Leveraging Loss

 

Mediatedrose

 

Intended as a test of iPhone processing apps, it occurred to me that I had a neat metaphor for recontextualizing loss: 

A not-good phone camera takes a picture of a literal last rose of the season in a disorderly bed well past Halloween which, by design and care of a underpowered handheld computer, further loses color and resolution. A kind of art has been arrived at through multifaceted diminishment

So see it as Dub Photography--the visual equivalent of Jamaican music crafted through the deconstruction of multitrack studio tapes. And, beneath it all, perhaps there's the faintest trace of a philosophy.

Then again, maybe it's just a bad photo with about $5.00 of miniature software thrown at it . . .

The Narcotic Blessing of Forgetfulness

An Excerpt From a Work-In-Progress

Though Beatrice doesn’t live at the end of the world, this is beginning to seem a technicality. Because so far it feels like you’re driving through an early Springsteen album: leather, denim and baseball caps inside too many tricked-out cars. And the endless succession of skinny kids hanging around on every corner; like that one, with his upended bike, kneeling next to the ratcheting gears. The town exudes a civic pride in being a kind of Wayne’s World simulation, and this guarantees the wink you've been waiting for is never going to come: each one of these chop tops is aspirational instead of a John Waters reference, and you’ll need to think hard about that tonight, with scotch and a long journal entry . . . . 

 

Something never thought about; something almost forgotten: The whir of a push mower and the play of sunlight on leaves that will be gone in three years’ time. Which makes you what? Seven years old? Or very close to it.

Your father's mower whirring in the front yard, under the canopy of limbs that will soon be diseased. But all the memories of him have been too-long packed away, and so you have to make do with impressions: He’s conjured up as short, with darkish hair; in a white tee shirt, inappropriate pants and the smudgy suggestion of work shoes. All of this Sears-Catalog neat; it’s almost conceptual clothing. Because you can’t recall if he sweats while working out there--or if he perspires at all. Which, it now becomes clear, is also the reason you’ve parted and combed his hair.

Another season’s whirring, across a less-shaded lawn, as the last elms in the neighborhood begin their rapid decline. The kitchen’s still there; it can still be imagined, complete with its strange dimensions: too narrow and too long and then all at once wide in a way you remember as momentary. It's where the savage intimacies of the family had most often been exchanged; collisions leaving many more scars than that dangerous drawer full of loose German knives. In the kitchen the family had been too distant and at the same time much too close; it had been a place where acceptance widened-out, only to narrow and close ranks again. The dining room, however, has become theoretical--as detail-free as the interchangeable dinners that had marked each holiday and celebration. Reduced to an essence half a lifetime later, this room’s revealed to have been the kitchen in a chandeliered Sunday Best; where weekday dictates and intolerance had been served up on good china. But its mislaid appearance has also faded these uneasy memories: the narcotic blessing of forgetfulness, though late, has at last arrived.

Still later, on a stifling night long before there’s any air-conditioning, a spray truck whirs past your tight-shut window, fogging yellow-lit neighborhood streets. This last-ditch rescue of the trees comes at the songbirds’ expense, because the insecticide kills many more robins than the number of elms it saves. The Midwest, however, is equal parts of momentum and determination--there once something is put into motion, no price seems too high to pay. Which isn’t surprising, because a comfortable rut is the most costly thing of all.

And then your father’s mower, blades glinting in the bright sun, trims around the new birch, avoiding the stakes. But the whirring this time is your childhood receding, leaving you earthbound, stranded and ten.

Wires and stakes, three sets of them; a new beginning secured in this stark new world. With the elms now gone, what was hidden is revealed: A ruler-straight horizon below a featureless sky. The kind of flatness that makes it seem you can see the neighboring states. But seeing forever is of little use when there's nothing to be seen: The town is bordered on all sides by regressions of itself; either countless other identical places, like the result of facing mirrors, or greener, simplified versions of a single, industrial sprawl. Urban and rural are cinched together by the Rust Belt’s psychogeography: Outside of the townships--out among the cows--the only thing that changes is the population count. The scenery shifts, but can never avoid the grim context of the region. The feel of heavy manufacturing thrums, even when it can’t be seen; an analog of the locust drone that had once throbbed throughout the elms.

Hand clippers are used to trim those places the mower is too big to reach, and with practice, you’ve become adept at keeping the lawn from obscuring the stakes. With the elm trees gone, the town is exposed; it’s like that scientific toy from last Christmas--the scale-model man with all his bones and organs showing through clear-plastic skin. You're beginning to see the town’s inner-workings, all the stuff that’s meant to be kept out of sight. And though too young to to do anything about it, you start to realize you want to get away. For one thing, the car worship is like weekday church, and the truth is you’ve never believed. But your friends had killed time watching from corners, shouting out models and years. And so at those intersections you had learned politeness; learned the benign dishonesty of manners, discovering that smiling could be a disguise for your deep and abiding disinterest. There’s also the bullying of those smarter or different; something shrugged-off like the weather. It’s tolerated in the kids because their parents also do it, with dismissiveness instead of scuffling. Getting good grades and reading books are invitations to be called a faggot. But the teachers won't help because they're unwilling to battle willful ignorance that's generations deep . . . You're wasting your life in this insular town, caught up in its rituals, repetition and rules. Because after you’re done faking all of that interest, after the hallway hassles over ruined grade curves, what’s left of your day is further splintered by narrow, ceremonial patterns: hymnals, baseball and frequent house arrest for asking unanswerable questions. So yes, now that the elms are no longer here, you can see things you want to leave behind. Is it possible staking the new tree to the ground is to prevent it from trying to escape? To keep it from pulling up its burlapped root ball before that becomes impossible? To guard against the birch floating away from this flattened desolation, to where its paper-curled presence has a chance of better fitting in? Standing here staring at the endless horizon, you feel a similar tethering: You may not live at the end of the world, but this is beginning to seem a technicality . . . .

The Inescapable Key of Me

About a week ago on Twitter, I shared this epiphany: "Since I revise responding to the endless reading aloud of passages, the novel's "definitive" unpacking is my accent and cadences." And since then, I've continued to think about this in terms of consequences and implications. I suspect the pondering is because, for me, vocalizing / revising is an atypical workflow in a writing career lengthy enough to deserve a Doctor-Who regeneration. 

Please note I said "atypical," and not "unprecedented." Over the years, I've certainly read passages aloud--especially In those faux Hollywood moments when I'm trying to nail elusive prose while staring into a deadline. But not consistently; not without fail; not to the extent that the final revision is always the version that yields the most successful recitation. At the same time, I feel that when the novel is finished and I move on to a new project, chances are good I'll revert to, well, a  quieter way of working. My sense is that this book has chosen its own workflow--art, like leaking water, will find its own way through any wall. There's no doubt new work will establish its own idiosyncratic, creative conduit--which I admit looking forward to, since the current stream of required throat lozenges is unexpected overhead in my writing.

But what I haven't been pondering during the past week is why I'm writing the book in this manner; the tangled psycho-dynamics of that, while probably a therapist's payday, might kill the work dead in mid-sentence. It's better--and safer--to limit myself to the how and what of my current approach. 

And to these ends, let's first consider singer/songwriter Lou Reed--but not for his edgy material, dodgy early behavior or later French deification. What's germane to this discussion is his famously limited vocal range. Reed's voice and material mostly exist in a neat one-to-one relationship: three-chord, world-weary rock is performed by an insouciant, three-note voice. Well and good, but what I want to know is if soaring arias exist inside his head--impossibly high notes that the limitations of his voice filter out during the composition of songs. Even more importantly, is right-for-his-voice necessarily synonymous with right-for-his-vision? Is "Perfect Day" what Reed wanted to do, or simply what he could manage? And, ultimately, does this parsing matter in terms of assessing the song? 

I'm thinking about Reed a lot these days because my own limited voice is the sole determinant of what remains on the page. Final revisions are being made based on the ease of my recitations. Let me say this again in a different way: I'm not further polishing images, I'm not further tweaking structure, and certainly I'm not fucking with wayward leitmotifs. I'm revising to improve my comfort when reading the material aloud. And this isn't a way of obliquely saying I'm refining sentence meter because that was dealt with in the mists of time on much earlier drafts. What seems to be occurring is an adjustment of long vowels and the honing of emotional ambience in ways I can't explain.

 On occasion, superior instances of "pure" writing have been discarded in favor of less-crafted passages that better suit my voice. Which leads back to my wonderment about how Lou Reed writes--if he could sing like Pavarotti, would we have a different "Perfect Day?" And--critically--would it be a somehow truer version? If I had the accent and cadences of a Jeremy Irons, would the book be locked down differently? And if so, would the unquestionably more emotive version be any more authentic?

Another issue I keep thinking about is the affect of a vocalize / revise approach on open textuality. Consider again our old friend, Reed--there are not a lot of cover versions of his back catalog; something usually ascribed to the extreme nature of his themes. But I don't think this is the main reason that other artists ignore his songs. For a two- or three-octave singer, there's not a lot of room for interpretation in narrow-range melodies. Annie Lennox doesn't sing "How Do You Think It Feels?" for reasons beyond the lyric's portrayal of paranoid drug addiction. I've worked hard to create an openness in the novel's text--encouraging a variety of emotional entries into the work and a wide range of interpretations. But if the final revision is thoroughly tied to my flawed and ragged voice, have I not implicitly suggested the 'real' interpretation of the book is my own recitation? If I let myself think too long about this, it becomes a real quandary. 

All of this too-sensitive-to-live, artistic dithering has been front-and-center because I'm thinking about blogging an excerpt from the book. And in choosing which part to unleash on the world, there's a temptation to select a sequence that's less tied to my voice--except, of course, there aren't any. This, in turn, suggested a post like this might be interesting--a public confession and presentation of my writing as a kind of visible-gear, Lexan clock. I thought it might philosophically prepare the way while the chosen excerpt is readied.

This is why I've decided to share an advance paragraph and, to make a probably unwise point, also provide its audio file--me, in Spector-ish, monophonic glory, letting you know what I intended, even if it runs counter to what you might have taken away. In short, clarifying and suicidal simultaneously. For maximum impact, I suggest reading the paragraph before you listen to it.

And that's it--back to the work itself, instead of this Prince-Hamlet posturing. After all, downstream of a few hundred-thousand words, the book can only be what it is--sounding, of course, like the odd wisdom of the De Niro character in Deer Hunter . . .  

-------------------

Another season’s whirring, across a less-shaded lawn, as the last elms in the neighborhood begin their rapid decline. The kitchen’s still there; it can still be imagined, complete with its strange dimensions: Too narrow and too long and then all at once wide in a way you remember as momentary. It's where the savage intimacies of the family had most often been exchanged; collisions leaving many more scars than that drawer full of loose German knives. In the kitchen the family had been too distant and at the same time much too close; it had been a place where acceptance widened-out, only to narrow again. The dining room, however, is only theoretical; it’s now as detail-free as those interchangeable dinners that had marked each holiday and celebration. Reduced to an essence half a lifetime later, this room’s revealed to have been the kitchen in chandeliered Sunday Best; where weekday dictates and intolerance had been served up on good china. But its mislaid appearance has also faded these uneasy memories: The narcotic blessing of forgetfulness, though late, has at last arrived.