Menu:

 
Picture
Terrence Holt’s new book of short stories, In the Valley of the Kings, is one of the best books I’ve read in ages. I almost said “the best book I’ve read this year, or even this decade,” which is true, but since it’s the only book I’ve finished so far this decade, that would be faint praising it, and I don’t want to do that. It’s kind of a miracle that I read it at all, since I’ve never heard of Holt, and I almost never buy hardcovers. (The fact that most midlist fiction writers can’t afford to buy hardcover fiction is a topic for another time.) And I bought it entirely on the basis of the glowing blurbs on the back, which, again, is something I almost never do, but in this case, they came from Peter Matthiesen, Gerald Stern, and Alexsander Hemon. The one that sold me, oddly enough, was the one from Junot Diaz, despite the fact that a) I knew from the acknowledgments page, even before I bought the book, that Diaz is a former student of Holt, and b) I haven’t actually read anything by Junot Diaz. But he said the right things to pique my interest, namely by comparing Holt to Melville, Poe, and Borges. So I took the plunge.

As it turns out, Diaz et al. were dead right: this is a marvelous book, one that scratches all of my itches as a reader. The stories are beautifully written, wonderfully idiosyncratic, and genre-inflected without falling prey to genre cliches. The first story, "Ο Λογοσ," is the most Borgesian, the story of a plague that is spread by a single word, which appears in the afflicted as a sort of bruise under the skin. To read the word is to become infected and, inevitably, to die. You might even think of it as a surreal gloss on scripture, to wit, that the letter killeth. A couple of other stories, “My Father’s Heart” and “Scylla,” likewise tend toward the surreal, recalling Kafka as well as Borges.


But the stories that absolutely knocked me out were a trio set in the outer regions of the solar system, each of them a first person account by a lonely explorer at the end of his tether. All three are straight-up science fiction stories, but written with a stylistic mastery you don’t often find even in the best sci fi. The first, “Charybdis,” is a sort of retelling of Poe’s “Ms. Found in a Bottle” (which provides the story’s epigraph), crossed with the second half of Kubrick’s 2001: A Space Odyssey (to which the story refers obliquely), but it’s more psychological than Poe’s story and more strange than Kubrick’s, as the unnamed narrator relates the inexorable and mysterious unraveling of a mission to Jupiter. The second story, “Aurora,” is narrated by a sort of cyborg, a spaceship which has been implanted with a human consciousness and which orbits Saturn, mining the ice of the planet’s rings for rare minerals. The story explores some classic sci fi themes—can a machine be conscious? Is a human a sort of machine?—but it’s also as haunting evocation of the mysteries of memory and longing as you’re likely to read, in any genre. The third story, “Eurydike,” is a sci fi retelling of the titular myth, and it reads as if Ovid and J. G. Ballard collaborated on an episode of The Twilight Zone. Set on the frozen wastes of Pluto, it’s another first-person account of a scientific mission (the creepy nature of which is slowly revealed) gone horribly awry. Taken together, as a thematic trilogy, these stories are brilliant accounts of loneliness and loss, and situated in the frighteningly well-evoked and spectacular setting of interplanetary space.

The title story, “In the Valley of the Kings,” is a novella, really, and it’s also the most purely entertaining story in the book, reminiscent of Poe’s “The Narrative of A. Gordon Pym” and Lovecraft’s “At the Mountains of Madness,” with a little academic satire and just a hint of post-structuralist literary theory. The narrator is an obsessed, imperious, sarcastic, and more-than-half-crazy Egyptologist who thinks he’s stumbled onto an undiscovered tomb that holds a secret of world-shaking proportions. The story ends with a long, wildly inventive set piece as the narrator penetrates further into the tomb, ending in a really terrifying Lovecraftian cul-de-sac, wherein the narrative snicks shut after the reader like the door of, well, a tomb. Just in case the Lovecraft comparison scares you off, let’s just say that it’s much better written and more self-aware than most of Lovecraft, not to mention much wittier. But make no mistake, it’s no mere parody or pastiche, but the creepiest thing I’ve read in ages.

The final story in the book, “Apocalypse,” is also superb and disturbing, concentrating on the quotidian details in the life of a married couple at the end of the world, but it’s also the warmest and most heartbreaking story in the book. Coming at the end of a series of stories that evoke, to varying degrees, loneliness, obsession, monomania, and fear, “Apocalypse” ends with a paragraph that moved me to tears—not because it’s hopeful, necessarily, but because it sees the beauty in the impermanence of just about everything:


But before the end we will speak once more, of everything that matters: of the brightness of the moon, of the birds still flying dark against the sky; of the man who brought me here; of the hours she waited; of what we would name the child; of the grace of everything that dies; of the love that moves the sun and other stars.

Nuff said. This is a thrilling and beautiful book. Go read it.

 
 
Picture
My new novel, Next, comes out in six weeks, so those of you who drop by this on-again, off-again (mostly off-again lately) blog should brace yourself for increasingly intense bouts of self-promotion, defensiveness, and rank narcissism. I'm going to make an effort (really, truly) to write about other stuff, too, but today, I'm returning to the blogosphere to shamelessly tout the book.

Starting with Shelf Awareness, a daily website for the book business, which is devoting today's issue to the launch of Reagan Arthur Books, my new publisher. Reagan is my once-and-future publisher, actually, since she not only edited Next, but The Lecturer's Tale as well, back when she and I were both at Picador. Since then, she has become (in the words of Gawker) a "rock star editor" at Little, Brown, publishing critically acclaimed and bestselling novels by Joshua Ferris, Elizabeth Kostova, Kate Atkinson, Denise Mina, George Pelecanos, and others. And now, for reasons that passeth understanding, she's publishing me again. Anyway, check out Friday's Shelf Awareness for news about all of the imprint's new releases, some lovely photos and interviews with Reagan and her talented team, and some smart-alecky answers from me to the site's Book Brahmin questions.

And if you go here, you can read the recent Publishers Weekly review of Next, wherein I dodge a bullet. So far, so good.

 
 
Picture
It's a wild and windy Christmas Eve in Austin, Texas: scudding clouds, blowing leaves, and cold, too, or at least cold for central Texas. We've got wind gusts up to 35 mph, and the tree across the parking lot from my apartment, which was full of turning leaves yesterday, has been stripped almost bare, leaving drifts of orange leaves under the wheels of my car. The wind is also a reminder of just how drafty and badly insulated my apartment is, and the little icy breezes that leak in through my windows make me feel positively Dickensian. I should be typing this at a high desk, wearing a scarf and those gloves without any fingers, like Bob Cratchit in the scenes before Mr. Scrooge comes to his senses. The wind makes my cats restless—makes me restless, too, come to think of it, and later, I'm going to bundle up like Mr. Cratchit and take a brisk five-mile walk around the Hike and Bike Trail.

Tomorrow I'm participating in a Christmas dinner at the home of my hemi-semi-demi ex, but tonight I'm on my own, which is sort of the way I like it. I've said elsewhere on this blog that Halloween is my favorite holiday, and that's mostly true, but Christmas still strikes me pretty deep. It's a melancholy holiday for me, more so in recent years, because it's the time of year my father died, and the time of year my mother was diagnosed with dementia. So there's sadness about what what I've lost, but then, I've always thought it was a melancholy holiday. Which is a good thing, because I actually enjoy (if that's the word) melancholy. I like the fact that this time of year it's cold, that there's more darkness than light, that the sky is blacker at night and the stars a little brighter. Insofar as I have a spiritual life, this is the time of year I feel the mystery more keenly. I'm sure I'm not the only one who feels this way, but it's that mystery, the thinning of the veil between what we think we know and the vastness of what we don't, that overwhelms me and makes me feel simultaneously awed and sad and weirdly hopeful.

Which doesn't mean that I'm not a sucker for the culture of Christmas, both the kitsch and the not-kitsch. I've been listening to the local classical radio station's non-stop, 24-hour "Festival of Carols," and I've been playing my own non-stop assortment of Christmas tunes: the Vince Guaraldi soundtrack to A Charlie Brown Christmas, the Phil Spector Christmas album, Anne Dudley's album Ancient and Modern, and a lot of Vaughan Williams music. The two tunes that always get to me, every time, are Stephen Oliver's arrangement of "God Bless Ye, Merry Gentlemen" from his music for Nicholas Nickleby, and Judy Garland singing "Have Yourself a Merry Little Christmas." The last especially reduces me to a sodden mess.

Picture
I've already watched two of my favorite Christmas movies, the Alaistair Sim version of A Christmas Carol (Sim is the best Scrooge ever, with the possible exception of Mr. Magoo), and Billy Wilder's The Apartment, which, if you've never seen it or you have seen it and forgotten, is set mostly between Christmas and New Year's Eve. The final shot of Jack Lemmon and Shirley Maclaine playing gin rummy makes me happier than any number of more traditional Christmas images. And tonight I think I'll do a double-header of Christmas movies, Die Hard and It's a Wonderful Life. Yes, Virginia, Die Hard is a Christmas movie, and even a pretty cheerful one, unless you're a corporate executive or a Euro-trash supercriminal in an expensive suit. And as for It's a Wonderful Life, it's the perfect Christmas story for melancholics everywhere, with Jimmy Stewart playing, for once, both sides of his persona in the same film: the aw-shucks charmer of You Can't Take It With You and the brooding, bitter obsessive of Vertigo. It encapsulates somehow the crazy dichotomy of the season—at least as far as we melancholics go—that roller-coaster combination of "Why fucking bother?" with "Hey, anything can happen!" This may be the only time in history that anybody will ever compare Frank Capra with Samuel Beckett, but in its own crazy, sentimental way, It's a Wonderful Life (which for much of its running time has the distinct subtext, "No, it isn't") is a gloss on Beckett's "I can't go on, I'll go on."

So, in the spirit of my Christmas movies, I say to you all, Merry Christmas, you wonderful old building and loan! Yippie ki yay, y'all! God bless us, every one! And shut up and deal.

Picture
 
 
Picture
In my (probably futile) efforts to remain au courant with the inexorable digitization of literary life—and to shamelessly promote my new novel, Next, soon to available as both a book-book and an e-book and who knows what else, maybe a direct download to your cerebral cortex, so you can remember having read it with actually having to take the time to turn the pages and have my prose pass before your eyes—I now have an author page on Facebook. This is in addition to my Twitter page, of course, and this blog. They are all linked to each other in the sticky, organic, and kind of creepy way everything is these days. It doesn't really matter if I think all this is a good thing (and believe it or not, sometimes I actually do), because it's not just coming, baby, it's here, and it's sink or swim from here on out, especially for aging midlisters like me. It's hard, though, I'm just saying. Sometimes I enjoy it—I actually like Twitter's 140 character limit, because it plays to my strength (aka, my weakness) for making short, glib jokes. On the other hand, Facebook baffles me, and makes me feel like I'm my mom, and it's 1987, and I've got my first VCR, and it's blinking 12:00, 12:00, 12:00 at me—let's face it, it's laughing at me—and I haven't got the slightest idea how to make it stop, let alone how to record or play back anything. As for programming the fucker, forget it; it's like learning Urdu, which I'm guessing is the original language of the guy who wrote the instruction manual.

Okay, anyway, so you get the idea. I'm old, all this shit is new, and it scares the hell out of me. People, I didn't even have a cellphone till about eight months ago, after I locked my keys in my car with the motor running in the Central Market parking lot (talk about your senior moment) and couldn't find a payphone within a ten-mile radius, and I had to go into the camping store next door and ask the earnest, young camping-store hipsters if I could use their phone to call a locksmith, and it turns out locksmiths don't even answer their fucking phones anymore, they have a service, and the first thing they ask you for is your cellphone number. (I ended up calling a cab, because it turns out cabbies carry jimmies and can pop the lock for you for about 25 bucks, a good thing to know if you're in your mid-50s and your mom already has Alzheimers and you can feel your own brain slowly turning to oatmeal.)

Anyway, as I was saying, Facebook is a baffling, strange new world for geezers like me—it took me all day yesterday to figure out the difference between a "page" and a "profile," and even now, I'm still not sure I've got it right. But at any rate, the author page is there, under the pretentious title, James Hynes, Author,  to distinguish it from my other Facebook page, which is personal, and which you can't get to unless you know me or used to know me, and which, let's be honest, I hardly ever look at because it comes at me like a firehose of information, often from people and sources (friends of friends, apparently) whom I've never heard of before. It's an adjustment, is what I'm saying, for a 54-year-old novelist who is used to spending vast amounts of time by himself, to find that in order to swim and not-sink in the ocean of digital literary culture, he needs to open himself to the hive mind of the internet, that he has to switch off the solitary, austere, I-wanna-be-Tolstoy mindset of the creative artist and turn himself into Locutus of Borg in order to sell the book. Though there are worse things, I guess, than being Locutus of Borg, like, say, being a former midlist novelist.

Anyway, there it is, my geriatric rant, my cranky, catlike rage at a world that insists on changing and requiring new skills of me when all I want to do is lie in the sun and wait to be fed. I got it off my chest. I'm done. My resistance, it turns out, really is futile. I have been assimilated. See you on Facebook.

 
Edge of Darkness 12/02/2009
 
Picture
This is a belated post: I meant to write about the great British TV and screenwriter Troy Kennedy Martin back in September, when he died, but I'm only getting around to it now. What reminded me was two things that happened in the last few days. One is that I saw a trailer for an American feature film remake (starring, saints preserve us, Mel Gibson) of Martin's masterpiece, the 80s miniseries Edge of Darkness. The other, better news was that I just found out that the original Edge of Darkness is at last available in the U.S. on DVD.

Martin made his early reputation as the creator of a gritty British cop show called Z-Cars (which my very British friend Jim Crace tells me is pronounced "Zed Cars," not "Zee Cars), but the only TV writing of his Americans are likely to have seen are Edge of Darkness and Reilly Ace of Spies, both of which played on PBS in the 80s (I think). His screen work may be more familiar: he wrote two films that Americans (of my age, anyway) are likely to remember. One was the original, Michael Caine version of the comic heist film, The Italian Job, which has a well-deserved cult reputation . It's got a very offbeat, loose, late-60s vibe (like, say, Bedazzled, or name-your-favorite-Richard-Lester-film). I first saw iton TV back in the summer of 1974, during my first summer home from college, and the power went off ten minutes before the end of the film (there was a tornado; long story), and while I had a chance to see the famous chase scene in Milan (I think), where tiny European cars chase each other through medieval pedestrian arcades and over rooftops, I didn't see the movie's famously ambiguous ending for years afterwards. It's still a fun movie, and much better than the recent remake.

The other Martin script Americans will know is Kelly's Heroes, which is, of course, a touchstone film for guys my age, a cheerfully cynical heist/World War II comedy, in which a unit of weary American soldiers at the end of the war stage their own private invasion behind enemy lines to "liberate" a cache of German gold from a bank in a French village. I'll even confess to owning the DVD, and I watch it every couple of years or so. It hasn't aged as well as The Italian Job; a lot of what seemed madcap when I was fifteen now just seems labored and phony. The film features a lot of sweaty American character actors who are too old to be playing WWII-era GIs, and a lot of the dialogue sounds like it was written by a non-native speaker of American slang (which is what Martin was, of course). That said, it's a clever idea, and a well-constructed story. If you're willing to put up with Telly Savalas and Don Rickles, the film also stars a steely, young Clint Eastwood as Kelly and Donald Sutherland in full, late 60s antic mode, playing an anachronistically hippie-ish tank commander called Oddball. And it's handsomely made, with some skillfully staged action sequences. Mainly, though, I still love it because it's vastly less sentimental about human nature than the George Clooney Iraq war film (first Iraq war, that is), Three Kings, which is basically a remake of Kelly's Heroes.  Three Kings is pretty impressive until the last ten minutes, when it loses its nerve and turns into a third-generation photocopy of Casablanca, whereas Kelly's Heroes flaunts its cynicism to the very end, with its American "heroes" cutting a deal with an SS officer and riding off into the sunset with stolen Nazi gold.

Picture
But much as I love these cult-fave movies, the real reason to celebrate Troy Kennedy Martin is Edge of Darkness, which for my money is one of the greatest TV miniseries of all time. It stars Bob Peck (best known to American audiences for his later role as the big game hunter in Jurassic Park) as a tough, Northern English cop named Ronald Craven, who, in the opening scenes of the series, witnesses his twenty-year-old daughter, Emma, being murdered by an Irish terrorist. So the story starts out as a standard revenge melodrama—tough, obsessed cop on a quest to find his daughter's killer—but even within the first episode, it takes a weird turn and keeps getting weirder. I don't want to say more about the story, in the hope that you'll track down the DVD and watch it yourself, but suffice it to say that it combines elements of mid-80s British politics (anti-Thatcher, anti-nuke), with elements of the paranoid thriller, ecological activisim, the supernatural, and intimations of incest. It's interesting to note, for example, that in the iconic publicity photo from the series (see above), both the teddy bear and the gun that Craven is holding belonged to his daughter.

Other reasons to watch it: it's beautifully directed by Martin Campbell (who has gone on to make several James Bond films, including the excellent recent reboot, Casino Royale), and it's shot in that moody, gloomy, claustrophobic, telephoto-lens-heavy style of mid-80s Brit thrillers that I like so much. It also features wonderful performances by a small army of great British character actors (Ian McNeice, John Woodvine, Zoe Wanamaker). Peck himself is magnificent, playing repressed rage in a way that evokes that master of repressed rage, the late, great Patrick McGoohan. 

The series also features the best performance of American actor Joe Don Baker's career. If you only know him as a heavy from American films, you're in for a surprise. In Edge of Darkness, he's clearly having the time of his life playing a more-than-half-crazy, golf-obsessed, rogue CIA officer named Darius Jedburgh. In his first scene, he's carrying his golf bag into a luxury hotel suite in London, just back from Nicaragua, and among the drivers and nine-irons is a .50 cal machine gun. He also gets many of Martin's best lines. In the scene where he first meets Craven, the two bond over a Willie Nelson song ("The Time of the Preacher"), and Jedburgh asks Craven if he's ever been to Dallas. When Craven says no, Jedburgh gives a big Texas grin and says, "It's where we shoot our presidents. The Jews got their Calvary, but we've got Dealey Plaza."

More than that, I shouldn't say. After Martin died a few months ago, I dusted off my blurry old VHS copy and watched the series again, and not only does it hold up really well, it seems surprisingly resonant with, um, our current situation. Let's just say that corporate malfeasance, government complicity with same, and imminent environmental disaster never go out of style (not to mention crazy CIA agents). I can't imagine that the Mel Gibson remake will be nearly as good—there's a whole other blog post to be written about how American feature film remakes of good British TV series (State of Play, Traffik) always manage to mute or even eliminate everything that was interesting about the original show—but I am encouraged that the film is being directed by Campbell, who made the original. But in the meantime, go to Amazon or your online retailer of choice, and get the DVD of the original. Jim Bob sez, check it out.

PS: If you can still find it on ABE Books or e-Bay, Faber and Faber published Martin's Edge of Darkness script back around the time the show was on the air. It's well worth reading in its own right.

 
 

 

Picture
I'm a small town boy. I was born in Lansing, Michigan, which is not small, but from the age of six, I grew up in Big Rapids, a small, mid-Michigan college town. Most of my memories of growing up there are pleasant, but it was also in Big Rapids that I learned to love scary stories. I probably checked out every ghost story anthology there was in the Big Rapids Public Library, and whenever I think of Halloween, the first memory that comes to mind, the baseline of every spooky mood I've ever felt, is the image of the ten-year-old me walking home from the library on a gloomy October Saturday afternoon, kicking through the fallen leaves on the sidewalk, under an overcast sky. I've already got my nose in the book I just checked out—an old, fat hardback with a crinkling plastic cover—and I'm wearing my fall jacket against a northern wind that already has the slight sting of winter in it, and that rattles the red and orange leaves of the maples overhead. I can smell the sharp aroma of the fallen leaves and the mustiness of the book, and I know without thinking about it that if I just walk slow enough, I can finish the first story in the book by time I get home.

Ohhhh-kay. With that egregiously sentimental intro, I bring you my brand new list of Halloween stories for 2009. I really hadn't planned on making this an annual event. I did a list a few years back for Maud Newton, and then I did my own list last year. I wasn't going to do one this year—it seemed like too much work—but then, over the weekend, it was actually kind of rainy and cold and gloomy for Austin, Texas, and I caught the old seasonal mood. Not only that, but this year it's a themed list, in honor of my small-town, Bradburyian roots: a collection of scary stories, novels, and films that have something to do with small-town life.

Some of them are supernatural stories, but some of them are not. Some are classically paranoid, from the-small-town-with-a-terrible-secret genre, while others are just horror stories that happen to be set in a small town. Some of them are actually about the nature of small-town life—namely, the potential creepiness of close-knit communities, and what the members of those communities know, think they know, and actually don't know, about their neighbors—while others derive their spookiness from the simple idea of isolation and remoteness. Still others are about the ease with which a small community can be corrupted or destroyed by outsiders, or even by a strong-willed native.

Some of the entries are kind of a stretch, theme-wise, and some of them are rather obscure, and maybe even impossible to find. I've also tried not to repeat entries I used in earlier list (so I'm not including Salem's Lot or "It's a Good Life") (except that I just kinda did). But all of them evoke in me, to varying degrees, the pleasant thrill of those gloomy Saturday afternoons back in Big Rapids, in the weeks before Halloween.

 

Picture
1) "Young Goodman Brown," by Nathaniel Hawthorne. The ur-text (American apocalyptic allegory division) of the creepy small-town story: it's set in Salem, Massachusetts, it starts at sunset, and by the end, young Goodman Brown has found out all sorts of things about his neighbors, and even his wife, that he'd rather not have known. Oh, and it's got the Devil in it, too.

2) "The Lottery," by Shirley Jackson. Another ur-text—American, apocalyptic, allegorical. You know it, you love it, and no matter how many times I read it, it always—always—creeps me out.

3) "The Dunwich Horror," by H. P. Lovecraft, who of course wrote a number of stories set in gothicky small towns in Rhode Island and western Massachusetts, this one being the most famous. Though I'm sure he wasn't thinking of it (Lovecraft not being known for his ideological bent), this one plays on Marx's idea of the "idiocy of rural life," through his evocation of the reclusive, inbred, white-trashy Whately family, who just happen to have been (how shall I put this?) intimate with godlike, malodorous, tentacled demons from another dimension. Just like some of the folks I knew in Big Rapids, in other words.

 

Picture
4) Dr. Cook's Garden, by Ira Levin. Most people know of Levin's work through the film versions of his novels Rosemary's Baby and The Stepford Wives (both of which are well worth reading in their own right), but he was also a successful playwright. This one is about a seemingly kindly doctor in a seemingly idyllic New England town who takes a very hands-on approach to social engineering. You can buy the play, cheap, if you click on the link above, but I know it from a 1971 TV film starring, of all people, Bing Crosby as Dr. Cook. Bearing in mind that I haven't seen it in nearly 40 years, I have very fond memories of the film, and recall that Crosby was very chilling in the part. It's completely unavailable on DVD or even VHS, as far as I can tell, which is a shame, because after seeing it, I've never heard "White Christmas" or "In the Blue, Blue, Blue of the Evening" quite the same way again. 

5) Harvest Home, by Thomas Tryon. Speaking of narratives about seemingly idyllic New England small towns, this novel scarred me for life; my own novella "99" is basically a riff on Tryon's book. Tryon was B-list Hollywood actor for about fifteen years, before giving up to write novels. In most cases, turning to novel-writing to make money isn't a smart career move (take it from me), but in Tryon's case, it paid off. Several of his books were bestsellers, and two of them, The Other and Harvest Home, are bona fide horror classics. It's out of print, apparently (are you listening, New York Review Books?), but click on the Amazon link above, and you can find cheap used paperback copies.

6) Something Wicked This Way Comes, by Ray Bradbury. How could I do a list of small-town horror and not include this? I must have read it half a dozen times before the age of twelve. I've read it since, and while the writing strikes me now as, erm, a little mannered, once I give in to it, it's still a very creepy little novel, with the added attraction of being set closer to my own experience, i.e., in a small, midwestern town. And in this one, the darkness isn't homegrown, but comes from without, from an evil circus. And who doesn't love an evil circus? 

 

Picture
7) Vampire Circus. And since one evil circus deserves another, here's my favorite Hammer Film. It was made in 1972, during the era when Hammer's films were getting more lurid—more blood, more breasts—and this one certainly fits the bill. It's also cheap-looking and rather clumsily put together, but it has a raw power to it, and it is, in the phrase of that noted vampire aficianado, John Marks, a very dank movie. It is, alas, not available in a Region 1 DVD, but if you live in or near Austin, Vulcan Video has a blurry old VHS tape of it which I watch every year. 

8) The Heart of a Witch, by Judith Hawkes. Between 1989 and 1999, Judith Hawkes published three first-rate supernatural novels: Julian's House, which for my money is one of the best novel-length ghost stories ever written, My Soul to Keep, which is nearly as good, and this one, a sympathetic portrait of a Wiccan coven in a small town in upstate New York. It's got loads of small-town atmosphere, lots of spooky magic, and a truly heartbreaking ending. It's an indication of the book's idiosyncratic appeal that, from its Amazon page, you can buy used copies for a penny, but a new copy for nearly a hundred bucks. And, for what it's worth, it's got 49 reader reviews, most of them five-star raves, and many of them by practicing Wiccans.

9) The Land of Laughs, by Jonathan Carroll, who really is a cult writer, and doesn't just call himself one, like I do. He's already published seventeen books, but this is his first one, in which a writer travels to a small Missouri town to write a biography of his favorite children's book author, and discovers that the writer and the town have...wait for it...a terrible secret. A beautifully written and genuinely haunting book.

 

Picture
10) The Midwich Cuckoos, by John Wyndham, the great British sci-fi author.  It's is a combination of small-town apocalypse with Cold War paranoia: women in an English village are impregnated by aliens, and the resulting children turn out to be unusually creepy, even by hybrid alien baby standards. Brian Aldiss once dismissed Wyndham for his "cosy catastrophes," but it's Wyndham's narrow focus, quotidian detail, and sharp characterizations that make his books so unsettling. Same with the two films of the book: made twice as Village of the Damned, the first version, with George Sanders, is the best, one of those low-budget, black-and-white British thrillers of the late 50s and early 60s that is all the more effective for being so tight and economical. Unlike your modern, over-the-top alien invasion blockbuster, with massive CGI explosions and nameless CGI extras being flung through the air, this one evokes the feel of coming face to face with an implacable enemy in your own yard.

So, there it is. As you wander the leafy streets of your own small town this holiday season, or just imagine you do, bear in mind that under those rustling, autumnal maples and behind the solid doors of those snug woodframe houses lurk sinners of every description, not to mention the Old Ones, matriarchal corn cultists, Wiccans, and alien children. If your doctor wants to give you an flu injection, you might think twice if he looks anything like Bing Crosby. And if the circus comes to your town this month, take my advice and stay home.

Happy Halloween!

 
Chinatown 09/29/2009
 
Picture
My reaction to Roman Polanski's arrest in Switzerland was, like a lot of people's, originally pretty blase—it's been thirty years, what's the big deal, who cares anymore?—until I read Kate Harding's piece in Salon yesterday. Returning again and again to a single, irrefutable refrain—"Roman Polanski raped a child"—Harding demolishes, with a fine, cleansing rage, all the arguments for leaving Polanski at liberty. The most pernicious excuses are easily dealt with—that the girl had a pushy stage mother, that Polanski's own childhood was horrific, etc.—and the rest of them—it's been a long time, he hasn't done anything like that since, his grown-up victim has forgiven him—probably wouldn't even have been brought up if Polanski weren't a celebrated film director and the friend and co-worker of a lot of famous people. 

In fact, what Polanski's defense boils down to finally is what you might call the Ezra Pound Exception, i.e., that some people consider great artists to be exempt from moral judgement (to wit, "So what if Ezra Pound was  Fascist, he was a great poet, etc."). If you take Polanski's talent out of the equation, then his defense falls apart, which is easy to see with a little thought experiment. Assuming that the facts are not in dispute—that Polanski pled guilty to unlawful sex with a minor and then fled the country to escape sentencing—consider this: if he were just an ordinary 76-year-old man, and not the guy who made Chinatown and Rosemary's Baby and Knife in the Water, then no one would take the other reasons for not extraditing him at all seriously. Her mother was pushy? So what. She was "advanced" for her age? So what. It happened a long time ago? So what. For anybody else but a celebrated and/or wealthy guy, none of this would matter.

And even if you do think that Polanski's personal history and the victim's forgiveness are mitigating factors, surely the proper venue for taking them into account would be a sentencing hearing in Los Angeles County. If they are mitigating factors—and I honestly don't know if they are or aren't, that's not my point—then let Polanski return to face the charges he admitted to, and let a judge take them into account. Given that he confessed to the truth of the charges, and then fled the country to avoid facing the consequences, letting him off the hook during the extradition process just feels wrong to me, or at least premature.

Picture
I say all this as an admirer of Polanski's work, or some of it. Chinatown and Rosemary's Baby are two of my favorite movies, and his version of Macbeth (the first film he made after his wife's murder by the Manson family, another potential mitigating factor) is my favorite Shakespeare film. (And no matter what happens, I will continue to watch them and enjoy them, just like I still think Ezra Pound actually was a great poet, if not such a nice guy, and just like I'll continue to listen to Phil Spector's great Christmas album, despite his being a convicted murderer.) In all three films, the film's script or original source material is not by Polanski, but he brings to them not just the cool elegance of his Polish film school training, but the full effect of his understanding (gained the hard way, by surviving the Holocaust) of the seductive persistence of evil. I watch Rosemary's Baby almost every Halloween; it's the scariest movie I know, and yet it's almost completely free of the visceral shocks you usually get in horror films. What's scariest about it is the slow accumulation of ordinary, quotidian moral compromises, culminating in that blackly comic and horrific final scene, at the end of which Rosemary (who is also a victim of a rape, by no less than Satan) comes to accept her demon child—evil triumphs through the back door, by means of a mother's love for her newborn son. And, of course, the ending of Chinatown is equally harrowing, as a rich and powerful old man who has committed a series of horrific crimes, ranging from rape and incest to the corruption of a city government, basically gets away with it. Polanski even changes the ending of Macbeth: while Macbeth himself gets what's coming to him—his severed head rolling in the dirt—Polanski adds a little scene at the end, with the new king of Scotland riding off to visit the witches and make his own pact with the devil.

Picture
Now, bear in mind, I'm not saying that Roman Polanski is Satan, or Macbeth, or even Noah Cross. He's continued to make good movies (if not as great as the ones he made before his arrest), and, as even Harding concedes (through gritted teeth), he may even be a decent guy, all things considered. And it's entirely possible that a judge may buy all or at least some of the mitigating factors everyone is invoking and let Polanski off lightly. All I'm saying is that if he weren't a famous (and wealthy) film director, none of these reasons would be enough to keep him from standing before a judge to accept his sentence, which is what he probably should have done thirty years ago. Much as I love his movies, and his bracingly ambiguous and subtle vision of the moral abyss we all walk over, all the time, I don't want this story to end the way his best movies do, where good people shrug off a crime and let it stand. This time, we shouldn't forget it. This isn't Chinatown.

 
 
You can now read the first chapter of Next, my forthcoming novel. Go here.

Everything I read and everything everybody I know tells me says that this is how you publish and promote a novel these days, but it still feels weird to me. I'm doing my geriatric best to keep up: I'm on Facebook now, fer chrissakes. God help me, I'm on Twitter, too, though I hardly ever think of anything interesting to say. The other day, I tweeted that I was eating a banana. Is this what Herman Melville would have done? Oh, time, strength, cash, and patience!
 
Coming Soon 07/30/2009
 
Picture
I've just put up a new page for my forthcoming novel, Next. Right now, you can see the catalog copy from Little, Brown, some very generous advance blurbs from Jim Crace, Kate Christensen, and Laura Lippman, and a link (click on the picture) to the book's Amazon page. In the near future, I hope to put up an excerpt, probably the opening pages of the book. Stay tuned.

 
 
Picture
Years ago, when I was in my early 20s and working as a clerk at the original Borders Book Shop in Ann Arbor, I came home after work one hot summer evening with a bag full of groceries and discovered that the lock to my apartment was broken. I left the groceries (including some melting ice cream) outside my door and went door to door in my building, looking for a phone I could use (this was in the Jurassic Era, aka the 1970s, before cellphones) so I could call my landlord. I finally found a neighbor at home (it was a Sunday evening), called my landlord, and got his machine. Not knowing what else to do (like I say, my ice cream was melting), I borrowed a crowbar from my neighbor, went down to the front porch of the building, and broke in my own bedroom window. Then I crawled through—very carefully—opened my door, put my groceries away, and went back into the bedroom with the empty grocery bag to pick up the pieces of broken glass. As soon as I bent over, I saw an Ann Arbor cop on the lawn, just beyond the porch railing, leveling his pistol at me. "Come out of the house slowly," he said, "with your hands in the air." 

Well, folks, that got my attention. I came out onto the porch with my hands in the air, trembling like leaves. "I don't know if this makes any difference," I said, "but this is my apartment." The cop, it turns out, was one of four officers who showed up, including, my neighbor told me later, an officer with a shotgun at the rear entrance of the building. He walked me back inside; I showed him my driver's license and a utility bill, and he tried my key in the lock to make sure I was telling the truth about that, too. Then all the cops went away.  

During that same period in my life, I spent a lot of time behind a cash register at Borders, dealing with professors from the University of Michigan, which was a block away. Most of them were perfectly pleasant, but there were always a few arrogant ones, who seemed to think they were entitled to special treatment or discounts, and more than once during my five years as a bookstore clerk, I heard some jackass with an overdeveloped sense of his or her own importance say, "Don't you know who I am?" 

Which brings me, of course, to Henry Louis Gates, but if you think you know where I'm going with this, don't be so sure, because I'm not so sure myself what I think of this whole situation. This blog post is me thinking out loud. I've been following it with considerable interest, not the least because how it all played out—on the day of his arrest, and ever since—provides a perfect opportunity to apply the lens of gender, race, and class, that trifecta of modern academia. You might even call it a perfect storm. I think race certainly played a factor, perhaps even the determining one, but (as academics like to say), it's complicated, and I also think without factoring gender and class into the situation, you can't really understand it. I enter into this with the obvious caveat that no one, not even Professor Gates or Sergeant Crowley, will ever know what really happened (I'm just enough of a postmodernist for that), and that the ordinary epistemological fuzziness of an incident like this—he said vs. he said— thickened within hours into an impenetrable fog of public claims and cross-claims. Just today, in the Boston Globe, there are two matching and mutually contradictory articles, one featuring the famous friends of Skip Gates saying that he's not an arrogant jerk, and the other featuring the not-so-famous family and fellow officers of Sergeant Crowley saying that he's not a racist 

All that said, here's what I'm thinking played into the incident, in ascending level of importance:  

CLASS: If you read Crowley's police report, and you assume, as I do (because of my experience with professors over the years), that he's not lying through his teeth, Professor Gates went ballistic and immediately played the "Don't you know who I am?" card. I completely believe this, despite what Gates himself or his supporters might say, on the principle that your friends don't necessarily see every side of your personality, especially how you treat people you consider subordinate to you. (The more relevant testimony, it seems to me, would come from secretaries, janitors, and waitresses who have dealt with Gates over the years.) The fact is, Professor Gates is not just a Harvard professor, he's a really famous one. Arrogance, or at least a sense of entitlement, in a man like that isn't a surprise, or even a character flaw: it's just part of the job description. Put it another way: sweet, self-effacing people don't become Harvard professors. It doesn't mean that Professor Gates is not a good or honorable man (and I believe that he is, not to mention a truly brilliant observer of race in America), it's just that you need a pretty high level of self-regard to succeed at that level, and when you do, you come to expect that people lower down the food chain will defer to you as a matter of course. 

Put against that the life and professional experience of James Crowley, who (I'm guessing) is solidly middle class, perhaps even working class in background. He works for the Cambridge Police Department, so no doubt he's dealt with a Harvard professor or two in his time. Is it reasonable to suppose that the average middle-class townie in Cambridge doesn't harbor any resentment, no matter how subconscious, against the mandarins at Harvard? I don't think so. Add in the fact that he's a cop, who is used to telling people what to do, and having them do it or face the consequences, and you've got one of those immovable-object-meets-irresistible-force situations. I don't know any cops personally (though one of my best friends is a civilian employee of a large police department), but in my very rare dealings with them, I get the distinct impression that, as a class, a) they don't like being contradicted, and b) they don't like people who put on airs. 

What further complicates this, of course, is the two gentlemen's shared

Picture
GENDER:  Which is not to say that the same thing wouldn't have happened if one or both of them had been a woman. But let's just say that when you get two guys facing off, especially two guys of different social class, it's going to go from zero to intransigence a lot faster. Some commentators have questioned the police report's claim that Professor Gates said, "Yeah, I'll talk to your mama outside," on the principle that a Harvard professor wouldn't talk that way. Having seen professors get mad upon occasion, I'm here to say that being a guy trumps your profession in a situation like this. I don't have any problem believing that a Harvard professor, if he was feeling angry, wouldn't start talking like any other guy on the street. Given the (extremely) mitigating factors that Professor Gates had just come back from a long plane trip, that he was tired, frustrated at not being able to get into his own house, and then confronted by a stony-faced white cop in his own hallway, I think the testosterone would flow pretty freely. 

It was probably flowing pretty freely in Sergeant Crowley, too. The key moment in the police report, it seems to me, is when Crowley writes, "While I was led to believe that Gates was lawfully in the residence, I was quite surprised and confused with the behavior he exhibited toward me." In other words, this prick is fucking with the wrong guy. This is the point where the situation went irrevocably downhill, where I think the flood of testosterone got the better of both men: Professor Gates is on the phone, demanding that someone "Get the chief," while Sergeant Crowley is radioing in that he's with "someone who appeared to be a resident but very uncooperative." My point being, I guess, that Gates should have calmed down and stopped shouting and pulling rank, but that Crowley, having established that Gates actually was in his own home, should have shrugged off the abuse and walked away. I came to this conclusion on my own, reading the report, but I was also enlightened by this comment on the Double X blog, from a woman who has been a police officer, making the same case: that police officers deal with loudmouthed jerks all the time, but they don't usually arrest them for it, especially if they haven't done anything else wrong. 

Which then brings us down to the nub of it, the fact that Sergeant Crowley did arrest Professor Gates, when he didn't really need to. I think all the elements I've outlined above played into it—professorial entitlement, Gates's fatigue and frustration, the cop's expectation of being instantly obeyed, the two men's respective social classes, their abundant testosterone—but it really feels as if the one thing that pushed it past the tipping point was 

RACE: I realize that, in my earnest, white liberal fashion, I have finally worked my way back to where a lot of other commentators (especially black male commentators, including the president of the United States) started in the first place: that if Henry Louis Gates had been white, and had behaved exactly the same way, he wouldn't have been arrested. Some commentators (mostly white) have given their own anecdotal evidence of being bossed around by cops and threatened with arrest, or even arrested, for mouthing off, but on the whole, I have to agree that it looks like the one remaining element, the one thing that may have rubbed Sergeant Crowley the wrong way, was that Gates was a black man. I say this with some trepidation, because the accusation of racism, especially in a high-profile situation like this, paints with a very broad brush, with the result that a decision by an ordinarily decent cop in a moment of stress, when his buttons are being pushed by an angry man and when deep-seated attitudes that probably most white people still have might come to the surface (perhaps even unwillingly), is judged to be on a par with burning crosses or turning fire hoses on civil rights marchers. It's even more difficult to make a distinction when each side is demonizing the other—Crowley's a racist vs. Gates is an elitist asshole—and it also raises the question of whether the fact that there are degrees of racism is any excuse. It isn't, I suppose, but any discussion of race that doesn't take into account how complicated and contradictory people are isn't going to get us very far. So, I guess my bottom line is this: Professor Gates probably shouldn't have lost his temper, but Sergeant Crowley definitely shouldn't have arrested him. 

Professor Gates is already talking about making a documentary about this, and I really hope he does. If this isn't a teaching moment, I don't know what is. I've always relied on him to say something shrewd and thoughtful at moments like this—I still remember his brilliant and illuminating analysis of the aftermath of the O. J. verdict—and what I'd really like to see, if it's at all possible, is the two men together on camera, once the passions have cooled and the lawsuits are dismissed, talking about this honestly with each other, across the lines of race and class. In the Age of Obama, this whole thing really shouldn't have happened, but in the spirit of Obama, it's a fantastic opportunity to say a lot of things that need to be said.