widower.  Now that Proust’s regrouping, what if you slid the string from the croissant box and fed the frantic rats a few buttery pills of still-warm dough?  Come on, be a man!  Look at their wet noses poking through the bars of the cage, look at their tongues.  They could struggle successfully for some of what they wanted if you rolled it up really small.  There’s your deli turkey, too.  They wouldn’t sneer at the brown edges.  Oh — widower? 

No soap.  My widower’s busy with the gorgeous prize of those who make it to the thirteenth rereading, and I won’t say it’s the pleasantest thing I ever saw. 

I return my attention to the rats.  What a sturdy cage.  Iron bars, Inquisition hinges, the heart-shaped padlock anything but a breeze.  Like the strap, the eight outside corners are padded, which mutes the sound of jiggling on a hard surface such as the coffee table, but I’ll bet the padding’s there to protect the Proustian thigh from jabs and bruises as he knocks about eternity with the cage.  I’m getting an idea I like, but in all decency, I should wait until my widower and Proust make it off the green couch and over to the dining table.  Eventually, they’ll stop for a snack — let them figure out what’s good to eat apres.  There’ll be just time for them to clamber atop the table when I snap that padlock.  Then, something shall finally have happened here, and I’ll pull right out — yes, I’ll pull right out — meeting extinction head-on like a train.

This story was posted with kind permission of Tima Smith, editor of Per Se, an anthology of fiction by students of the late Arthur Edelstein. For a closer look at Per Se, go to Amazon. To find out about the Arthur Edelstein Literary Fund, which awards a competition prize of $1000 annually to a writer of fiction, go to The Writing Site, and click on “contests.”

Not-So-Lucky Sevens

by Beth Ann Bovino

The financial markets marked the centennial of the Great Panic of 1907 by holding another panic.  David Wyss, chief economist at Standard and Poors (and my boss) asked whether it’s an accident that these crises often seem to occur in years ending in ‘7’?  He said that “we had financial problems in 1957, 1967, 1987, 1997, and 2007. That it’s hard to tell about 1977 because the whole decade was one long crisis (maybe just having a “7” is bad).” Going back further, 1937 was a bad year, as were 1897, 1907, and, of course, 1917, with the start of America’s participation in World War I.

So, what is it about “7”?  There’s the “Lucky 7” dice roll (of course, roll it the wrong time at a craps table and everyone loses their money).  According to luckymojo.com, 7 is also said to be found on a lot of hoodoo curio packaging, including 7-day candles, and that Lady Luck wears dice for earnings which always show 7 (the Irish-American World War Two version).   It sounds like numerology. And, of course, 1929 negates the picture.  But it’s still pretty spooky.  Given today’s financial crisis, I wanted to learn more (about panics not numerology).

The Panic of 1907 was a financial crisis in the United States. The stock market fell almost 50% from its peak in 1906, the economy was in recession, and there were numerous runs on banks and trust companies because of a retraction of loans by some banks. It started in New York, but then spread across the nation and led to the closings of banks and businesses. While the 1907 panic was the fourth panic in 34 years, the significance of the 1907 Panic as an economic event went far beyond the usual ‘crash and recovery’ story.  The severity of the downturn was one of the major reasons for the founding of the Federal Reserve System, as Congress decided that the U.S. can’t depend on the good will and ability of private bankers to gets banks to cooperate in a time of crisis.

One book I recommend is The Panic of 1907: Lessons Learned from the Market’s Perfect Storm, by Robert F. Bruner and Sean D. Carr. It is an academic study which analyzes the financial crisis that gave America the FDIC and the Federal Reserve. Seems pretty boring, right?  However, much of the book covers the events and personalities of the crisis, to make the account rival an episode from the T.V. show 24. The book begins with the earthquake of 1907.  It then follows the Heinze brothers’ failed effort, using borrowed money, to corner the copper market, which led to panic, the failure of banks and trusts and the impending bankruptcy of New York City. Add to this, J. Pierpont Morgan, the man who, superhero-style, was able to halt the spread of bank runs, though without a mask.

In their book, the authors point out the following disturbing similarities a hundred years later:  “War was fresh in mind. Immigration was fueling dramatic changes in society. New technologies were changing people’s everyday lives. Wall Street was wheeling and dealing…”  In the last chapter on theory, the authors describe which factors are required to develop a financial panic:  Buoyant Growth, Systemic Architecture, Inadequate Safety Buffers, Adverse Leadership, Real Economic Shock, Fear and Greed, Failure of Collective Action. They warned that many of these conditions are seen in 2007.  However, what was meant to be a warning, now describes what has just happened.

While the financial system has changed since 1907, the basic reliance on confidence remains. In addition, any long period of stability results in an underestimate of risk, which is followed by a sudden convulsion as risk perceptions return to more normal levels. When the market corrects, it usually overcorrects, at least temporarily.

The turmoil began in the subprime mortgage market, but has extended far beyond that to a general crisis of confidence. We are watching a classic run on the bank.  However, banks have been disintermediated by the short-term money markets, which have become a virtual bank. The central bank’s role in fighting bank runs has been well established, but needs to be extended to the money markets that now support the banking system.

This one will be likely to affect the economy less than in 1907 because the central banks have learned to handle liquidity squeezes better than in the past. We will have to see if Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke can do a better job than Mr. Morgan.

Bernanke and company seem to be trying.  Since August, the Fed has lowered interest rates by 100 basis points. They also announced the new Term Auction Facility on December 12th.  The measure is intended to provide liquidity to shore up markets that have been frozen by the current pressures in short-term lending markets.  Swap lines have been established to allow the transfer into other currencies… the coordination among the central banks seems like very good news, but the actual function of this auction facility remains unclear and markets remain skeptical.

Judge Not and Buy: Morgan at Art Basel Miami

In The Smart Set, Morgan continues on the Art Basel Miami Beach, and finds solace in consumption:

Clement Greenberg is the brilliant and extreme case. He once wrote:

“Value judgments constitute the substance of aesthetic experience. I don’t want to argue this assertion. I point to it as a fact, the fact that identifies the presence, the reality in experience of the aesthetic. I don’t want to argue, either, about the nature of aesthetic value judgments. They are acts of intuition, and intuition remains unanalyzable.”

I don’t want to argue either. It is a beautiful night in South Beach and there is a man standing on a balcony not far from me exclaiming loudly, slowly, and with labored enunciation, “I am an exceptional artist” to any and everyone standing in the sudden tropical downpour below. Earlier today a man explained to me that he collects old giant objects. Not new giant objects, not old regular-sized objects. He collects old giant objects and he has been doing it obsessively for longer than I have been alive. So, agreed, I’m in no mood to argue about the substance of aesthetic experience. I would like to point out one thing though.

If Clement Greenberg is right than it shouldn’t — it couldn’t — matter whether we’re looking at a work in a museum, in a gallery, in someone’s home, or at an art fair. Intuition is going to do the mysterious work it does and no one’s going to damn well stop it. “Show me a work,” suggests Clem, “and I’ll view it and judge it practically before you even set the sucker down.” This is a site-indifferent approach to the process of looking at art. I suspect you could throw paintings at Clement Greenberg while he was standing at the bottom of a gorge and he would have been satisfied that he’d done most of them justice in the next week’s column. I exaggerate for effect.

But if my Aunt Lou Ann is right, and she has never steered me wrong, then we have to be prepared for the idea that art is not the selfsame thing in all cases that Clement Greenberg (and most of the rest of us, though in less stubborn and precise manner) assume it to be. Point being that if I glance suddenly at an Anselm Kiefer painting in a booth at Art Basel, I’m going to look at it slightly differently if I have an eye toward things I might acquire than if I intend to write an article, or borrow something for a museum show.

Kaleidoscopic Paper Eruptions

Via Andrew Sullivan, the paper cut sculptures of Jen Stark, in PingMag (Japan):Jen12

Look at these intriguing, repetitive shapes like eruptions by Miami-based Jen Stark: Her three-dimensional, kaleidoscopic paper art is simply hand-made with dozens of layers of thick coloured paper. With her abstract geometrical patterns just shown in the new Tactile book, PingMag feeds you an interview with the artist about the quality of cardboard.

When did you start with your… can I call it kaleidoscope paper art?

I began making paper sculptures when I went to study in France for a semester. Since I could only take two suitcases with me for five months, I decided to purchase art supplies when I got there. The Euro was high and everything was pretty expensive, so I decided to get the cheapest but coolest looking thing in the art store – a stack of construction paper! I started experimenting with what paper could turn into and it took off from there.

the abnormals

04_sec1

What is truly worrying is not simply the number of failed democracies. It is rather the extensive misuse of democratic institutions, symbols, and practices. Thus, presidential elections become an opportunity to propel to power an unstable demagogue (Venezuela) and parliamentary elections an opportunity for the business oligarchy to buy political influence (Ukraine). From Thailand to Bolivia, from Russia to the Gaza Strip, democracy everywhere has been perverted beyond recognition; often, demagogues do not even that pretend theirs is the “Western” variant of democracy. Francis Fukuyama’s contention that we are witnessing the final triumph of “liberal democracy” sounds increasingly shallow. The perception of the classical authors is probably truer. Free states are precious few, beacons of light in the dark and boundless ocean of despotism.

more from Eurozine here.

a living, flaming presence

Ianmcewanceamonmccabe

In other words, McEwan’s fiction has sometimes felt artificial. It should be said, in his favor, that most contemporary novelists feel artificial because they are not competent enough to tell a convincing or interesting story; it is a peculiar excess of proficiency and talent, like McEwan’s–or like Robert Stone’s, W. Somerset Maugham’s, or Graham Greene’s–that produces a fiction so competently told that it also feels artificial. Still, one has tended to read McEwan with the sense that he is beautifully constructing and managing various hypothetical situations rather than freely following and grasping at a great truth. (That this latter mode is also an artifice is only a banal paradox.) In particular, McEwan’s characters, while never less than interesting, lively, and sometimes interestingly weird, have tended not to be quite human. Many of them have neither pasts nor futures, but are frozen in the threatening present. Many of them have parents who died when they were young. They rarely refer to their childhoods, and seem not to have the use of deep memory as such. McEwan, unlike most writers, has not seemed to need any kitty of childhood detail on which to draw. This absence of past stories, of loitering retrospect, allows him to polish the clean lines of his stories. Since his writing rarely dips into the reflective past, it can exist the better as pure novelty. This is the key to McEwan’s extraordinary narrative stealth. His fictions, like detective stories, are always moving forward. They seem to shed their sentences rather than to accumulate them.

more from TNR here.

amelia

Ssjonimitchell2

This is a love letter. To a love song. One I keep returning to. One I keep feeling I need to do justice to. I don’t know if I can, but I’ll try.

A couple of months ago, I’d gone back to playing it. Only I can’t play it just once. I have to play it over and over again for hours on end. I can’t get enough of it. It’s not just a love song: It’s a road song, it’s a motel song, it’s a Southwestern desert song, it’s a disappearance and death song. It’s a Joni Mitchell song. It’s “Amelia.”

People get that way about Joni Mitchell songs. Bob Dylan once told me that he’d written “Tangled up in Blue,” the opening song of the much-celebrated Blood on the Tracks, after spending a weekend immersed in JM’s Blue (although I think he may have been talking about the whole album, not just the song).

more from Slate here.

Sunday Poem

Via NoUtopia:

Trust
Screenhunter_8_2Thomas R. Smith

It’s like so many other things in life
to which you must say no or yes.
So you take your car to the new mechanic.
Sometimes the best thing to do is trust.

The package left with the disreputable-looking
clerk, the check gulped by the night deposit,
the envelope passed by dozens of strangers–
all show up at their intended destinations.
The theft that could have happened doesn’t.

Wind finally gets where it was going
through the snowy trees, and the river, even
when frozen, arrives at the right place.

And sometimes you sense how faithfully your life
is delivered, even though you can’t read the address.

Give Fareed Zakaria a Medal!

Tony Karon in Rootless Cosmopolitan:

FareedFareed Zakaria deserves a medal for breaking with the mainstream media pack to slap down, with the requisite rudeness, the hysteria over Iran being manufactured by the neocons, opportunist Israeli politicians and the Bush Administration. Perhaps stung by having participated in a secret Bush Administration policy discussion to help shape the Iraq war policy before the invasion, Zakaria is acting with honor now to prevent another disaster. This while much of the rest of the media is futzing around asking the wrong questions on Iran and getting the answers that only the wrong questions can produce. Exhibit A: The Washington Post editorial suggesting that the only “alternative” to harsh new sanctions that most of the international community opposes is war, and then scolding “those who say they oppose military action — including a couple of the second-tier Democratic presidential candidates — to portray the sanctions initiative as a buildup to war by Mr. Bush. We’ve seen no evidence that the president has decided on war, and it’s clear that many senior administration officials understand the package as the best way to avoid military action. It is not they but those who oppose tougher sanctions who make war with Iran more likely.”

More here.

In ‘Kite Runner,’ A Culture Swoops Into View: Our Own

Robin Givhan in The Washington Post:

It’s impossible not to be charmed by the two boys who star in the film, which opened Friday and is based on the best-selling book about friendship, betrayal and guilt. Ahmad Khan Mahmidzada and Zekeria Ebrahimi have faces far more expressive and eloquent than any of the dialogue they recite. In particular, Ahmad Khan, who plays Hassan, has a face of such exquisite soulfulness that it’s almost too much to bear. It takes approximately five seconds to fall in love with him.

Kite_3 Because the boys’ story is set in Afghanistan in the 1970s, both speak entirely in Dari. There are English subtitles, but the young actors’ facial expressions are especially important in the telling of their story. English-speaking audiences don’t have the benefit of subtle vocal intonations to help them connect with the characters. But they do have American popular culture. It’s there from the moment Zekeria, who plays the privileged young Amir, appears on-screen. He’s wearing a striped sweater and ski vest and looks as though he has stepped from the pages of any class photo from middle America. The boys are obsessed with “The Magnificent Seven” and its stars, Steve McQueen and Charles Bronson. They’ve seen the movie so many times that they can quote dialogue. And the streets of their home town are filled with Western tourists; bohemians and hippies wander through the market. There’s nothing terribly obvious or heavy-handed in the way American popular culture is portrayed. It’s simply an undeniable part of their daily life.

More here.

American beauty? British women are unkempt and lazy about grooming

Tad Safran in The Times:

Tad385_255135a In the iconic chick-flick Bridget Jones’s Diary, the title character is a sad, lonely, overweight, posh-sounding chain-smoker in her thirties with a drinking problem and no dating prospects. She then, one day, goes to the gym for an hour or two, spends £200 at Topshop, reads a self-help book and, lo and behold, she finds herself in the delightful position of having to decide between Hugh Grant and Colin Firth.

Women of Britain: Bridget Jones’s Diary is not a documentary. It’s a work of fiction, a fairytale. The fact is that control-top granny pants are simply not a substitute for regular exercise, thoughtful grooming and a healthy diet. Certainly not if you’re single and interested in men. An informal poll of my US female friends revealed that they spend roughly $700 (£350) a month on what they consider standard obligatory beauty maintenance. That covers haircut, highlights, manicure, pedicure, waxing, tanning, make-up, facials, teeth whitening etc. They will spend a further $1,000 (£500) a month on physical conditioning such as military fitness, spinning sessions, vikram yoga, Pilates, deep-tissue sports massage, personal training etc. On top of that, add the occasional spa day, a week-long “bikini boot camp” in Mexico at the start of every summer and seasonal splurges on personal shoppers and clothing. I’m not sure any of my British female friends spends £700 during an entire year on her appearance. American women see these costs as a simple and sensible investment in their future.

More here.

Charm City

Baltimore3b_2

Mark Kamine in the New York Times Book Review:

The name Charm City first came into use during a 1974 garbage strike and heat wave that led to looting and arson. This darkly droll anecdote, with which the novelist Madison Smartt Bell opens his guide to Baltimore, gives fair warning of what’s to follow. A standard tourist itinerary can be gleaned from the handful of walks Bell describes, but Frommer would serve better for those interested in simply seeing the sights and eating fine food. Bell’s Baltimore is a real city: complex, ever changing, often gritty and dangerous, always interesting.

The four walking partners Bell teams up with become guides to very particular facets of the city. Eric Singer, a transplant from South Africa, accompanies him through a sketchy stretch of discount stores, thrift shops and dive bars. Singer, like Bell, has an eye for racial divisions. Here we pick up useful tourist lore, including the local nickname for narcs (“knockers”) and the location of a grove of old trees in a church garden whose “deep calm” may be the reason homeless people camp there.

More here.

Inside the CIA’s notorious “black sites”

A Yemeni man never charged by the U.S. details 19 months of brutality and psychological torture — the first in-depth, first-person account from inside the secret U.S. prisons.

Screenhunter_6_2

Mark Benjamin in Salon:

The CIA held Mohamed Farag Ahmad Bashmilah in several different cells when he was incarcerated in its network of secret prisons known as “black sites.” But the small cells were all pretty similar, maybe 7 feet wide and 10 feet long. He was sometimes naked, and sometimes handcuffed for weeks at a time. In one cell his ankle was chained to a bolt in the floor. There was a small toilet. In another cell there was just a bucket. Video cameras recorded his every move. The lights always stayed on — there was no day or night. A speaker blasted him with continuous white noise, or rap music, 24 hours a day.

The guards wore black masks and black clothes. They would not utter a word as they extracted Bashmilah from his cell for interrogation — one of his few interactions with other human beings during his entire 19 months of imprisonment. Nobody told him where he was, or if he would ever be freed.

It was enough to drive anyone crazy. Bashmilah finally tried to slash his wrists with a small piece of metal, smearing the words “I am innocent” in blood on the walls of his cell. But the CIA patched him up.

So Bashmilah stopped eating. But after his weight dropped to 90 pounds, he was dragged into an interrogation room, where they rammed a tube down his nose and into his stomach. Liquid was pumped in. The CIA would not let him die.

More here.  [Thanks to Élan Reisner.]

On Coetzee’s Emigration

Rachel Donadio in the NYT:Donadio190

This month, Viking will publish “Diary of a Bad Year,” the latest novel by J. M. Coetzee. With his spare prose and unsparing sense of the human condition, Coetzee is one of the most important novelists at work today. His biographical note mentions his 2003 Nobel Prize and 18 previously published books. It also presents, understatedly, a significant fact: “A native of South Africa, Coetzee now lives in Adelaide, Australia.

A host of questions lurk behind that simple sentence. Why would a novelist who has written so powerfully about the land of his birth pack up and leave? Were his 2002 move and his taking of Australian citizenship last year a betrayal of his homeland, or a rejoinder to a country whose new government had denounced one of his most important novels as racist? Was it just another example of the “white flight” that has sent hundreds of thousands of generally affluent South Africans to other Anglophone countries since the end of apartheid? Or was it a tacit acknowledgment that Coetzee had exhausted his South African material, that the next chapter in the country’s history was the rise of the black middle class, and what did an old resistance writer, with his aloof, middle-aged white narrators, know about that?

Evolution of the Hive Mind

Rusty Rockets in Science a Go Go:

Now that scientists are readily identifying genomic changes due to selective pressures, what’s next? Would it be too far fetched to suggest that social pressures could affect brain function at a genetic level? At least one study has identified collective behavioral differences between Western cultures like the United States and China, possibly suggesting the beginning of brain divergence among humans.

The study, from the University of Chicago, makes the claim that people living in the United States have difficulties with accepting another person’s point of view, which they put down to US culture prizing individualism. They say that in China, where a collectivist attitude is encouraged, quite the opposite is true, with Chinese citizens being much more in tune with how others are thinking. As a result, the researchers argue that there may be more scope for communication confusion among Western citizens relative to citizens of China. “Members of these two cultures seem to have a fundamentally different focus in social situations. Members of collectivist cultures tend to be interdependent and to have self-concepts defined in terms of relationships and social obligations,” says Boaz Keysar, a Professor in Psychology at the University of Chicago. “In contrast, members of individualist cultures tend to strive for independence and have self-concepts defined in terms of their own aspirations and achievements.”

Race and the Speed of Human Evolution

In the Economist:Cst912

PROBABLY, more bad science has been conducted on the concept of human race than on any other field of biology. The reason is that an awful lot of research into race has been motivated by preconceived ideas that one lot of people are somehow “better” than another lot, rather than being a disinterested investigation of regional variations in a single species and the evolutionary pressures that have created them.

Contrariwise, even well constructed studies, if they do find racial differences, risk opposition from those who deny that people from different parts of the world could ever differ genetically from one another in important ways. As a result, only the foolish or the daring rush in to add to the carnage. It remains to be seen which category the authors of two papers in this week’s Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences fall into.

One of the papers, written by Andrea Migliano and her colleagues at Cambridge University, looks at a local outcome of human evolution—the short stature often known as pygmyism—and tries to explain the evolutionary circumstances that cause it. The other, by Robert Moyzis of the University of California, Irvine, and his colleagues, asks a broader question: how much evolutionary change has happened since Homo sapiens climbed out of his African cradle and began to colonise the world? The answer is, quite a lot—and the rate of change seems to have speeded up.

Forgiveness

Roger Scruton reviews Charles Griswold’s Forgiveness in the TLS:

Forgiveness is not achieved unilaterally: it is the result of a dialogue, which may be tacit, but which involves reciprocal communication of an extended and delicate kind. The one who forgives goes out to the one who has injured him, and his gesture involves a changed state of mind, a reorientation towards the other, and a setting aside of resentment. Such an existential transformation is not always or easily attained, and can only be achieved, Griswold suggests, through an effort of cooperation and sympathy, in which each person strives to set his own interests aside and look on the other from the posture of the “impartial spectator”, as Smith described it. Crucial in this process are the “narratives” which the parties recount to themselves, and Griswold draws interestingly on recent work in “narratology” in his search for the crucial factor in the process of psychic repair. This is the factor that permits a voiding of resentment in the one soul, and a self-giving through contrition in the other. Each party’s narrative is both an account of the injury, and an allocation of blame; ideal and reality, exoneration and fault, are all woven together, and forgiveness can be seen as in part an attempt to harmonize the narratives, so that the story comes to an end in a new beginning.

Griswold’s arguments are deep, far-reaching and all the more effective for the many interesting examples, drawn from recent events and biographical accounts. He sets a paradigm before us, in which one person injures another, seeks forgiveness and then receives it. The injury and the seeking are as important for Griswold as the final forgiveness, and he rightly rejects the view that forgiveness is simply a “gift” that can be bestowed by the injured party whatever the state of mind of the one who had hurt him. You don’t succeed in forgiving when you have shown no recognition of the fault, and you don’t recognize a fault if you regard it with indifference, and without the natural resentment with which one moral being receives the injuries inflicted by another.

New solar systems

Matthew Night at CNN:

Screenhunter_5Not since the 1970’s, when the energy crisis forced oil prices through the roof, have solar power solutions been so warmly received.

Most people associate solar power with shiny black panels — called photovoltaic cells (PV’s) –which nestle on rooftops trapping the heat from the sun and converting it into electricity.

But sightings of solar panels on suburban streets remain rare, not least because of the prohibitive cost of purchase and installation.

But there are other ways of capturing the power of the sun which may provide a considerable chunk of our energy needs in the years ahead. Research is increasingly focusing on ‘concentrated solar power’ systems — CSP for short.

More here.

A coterie of Transcendentalists

3427180114130033

Almost anyone who muddled their way through high school has heard of the Transcendentalists. Plenty of people could even name some of them: Ralph Waldo Emerson, Henry David Thoreau or even, perhaps, Walt Whitman. Some of us might even own a dog-eared paperback of “Walden.” But only a few of us could tell you what Transcendentalism actually means.

We shouldn’t feel too bad about this, it turns out, for even in its heyday, from the 1830s through the 1850s, the average American was equally befuddled by the term. “When a speaker talked so that his audience didn’t understand him, and when he said what he didn’t understand himself — that was transcendentalism,” as one newspaper reporter joked in 1853.

Philip Gura, a professor of American literature and culture at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, sets out to change all that. He has succeeded grandly. In “American Transcendentalism: A History,” Gura untangles this complex web of ideas and characters and weaves them into a clear, coherent and compelling tale of America’s first, and maybe greatest, major intellectual movement.

more from The LA Times here.