Keith Richards on a boat crossing the English Channel

Marie, an acquaintance at the cafes, told me the following story: She was twenty years old and inside the big ferry that took people back and forth between Dover, in England, and Calais in France. The Rolling Stones were there, going to France for a tour. They had a truck loaded with equipment, and they stood around talking quietly, not making a fuss about themselves. “Keith Richard, he give me a smile,” Marie said, a couple of times, still proud. She said she’d been walking past the group, trying to get a look, and she’d been holding her little daughter Catherine, who was then just a year old but is now forty-two.

We were talking because Marie just had a biopsy and is now waiting to hear what her specialist has to say. You can see the poignance in this situation — present-day Marie and Marie as a lovely young mother with child. She’s scared right now, and it takes a few minutes’ talk before she brightens up and remembers the Keith Richards moment. But even at the best of times, when Marie is her usual, high-spirited self, there is still something wrong with her. She told me once that she had been on a heavy prescription tranquilizer for years, against anxiety, and I guess I would describe her as zonked. Her gaze rarely comes together. She’s big and vague, and she has trouble judging what’s what: when she sees a familiar barista, she acts like a friend is back from Europe. For someone who hangs out in coffee shops, she has no idea how to talk indoors; you have to gently talk her down and lower her volume.
To tell the truth, it’s a relief when you notice that she has clean clothes, that her hair is styled. She isn’t a derelict and she’s got a life. I see her with friends sometimes, other old folks, and she talks a lot about her two daughters. She has an apartment and invited me to Sunday afternoon party, and of course I forgot to go. But she was fine with that; lots of other people had been there.
My favorite Marie story is when I bought a new laptop and she was poking her finger at one pretty picture or another on the screen.  “Ah, c’est beau,” she said, and she lunged from the hips; her finger got to the screen first, but her whole torso was in train. “Marie, pas de doigts, s’il vous plait,” I told her.  She said, “Oh, pardon,” but a moment later she was lunging again: “Ah, c’est belle!” If she likes looking at something, she wants to touch it.
A friend, another cafe rat, told me once that he thought Marie was infantile. That’s right in its essential part: she really is like a child, something I didn’t put together until my friend pointed it out. But normally “infantile” implies brattishness, and Marie is a sweetheart. She really wanted to keep her fingers off my new screen, but then she saw that picture of a sand dune and forgot herself. I guess “childlike” would do it, but the word makes me think of a poet with a childlike vision or of a girl who has a childlike seriousness. With Marie it’s an all-over, universal, constant childlikeness, and I feel that a term with a clinical sound is called for. To me it’s like her stages of development have been razed right back to the ground floor; lucky for her she was a happy child, because all those other years have been wrecked.
Her attention doesn’t last, which is good in a way. We have a couple minutes of talk, always a lively and agreeable couple of minutes, and then she says, “Au revoir, Tom. Goodbye, Tom” and I go back to my computer. Yesterday I saw her in conversation with another man, one who kept her longer than she wanted. He was sitting, she was standing, and as they talked Marie started to flex and straighten at the knees; her chin bobbed bob up and down. She looked like a ten-year-old who wanted to climb something.
Anyway, that’s the rundown on Marie. Her appointment with the specialist is Thursday, and now that I think of it, I leave town Friday for a couple of weeks in New York. So who knows when I’ll find out whether she has cancer. I like her, and I make a point of listening when we talk, but really I’m a good acquaintance, not a good friend.

Monkey, dig your grave

Having grown accustomed to his freedom in The Jungle, the “humanized” chimp needed too much supervision and went berserk when he was put in his cage. … When Jerry became more and more impossible, Dutton took Jerry into a nearby orange grove and gave him a shovel. “I had him dig a deep hole,” Dutton said. “When he was finished, I told him to jump inside. Then a policeman friend shot him in the head.” 

“Dutton” is Jack Dutton, described as an “eccentric millionaire and showman.” He built up a private menagerie, then put it on display as an Anaheim tourist attraction called The Jungle. Jerry the chimp was the attraction’s top-billed star, “The World’s Most Human Chimpanzee.” 
Dutton and his wife had taken Jerry from the jungle, the real jungle, and “raised him as their child,” says my source, the fine coffee-table book Southern California in the ’50s (compiled and written by Charles Phoenix, designed by Kathy Kikkert). The book continues: “Within a few months he was toilet trained, sat at the dinner table, dressed himself … Locals, tourists, schoolchildren and church groups enjoyed Jerry’s antics as he played with Sunny the bear or swam with the ducks in the pond.”
But in just a few years, everything fell apart. Disneyland opened, neighbors sued because they thought the animals were dangerous, Dutton’s wife eloped with his lawyer. And Jerry fritzed out. Dutton had to hire people to look after Jerry around the clock. Then he tried giving Jerry away to zoos — no good.
Then the shovel, the grave. The single bullet. The role for Bill Murray if some indy wiseacre makes this business into a film. (I see Murray in shorts and safari jacket, bush cap riding the back of his head, the strap under his chin, his face puckering as the tears squeeze out.)
Thanks to The Inkwell Collector for recommending Southern California in the ’50s.

Articulate

Way back at the start of the ’08 campaign, Joe Biden caused a flap by describing Obama as “articulate and bright and clean.” From Richard Wolffe’s book Renegade: The Making of a President, via Talking Points Memo:

Bush was so taken aback with the public criticism of Biden that he called in his African American secretary of state Condoleezza Rice. “I don’t get it,” he said. “Condi, what’s going on?” Rice told him what everyone else had said: that white people don’t call each other articulate.

  Yeah, I’m pretty sure we do. When talking about someone who gets words out of his/her mouth for a living, it strikes me as not uncommon to describe such a person, if he/she is good at the job, as being articulate. “Articulate” becomes condescending when used to describe someone who is not expected to be able to speak well: an athlete, for example. Then the implication is “Hey, he can talk.” In the old days reporters found it especially surprising that black athletes, entertainers, cops, etc., could speak well; hence the dragging out of “articulate” in enough racial contexts for the word to pick up the air of a backhanded slur. The reporters learned the word’s racial pitfalls a while back; I first heard about its implication when reading a copy of the New York Times stylebook from the 1970s. But Biden has an invincibly active mouth and just about anything is bound to come out of it at one point or another.
TPM posted the above anecdote because it’s supposed to make Bush look bad. But I think he comes off okay. He was confused about something racial, so he asked his black friend what was up. Seems reasonable to me. Yeah, yeah, Bush is a rich, white, sheltered conservative who doesn’t have a clue. But when it comes to race, most of us have half a clue at best. Part of being black or white in America is being confused about blacks and whites. I was confused by most, not all, of the racial charges that flew about during the early primaries. (Like, it’s wrong to say Lyndon Johnson should get a lot of credit for America’s civil rights laws? He passed the damn things!)
 The two races are a pair of riddles riding side by side in a ball of confusion, and — how to put this? — away from the office we don’t hang out all that much. Hence Steven Colbert’s very funny jokes about his “black friend” — every white American wants one and they’re harder to come by than you might think, in large part because centuries of racial oppression have bred a certain distance and distrust between the two groups. But if you have a good friend, and you’re confused about something she might be able to explain, then go ahead and ask her. 

Oliphant Watch: Careful There, Obama!

The idea is clear: Obama isn’t keeping his promises and he’s getting high and mighty. A very simple point. Yet the cartoon makes no sense. Oliphant bounces his point off the fact that Obama now has a dog and dogs leave shit around the place. So?

Obama: “Promised? What did I promise?”
Axelrod: “That you wouldn’t tread in anything.”
What? What promise was that? I mean, even metaphorically, what promise was that? Obama promised that he wouldn’t get into trouble? Like, when?
Oliphant has his metaphor exactly reversed. If Obama decided he was so powerful and popular that he could now wade into every messy issue and get it resolved exactly the way he’d like, then this idea of loftily stepping into dog turds would make sense. But Obama is now as he has always been: daring in a few big things, cautious in many others. He keeps the shit off his shoes unless he sees some great, compelling reason that makes the mess worthwhile.
UPDATE:   Bryan guides us here for the St. Petersburg, Fla., Times’ meter of kept/unkept Obama promises; looks like we’re at the too-early-to-tell stage. Matthew outdoes me with a roundup of recent Oliphants:

I would vote for something like this, if you want recent inscrutability. I have no idea what he’s trying to say here (bigots live in New Hampshire, even if they do legalize gay marriage?); the point seems to be a funny drawing of a grizzled hillbilly type in a wedding dress. And I agree, that’s funny, but there’s little point. …

But the drawings are as good as ever … look at Obama running some guys over with a steamroller, or these hideous human-headed vultures, or the big ass on the banks. And I can even follow what he’s trying to say with those. It’s when he tries to do some actual humor that he usually loses me. This one (which does have some charmingly simple depictions of its characters) seems to be saying that Rush Limbaugh is a hypocrite because he won’t gay-marry Dick Cheney. That’s silly. And here’s another bit of slang that recalls the “Texas tea” thing from a few weeks ago; apparently Oliphant isn’t aware of the term “rugmuncher”, but that’s what I thought of when I saw that one. 

Mr. Cream’s sapphire teeth

Since I’m writing about Miracleman, I might as well mention my favorite bit in the series so far: the assassin Mr. Cream, an elegant fellow with black skin and sapphire teeth. I wonder if a writer, at least a white writer, could invent him now. A big part of the character’s gimmick is that he’s black but named “Cream” and dressed in white. To tell the truth, I suspect that even 27 years back only Europeans, not Americans, could have gotten away with that gag. Racial etiquette is stricter here because we were a slave-holding society whereas the Europeans were slave-trafficking societies. Blacks and whites have spent much more time side by side in America than in Europe, giving American blacks more time to speak up and combat the idea that the white perspective is the only perspective.

Also part of Mr. Cream’s gimmick is that he’s black and yet elegant, cultured, the owner of an original Hockney, etc. Sadly, I think this gimmick still gets trotted out today. It has a patina of well-meaningness that allows it to get by.
But I’m getting off track. The point of this post is that so much of Miracleman concerns itself with dragging silly old superhero tropes into the light of day and exposing them to adult notions of probability: Dicky Dauntless is a silly name, Miracleman can’t just pick up his wife and fly her thru the air because the wind resistance would kill her, and so on. But it’s completely improbable that a cunning, stealthy, highly secret assassin would have sapphire teeth. In fact it makes no sense. People would see him coming; after he left the scene of the crime, anyone anywhere who had seen him that day would remember him. So the idea is absurd. But it’s still great. An elegant black man dressed in white and with sapphire teeth and he goes about killing people thru use of his superior, icy cold intellect — I don’t care if it’s laughable and borderline racist, I still dig it.
Which goes to show that our notion of cool doesn’t care about anything but itself (for me, even using the word “cool” is a horrible concession, since I hate it, but the phenomenon needs a name and I can’t think of any other). And also that genre realism is all relative: the point isn’t to be realistic, it’s to be more realistic than some well-acknowledged cultural touchstone, producing an unexpected contrast (familiar story, everyday facts) that gooses the reader. Which is, oh God, cool too. In writing this post I don’t mean to debunk Alan Moore or Miracleman, just to bring out what they actually offer, as opposed to what we imagine they offer.