hello monday! (150420)

150420.jpg

i was looking through the photos on my iphone, and, as it turns out, i had several of the melville house tote bag lying around, so here are three photos of the melville house tote because tonight was the game of totes at housing works and melville house was eliminated in the first round despite a rousing speech.

(tin house won.)

(also, and maybe most importantly, i got me one of the shiny new lit hub totes.  :D)


sometimes, i'm surprised by the disconnect between faith and comfort, how, oftentimes, the common immediate response to an admission of suffering or pain runs along the lines of you should pray about it; trust in God; i'll pray for you.  it isn't that i don't understand where that comes from because, as a christian, i get it -- there is a need and a place for exhortation -- but that's the thing -- there's a place for it, a time for it, and, sometimes, it's the wrong initial response.

michel faber captured this religious instinct accurately in his novel, the book of strange new things (hogarth, 2014), so much so that i wanted to reach in and shake peter (the main character) for his inability to comfort his wife, to sympathize with her first as her husband, to tap into human understanding for their situation -- he's away on another planet, ministering to aliens, and she's alone at home, dealing with a world that's falling to pieces.  she's having an understandably difficult time coping because everything's seriously gone to hell on earth, and, finally, she cracks in one of their communications (done via writing, kinda like e-mail), pouring out her frustrations and vulnerabilities to her husband, only for him to reply with religion.

one might argue that someone's spiritual well-being is top priority, and i'm not here to argue about that because that doesn't negate the fact that part of this thing of being human (and, even, on a religious level, of ministering to each other) is that we have a variety of needs that require tending.  and that, sometimes, all someone needs is comfort or assurance or solace.  that, sometimes, it's enough to give a hug or ask, are you okay?, and listen -- the spiritual exhortations and appeals can wait for later after the heart has been soothed, the pain abated, but, often times, there's a tendency to skip the heart and go straight to the religion and expect that that is enough and, if it isn't, ooo, bad christian, how small is your faith.

that said, i did deeply appreciate that faber didn't simply stop there but also explored the struggle for peter, too, in being confused and frustrated that his exhortations only further angered bea.  religion is his default; he has to wrestle with bea's continued irritation with him because he thinks he's saying the appropriate things; and i appreciated that because, for some people, myself included, sympathy isn't something that comes naturally.  sometimes, for some of us, it's a struggle to know how to act or respond in the face of great emotional need, and peter has to try and try again before he finally understands what it is bea needs, and it isn't religious exhortations or rebuke but simply comfort and understanding on a human level from heart to heart, from husband to wife.


you know what phrase i hate?  like deeply, passionately hate?  "make love."  it's so ... prissy ... why not just say "have sex" or go for the wonderfully carnal, visceral, aggressive "fuck"?


anthony doerr's all the light we cannot see won the pulitzer for fiction, and i'm not surprised.  i also don't have much in reaction to it?  i didn't read it; it wasn't on my list of TBRs; and the pulitzer honestly doesn't further incline me to pick it up.  i'm not side-eyeing this one like i side-eyed donna tartt's the goldfinch last year, though, so hey there's that!


this week's poem!  or part of a poem!  though it feels odd to "excerpt" poems, but what can you do.  this is from ted hughes' birthday letters (FSG, 1998), from a poem called "the 59th bear."  have a good week, all!

that was our fifty-ninth bear.  i saw, well enough,
the peril that see-saws opposite
a curious impulse -- what slight flicker
in a beast's brain electrifies tonnage
and turns life to paper.  i did not see
what flicker in yours, what need later
transformed our dud scenario into a fiction --
or what self-salvation
squeezed the possible blood out of it
through your typewriter ribbon.
                                            at that time
i had not understood
how the death hurtling to and fro
inside your head, had to alight somewhere
and again somewhere, and had to be kept moving,
and had to be rested
temporarily somewhere.

hello monday! (150413)

in his interview with the asian american writers' workshop's ken chen, kazuo ishiguro says:

i became interested in how people told the story of their own lives to themselves and how they deceive themselves.  how sometimes they wanted to look at shameful episodes from the past that they had participated in and other times they absolutely did not want to look at those things.

and 

the parent-child or any relationship tends to become dependent on some unspoken agreement not to go to certain memories, certain dark passages.  after a while, you start to ask, is our bond, is our love, based on something phony if it depends on things being kept hidden?

when i think about memory, i think of nell, my favorite band.  a few years ago, when they finally made a comeback after four years away, during a TV appearance, jong-wan (vocalist + songwriter) said:

예전에는 뭔가 잃는게 굉장히 두려웠던 것 같에요.  그리고 그게 되게 힘들고 … 근데 시간이 점점 지나면서는 내가 잃는 것 보다는 뭔가 잊어가고 있는 것들이 굉장히 슬프게 느껴지들아구요.  제가 예를 들어서 그 어떤 소중한 사람이 됐든 아니면 꿈이 됐든 그걸 잃어가는 것 보다는 내가 그런 것 자체가 있었다는 것 조차 잊어가는게 슾퍼서 아마 전반적인 앨범에 가사 내용이 좀 그런 내용이 아닌가 …

before, i think i was afraid of losing things.  and that was incredibly difficult … but, as time passed, instead of losing things, i started to feel more sadness about forgetting things.  for example, whether it’s an important person or a dream, instead of losing that, because i felt sad about forgetting that i even had such a person/thing, i think that’s why the lyrics on this album generally have that quality …*

for some reason, i've always thought of this in terms of memory, in losing memories versus forgetting memories.  there's a degree of willfulness attached to losing something, that there is some contributing action that leads to the loss, whereas forgetting happens when we don't mean for it to happen, when we want to hold onto something and keep it close, only to realize one day that what we so cherished has slipped away -- and, yet, at the same time, could we not see forgetting as a type of loss, too?  but, yet again, i wonder if this also is a way that english fails me because there is something so distinctive about these words in korean, to lose (잃는다) versus to forget (잊는다) that makes the comparison so poignant, so melancholy, so regretful.

the exploration of memory, though, is one reason i love ishiguro's books, especially when paired with his exquisite first-person and the nostalgic tones with which he imbues his books, and i'm interested in the new places his explorations of memory have taken him.  in the buried giant (knopf, 2015), there's a mist caused by a dragon that causes people to forget, but these memories aren't lost because they will be awakened again once the dragon has been slain.  when these memories are regained, tensions and conflicts will return to the land, which begs the question, is it better to forget then, to accept the loss instead of questioning it?  and, on a more intimate scale, is it better in a marriage, in a relationship, in a friendship to claim forgetfulness?  like ishiguro said to chen, where are the foundations then, and are they real and valid or fake?

how long can something be sustained when essential memories have been forgotten?

who are we when we've lost or forgotten our memories?  who are we to each other when we've lost or forgotten our memories?

nicole krauss explores this in her debut novel, man walks into a room (doubleday, 2002), in which the main character, samson, wakes up one day in las vegas, having somehow made his way out west from new york city, though he has no recollection of this.  as it turns out, he has a brain tumor, which has erased his memories since childhood, and, though his wife, anna, brings him back home post-operation healthy and physically well, nothing is familiar to him -- everything's been erased, lost, forgotten.  he is no longer the man she married and built a life with, and she is nobody to him, and their marriage cannot be sustained.

the truth, though, is that it doesn't necessarily take a brain tumor to lose or forget because, as humans, we're subject to change, and, sometimes, to maintain our relationships, we willfully lose or forget things.  or we simply lose or forget memories as we get older, become different people, and how regretful a prospect is that, sometimes, that this is something we can't help, and is it natural, then, that we've become a culture so obsessed with remembering, with curating our lives and preserving them on facebook, twitter, instagram, blogs, like, if we don't leave some record of ourselves behind, it'll be like we were never here, like we've never lived these lives?

"slip away" (from nell's album, slip away) ends:

혼자 남겨진 외로움보다, 
눈물로 얼룩진 마음보다,
뒤엉켜버린 그 시간보다, 
단 하나뿐인 그 진실보다,
잊혀져갈 이 모든 게 애처롭다
추억조차 지워갈 내 그 모습이 눈물겹다
익숙해질 그 모습이 눈물겹다

more than the loneliness of being left alone,
more than the heart spotted with tears,
more than that entangled time,
more than that singular truth,
all these things i'll forget are more painful,
the self that will erase every memory is more pitiful,
the self that will become accustomed to that is more pitiful.*

* all translations are mine; even if they are crappily done, i still claim ownership of them.


april is national poetry month, so here's a poem (or part of a poem) every monday for the rest of the month, which is really my way of saying, here's a poem by ted hughes.  today's is the end of one of my favorite poems, and i will leave you with this -- have a good week, all!

even in my dreams, our house was in ruins.
but suddenly -- the third time -- you were there.
younger than i had ever known you.  you
as if new made, half a wild roe, half
a flawless thing, priceless, facetted
like a cobalt jewel.  you came behind me
(at my helpless moment, as i lowered
a testing foot into the running bath)
and spoke -- peremptory, as a familiar voice
will startle out of a river's uproar, urgent,
close:  'this is the last.  this one.  this time
don't fail me.'

howls & whispers, "the offers"

hello monday! (150406)

mmm, so, the monthly recap did not get written over the weekend (clearly), but, in my defense, i was still (am still sorta) recovering from a bad sinus cold.  i'm also going out of town tomorrow for an overnight trip, so shall we say march books will be up by thursday evening?  yes?  ok!


last week, i read michel faber's the book of strange new things (which is easily one of the most beautiful books i have laid my eyes upon) with a friend on instagram, and we finished over the weekend.  i spent the last 50 pages sobbing my eyes out because the oasans had burrowed their way into my heart to an extent unbeknownst to me until i started crying and could not stop, and the book has sat with me these last two days, which i dare say is a pretty good thumbs-up as far as an endorsement of the book goes.

i particularly appreciated how faber wrote peter (the main character and the missionary to oasis) -- faber wasn't judgmental of peter, even when peter really started exhibiting the more gnarly parts of legalistic christianity, but neither did he try to soften the edges and try to make peter more "likable" (for lack of a better word).  i liked that peter was human even in the ways that he internalizes his faith; he is so many legalistic, self-absorbed christians i know and have grown up knowing; and, in many ways, i found the book of strange new things to be refreshing in its presentation of faith, while also being fascinating for not having a particular slant either way.  peter is who he is; faith is what it is; and it is up to the reader to make his/her own judgment.

(or maybe this is me being sensitive to faith and expecting disparaging views toward faith and religious people in books [and pretty much everything].  there is also that.)


themes i respond strongly, viscerally, emotionally to in books:  loneliness, siblings, loss.


tonight (monday night), i went to hear jennifer weiner who gave a talk titled "how to be authentic on social media" as part of pen america's DIY series.  this shall be the write-up from the talk because i wrote down exactly three things:

  1. weiner made a defense for twitter as being a place where writers can practice, to try out new things and essentially get feedback because followers will respond so you can get a sense of what works and what doesn't -- and i wrote this down because i don't particularly agree with this.
  2. emily gould (who joined weiner in conversation after the talk) likes birds and knows about birding!  (i did not know this!)  she likes people best then cats ... then birds are somewhere there.
  3. gould said she agreed with about 98% of what weiner said about twitter but disagreed with about 2%, part of which was that she thinks that it should be okay for writers who aren't comfortable with twitter not to be on twitter (and with which i vehemently agree).

weiner was exactly as i expected -- funny, personable, gregarious with lots of digs directed at franzen -- but, ultimately, i am a non-[public-]tweeter, and i find all this "if you want to be a writer now, you have to be on social media" thing immensely discouraging.  but neither does it compel me to get on twitter ...  however, i am an instagram fiend, and i think that's quite enough.


the 2014 vida count is out and ... what can i say about it that hasn't been said yet.


i'm going out of town tomorrow for an overnight trip and am looking forward to it, to hopping on a train and getting away for thirty-six hours.  i'm taking flannery o'connor's the habit of being (her letters) with me, and i like how blunt she can be -- or i suppose "blunt" might not be the right word, but o'connor doesn't necessarily play in niceties, and i appreciate that.

i should end this here and pack or something, but i feel like lingering.  i'm feeling a bit soul-weary tonight, a little lonely, and i'm thinking that maybe i should reread something because i'd like to sink into an old friend, seek out the comfort of something familiar and warm and safe.  what to read, what to read -- i guess we'll see what my heart lands upon on friday!

have a great week all!  and, if you're in the nyc area, enjoy spring!

hello monday! (150330)

maybe one of the contradictions/surprises of my life is that i write short stories yet i read so few of them.  to be quite honest, i’m impressed by so few of them; there’s a sparseness to short stories that i can’t get into; and i personally enjoy being able to sink into a story and luxuriate in it, spending hours or days or weeks with the characters in their world.

over the weekend, i read alice munro's the beggar maid for book club, and this was my second munro collection.  i admit to not having been all that enthused by my first munro collection, hateship friendship courtship loveship marriage, maybe because i didn't "get it" or maybe because her narrative eye is so honed in to a particular, provincial life that i kept feeling myself drifting away -- who knows, but i can understand the argument for munro being boring.

the beggar maid was better, though, and i'd say it was because the stories in this collection are interrelated, following the same characters at different points in their lives without feeling like munro had meant to write a novel but had somehow fallen short of that.  these were decidedly short stories, and i enjoyed them for the way that they layered upon each other, though i will say ... god, munro bums me the fuck out.  she gets there in the gritty and dark recesses of human behavior, but she does so without sentimentalizing it or glorifying it or making it seem like something out of the norm, and i find that to be more off-putting because it's true -- acts of violence against women aren't a one-off thing, and they've been so inculcated into our culture that we absorb it, and i think that is the most terrifying thing about it.


the tournament of books has been going on, and, because of it, i find i have a lot of thoughts about roxane gay's an untamed state when, to be honest, had the tournament not been going on (and had it not been my march crack), the book would have completely slipped out of my mind. 

however, because the ToB is my crack and an untamed state has been advancing, which means i've read all the comments about it and had to mull over it myself, i can say that i didn't like an untamed state.  i commend it for its content and the frankness with which gay writes about rape and the violence mireille endures and her PTSD after she's set free, but, unfortunately, content ultimately isn't enough, and an untamed state fell apart in so many ways.  for one, the writing was clumsy and clunky, and, for another, mireille never convinced me as a human being, and, for another, the marriage failed to convince me and the dual points-of-view confused me and, while i did love mireille and lorraine, i wasn't convinced of that either.

setting aside the last few points and focusing on the first, though:  i understand that gay was trying to do something with the writing, that she was trying to demonstrate that, sometimes, language fails us, to communicate that mireille has been through trauma and this is her story so this is her voice and it's been fractured.  i understand that, similarly, mireille's portrayal of herself is also not going to be sweet and sentimental (as well as her portrayal of her marriage), and i didn't find any of that problematic -- it's just that intention is one thing, and execution is another.  ultimately, the language in an untamed state does not convey the failure of language or the brokenness of a woman.  mireille does not come across as an actual human being, more like a figure upon which these violent acts have been committed but not in a way of mireille having disappeared because of the trauma.  and, because mireille reads like a string of character quirks almost (her penchant for throwing things comes to mind), i fail to be convinced of everything else:  her marriage, her taking care of lorraine when lorraine is ill, her relationship with her parents, etcetera.  in the end, unfortunately, intention is not sufficient, and gay's writing in an untamed state is simply clunky and clumsy and flat instead of being fully-realized and vibrant and alive.  

and i don't think that's an unfair thing to pick on because the writing really is the foundation.  if the writing rings false or contrived or flat, it inevitably distances readers, and i pick on the clumsy writing of an untamed state because it was the reason i couldn't connect with the book -- i could make myself feel for mireille in an abstract way, but, in the end, she felt riddled with holes, again not in the sense of her having been fractured but simply in the sense that the writing wasn't there to hold her.


i’ve decided to give up on the friday posts, at least in the way they were intentioned to be about writing from a personal POV.  maybe i'm not ready to be vulnerable in that way yet.  heh.  i’d still like to keep posting on fridays, though, but i’m not sure how they’ll proceed yet.  i shall continue ruminating upon it!

that said, i am excited for this week.  i’m going to hear marilynne robinson tonight, and tomorrow is pub day for selfish, shallow, and self-absorbed, and i have been waiting for this book for months.  i cannot wait to have it in my hands to read and to hold, and housing works is hosting a launch event, so i’m super stoked for that, too!

how're y'all doing?

hello monday! (150323)

i'm currently reading miriam toews' all my puny sorrows, and i think this might be the first time i've held a book at arm's length.  the voice is incredible, and the characters are fleshed out and fully human, and i appreciate the book for its depiction of how a sister and a family rally around a depressed and suicidal loved one -- but that's also why i hold it at arm's length.  i'm wary about these narratives, am more interested in hearing from the suicidal themselves, and so i'm reading all my puny sorrows slowly with a queasiness rolling around in my stomach, hoping, don't fuck this up, don't fuck this up, don't fuck this up, as i flip each page.

thus far, though, i'm thoroughly appreciating it -- yoli's voice, the humor that prevents the book from sinking into indulgent despair, toews' generous but honest depiction of elfie.  i love elfie in ways that squeeze my heart and make me feel for her, hurt for her, and toews has done a beautiful job of showing her for all her contradictions, too -- she isn't a caricature or a stereotype (okay, part of the precocious, genius pianist part is a little much), and she's vulnerable and infinitely human in her desire to end her life.  (none of this is a spoiler, so don't worry.)  i'm a little more than halfway through the book now and hope it is good all the way to the end!


i spent yesterday afternoon with a friend, going to a reading, eating pie, and talking books, and she mentioned (or asked about, i forget which) my rereading tendencies.  as it goes, i reread quite a bit -- i know some might argue that there are so many books out there to read that time's essentially wasted rereading books -- but i love to go back to the books i love, the books that stay with me and come back to me time and time again.  and i love rereading, the discovery of new things, of things i missed previously, seeing how i read books differently now that i've changed because reading isn't a static act -- we bring our experiences and our needs and our desires to the books we read, so it's inevitable that they'll touch us in different ways at different points in our lives.

sometimes, though, i admit it's disappointing in ways, like with me and haruki murakami.  i loved him intensely when i first started reading him in my early twenties, but, over the years, as i've gone back to some of his books and read his new books as they were released in translation, i find myself less and less enamored, more and more aware and critical of the sameness of his work, the sterile tones, the flatness of his women.  even so (or maybe in such ways), i think of him nostalgically because he spoke so intimately to a specific chapter in my life, when i felt myself drifting and aimless and isolated, so i suppose i can't necessarily call it disappointing, especially because this is one of the things that makes the reader's life dynamic -- that our tastes change as we change, that the themes we respond to and seek out morph as we grow.  further, it's true that the author-reader relationship is just that -- a relationship -- and, like all relationships, it's subject to change and growth and, sometimes, termination.


it's been an ambivalent reading year thus far.  i know i've read books in 2015 that i've loved, but i'm having a hard time recollecting them.  i've read several books i've loved/enjoyed in the moment but have ultimately turned out to have no sticking factor.  i've dropped (or wanted to drop) a few books, which i hate doing, and i've resorted to skimming pages just to get to the end, which i also hate doing.  i've been wary of going into bookstores and browsing because i'm suddenly very wary of buying books that will disappoint (man, find me burned me bad), but that's okay because i've been liking oyster books because libraries and i are a disastrous pairing.

maybe i'm just in an ambivalent place at the moment.  or maybe it really is just the recent string of books that fell flat.  which, i must add, also make me reread because, when new books are disappointing, i like turning to a familiar favorite because there's a sense of safety there.  which is why i'm also currently reading franzen's strong motion for the second time because i thoroughly enjoyed it the first time around and have wanted to come back to it ever since, so i decided, what the hell?  purity (and its terrible cover) is five months away, anyway, and the heart wants what the heart wants.  in my opinion, strong motion deserves more love -- it really is the ignored second child, but it's really good!  i feel like franzen grew tremendously as a writer between the twenty-seventh city (which i reread last year and realized i didn't like) and strong motion, hideous cover and all.

heh, i suppose there's my update about my planned reading of middlemarch ...

(seriously, though, september really can't come soon enough, especially when september will also bring us a new book-in-translation from shin kyung-sook!!!  cannot wait!)