Inadequate instructions from an omnipresent authority

On the Greyhound coming down from Montreal, I sat next to a window with an emergency exit. The little message read:

EMERGENCY EXIT
LIFT this bar, PUSH window OPEN

But what bar? If you looked, there was a lever a couple of inches to the right of the little message. But that’s not a bar, and I would think you pulled it up instead of pushing it.

This kind of thing used to drive me crazy when I was a kid.

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.

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. 

Newt and Twitter

My personal theory holds that most politicians enter public life for the following reasons:

1. power for its own sake
2. get things done that they care about
3. attention
4. money
5. blowjobs
Newt Gingrich is a special case. I think his motives run this way:
1. attention
2. blowjobs
3. attention
4. money
5. get things done that he cares about
6. power for its own sake
The man just cannot keep his mouth shut. Twitter is designed for someone like him. Every time big news is afoot, he can horn in by instantaneously sending his mental twitches to an audience that includes the national media. So, during the pirate standoff, he went on record against the very strategy that eventually proved to be a winner. Now he’s joining the Sotomayor debate.    

Review of Fun Home

I reviewed the book for TCJ when it came out. Ng Suat Tong says it’s more favorable in tone than my recent post. I know I didn’t bring up the business about Bechdel’s dad dropping out of grad school. But what strikes me is what a dreadful first sentence the piece has. I must have been paid by the preposition.

And now …
“Puzzle Palace”

Fun Home
is a set of seven essays about Bechdel’s memories of her father, a dominating but highly sissified man who led a secret life of chasing after boys while he raised his family and outfitted the family’s home as a sort of museum devoted to his particular aesthetic (cream settees, lilacs, “silk flowers, glass flowers, needlepoint flowers”). The book takes you inside a baffling childhood, one where not a whole lot could be counted on to hold steady, to match its official description. “My father began to seem mortally suspect to me long before I actually knew he  had a dark secret,” Bechdel writes above a picture of her young self watching Dad apply his bronzing stick. Bechdel herself was gay and didn’t know it until college. Until then, she lived with a sense that she and her father were misfits for their proper roles — “inverts” was the the term she adopted later, “the homosexual as a person whose gender expression is at odds with his or her sex.” While at Oberlin, she did some thinking and came out. Her mother then told her about Mr. Bechdel’s secret life and soon began talking about a divorce. A few months later Mr Bechdel was dead. He jumped in front of a truck, but he jumped backwards, so whether his death was a suicide is hard to say. Fun Home admits the question is open but states its preference: Bechdel thinks her father killed himself because she managed to tell the truth.

Fun Home puzzles over how Bechdel was cheated by the biggest figure in her life. Her father was an outsized personality, but to be around him was somehow to be in the presence of an absence. Fully as he lived it, his life was not really his, and everybody close to him felt the effects. “He really was there all those years,” Bechdel writes, ” a flesh-and-blood presence steaming off the wallpaper, digging up the dogwood, polishing the finials, smelling of sawdust and sweat and designer cologne. But I ached as if he were already gone.” Bechdel sees her father’s life as a slow retroactive suicide, and she says the beautiful mansion where he housed his family was tainted by his sexual self-hatred: “His shame inhabited our house as invisibly and pervasively as as the aromatic musk of aging mahogany.” In fact he turned his house into a kind of labyrinth. “Mirrors, distracting bronzes, multiple doorways. Visitors often got lost upstairs,” Fun Home says. Her father’s instinct was to baffle others and hide his real self. It’s no surprise that Fun Home is constructed as a set of riddles instead of a straightforward narrative.

     Bechdel kept her eyes open, and she has thought long and hard about what she saw. The book’s panels are full of painstaking physical detail (right down to headlines for newspapers, graffiti next to a dorm telephone and the dictionary entry for “queer cubbin”). More important, Fun Home is honest about painful moments and highly intelligent about tracing their roots. At points Bechdel seems to X-ray the life she and her family shared, to see it all right down to the bones. Not that the book is cold-blooded. It’s chilly, but it’s human. There’s humor and plenty of day-to-day detail about the family. Most of all, Bechdel seems to care a great deal about the lives she’s dissecting.

The approach is high-toned and literary, so expect allusions, symbols, hidden meanings, hidden jokes, obtrusive elegance. Each chapter in Fun Home wind its way about one aspect or another of the family situation: obsessiveness (“The Canary-Colored Caravan of Death”), the unspoken drive to hold back unwelcome secrets (“The Ideal Husband”), Alison’s creeping sense that she and her father are not what they’re supposed to be (the well-named “In the Shadow of Young Girls in Flower”). The essays are so well constructed they snake you into their guts. The book is dense, but it’s a fast read and it locks the reader inside its atmosphere. The ink wash and the ever-present captions make the events feel like exhibits, and not in a bad way. It’s as if a person’s mind had been made into an ingeniously laid-out museum and we got to walk the halls. The tone of the place is hypnotically ruminative, grave, mordant. The narration is always at your elbow, and it’s silver-edged in the extreme. When it doesn’t connect, the writing gets a bit Bulwer-Lytton. (“It was a benign and well-lit underworld, admittedly, but Odysseus sailing to Hades could have not felt more trepidation than I did entering that room.”) But often enough it does connect, and either way the tone is set.

The drawing shows traces of Bechdel’s old Edward Gorey influence, which comes in handy. It’s childlike and also funereal, a good combination for the subject, but of course it doesn’t have anything like Gorey’s bizarre expressiveness. Bechdel’s figures are stiff, and their expressions don’t always rise to what’s demanded. Draw the smallest mouths in comicdom and you’ll get “elated” Mr. Bechdel, “manic” Mr. Bechdel, and young Alison (“limp with admiration”) all looking a lot the same, which is to say irate. The book’s greatest technical strength is its layout. Comics layout is a great craft for meshing, for guiding attention with interlocking sequences of forms and angles, and Fun Home does it well for page after page. The book has a certain suave command that prevails over any faults in the writing and drawing, and its source is the skill with which one subject is flipped into another. The layout is crucial to the effect.

In fact, Fun Home shows how useful comics can to be to the high-gloss literary approach of hidden meanings and look-at-me elegance. Using both words and pictures provides more crevices for sliding in implications and secret jokes (the cucumber in the upper left-hand panel of a page in “The Ideal Husband” is not only lined up suggestively with Mr. Bechdel’s profile, it mirrors the spread legs of the randy Dr. Gryglewicz in the page’s lower right-hand corner). Also, the illusion of coherence is deepened when you have two sets of signs to play with. Not only do the words chime together, but the pictures chime with the words. Bechdel writes “my father’s life was a solipsistic circle of self” and places the caption atop a circle highlighting the small area on the map where her father spent his life. There’s no real connection between the caption’s point (that her father centered his life on himself) and the image’s point (that he lived and died in one town). But it feels as if there were.

I mention the “illusion of coherence” because Fun Home has an odd sort of fault. The book has substance and it’s elegantly done, but the elegance has been brought about through a certain amount of fraud. Most of the book’s transitions are enabled by a network of allusions to Camus, Shakespeare, Wilde, Proust and others. The allusions do great work as a kind of trellis, a technical convenience for laying out the good stuff, the facts and feelings. But as statements they don’t always add up to much. Mr. Bechdel was reading Albert Camus’s A Happy Death before he died, he had a copy of The Myth of Sisyphus from college, a college photograph shows Mr. Bechdel smoking, and Camus smoked. And so what? “But in a way Gatsby’s pristine books and my father’s worn ones signify the same thing — the preference of a fiction to reality.” Yeah, all right, whichever. When Greek myth comes in, it turns out Mr. Bechdel managed to be Daedalus, Icarus and the Minotaur. Maybe he was also King Minos and the guy who sold tickets out front.

Any literary bafflement aside, Bechdel had the brains and honesty to analyze a painful situation and to be true to the feelings that came with it. Life piled some atmospheric details atop the Bechdel household’s basic plight. Mr. Bechdel was an undertaker on the side, and we see the Bechdel children polishing caskets and viewing bodies. The house was still unrenovated and moldering in Bechdel’s early childhood, so she has potent memories of looking at Charles Addams cartoons. But all of that’s incidental. The heart of Bechdel’s book is about growing up in a home where the family’s common ground has been poisoned. Her father addressed her mother as “you”; her mother claimed there was no story about how they met. “My parents seemed almost embarrassed by the fact of their marriage,” Bechdel says. To survive emotionally, she remembers, all the family members had to fend for themselves. They retreated into separate capsules of obsession: music, model airplanes, Bechdel’s drawing, her father’s refitting of the house. “Our selves were all we had,” she writes.

Fun Home is fine work and sometimes unbearably poignant. Several chapters manage a last panel in which drawing, writing and layout come together to hit a high note. A girl lies by her father’s tombstone and looks at the sky. Father and daughter are seen through separate windows, together in a room but oblivious to each other. Call the scenes greeting cards for isolation, but the effect is still overwhelming, and it’s typical of this somber, skillful and heartfelt memoir.

Why Batman Isn’t Green Lantern

Batman has a lot of will power, Green Lantern’s ring runs on will power, but Batman wasn’t chosen to be Green Lantern. Why not? I asked this question before and was told the DCU had coughed up some story establishing that Batman’s brand of will power had too much fear in its composition; Hal Jordan, by contrast, isn’t neurotic or fear-based or whatever the deal is. 

A better explanation has been put forward by Grace, girlfriend to Matthew Surridge. Matthew gives the lowdown: “As she put it, Batman scores a ten out of ten on the score of ‘willpower,’ but probably no better than a three of out of ten at best on the count of ‘doing whatever the Guardians of the Universe tell him to do, when they tell him, in the way they tell him.”
Note that Grace doesn’t even read comics. She got her theory from watching the Justice League animated cartoon series. Not bad!