Monday, February 11, 2008

Five minutes with Liz Calder

The most prized possession on my bookshelves is a copy of the commemorative book that Bloomsbury published and I edited to help celebrate the author Russell Hoban’s 80th Birthday in 2005. It was signed in London by Hoban, and page 33 has now also been signed by his publisher, Liz Calder, who also contributed a short article. We fans of Hoban—a writer who has said that none of his adult novels has ever recouped the publisher’s advance—have good reason to thank her. It is clear she is a lover of literature, and not only of books that make a mint.

You only have to talk to her for a couple of minutes to realise that she is someone very special. Her uncanny ability to unearth and then nurture writing talent and often to convert that into vast quantities of dosh while still remaining endearingly human has led writers such as Michael Ondaatje to say that she is “sane, calm and generous—at ease with herself. It’s astonishing she’s survived in a world that’s cut-throat”. And the man who head-hunted her 20 years ago, Bloomsbury Publishing chairman Nigel Newton, says he did so because “she had highly attuned literary interests, strong commercial judgment and was loved in the industry—she’s the best there is”.

Calder lived in New Zealand in the 1950s, and went to school in Palmerston North before returning to England in 1958. NZBC wanted to know what changes she had noticed here since, and politely test her knowledge of our literature.

How familiar are you with New Zealand writers?

“I would say not familiar at all. My job has changed in the last few years so that I’m now semi-retired and I work only a few days a week. I’ve read Mister Pip. A long time ago, back in the early 1990s, we were doing an annual anthology called Soho Square and we had a different editor every year, and one year
we had Bill Manhire, and that’s when I first encountered Lloyd Jones and we had a piece of his in it. I’ve read Emily Perkins because we’re publishing her. I’ve read a few things in the last few years but really I haven’t kept up with it very much. But if I didn’t read another new book, I would still have a lifetime of reading waiting for me.”

How do you prioritise reading for pleasure?

“Well, until a year ago I didn’t do any reading that wasn’t related to work—but that doesn’t mean that it wasn’t pleasurable because it was. So I didn’t in that sense miss it. But since I’ve been involved in this literary festival in Brazil [Flip, the
Parati International Festival of Literature] I’m reading much more stuff. This Nigerian woman [Calder points to a paperback on her table], Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie, Purple Hibiscus was her first novel and she had another one, Half of a Yellow Sun, which won the Orange Prize, and she’s coming to our festival in July and I wanted that. So I now read a lot more than previously and I’m catching up with some of the things, but I haven’t really begun. There’s so much! Even classics, rereading Dickens last year… or beginning to.”

Do you maintain a ‘Books to read’ log?

“No, perhaps I should. An antiquarian bookseller I knew years ago was a voracious reader and she would read everything and had a huge library. She wrote down, in notebooks, every book she ever read, with the date, the publisher’s name and her comments. She died and I don’t know what happened to her books, but she was a habitual cataloguer so everything had to be written down. I’m certainly not like that.”

Which other books that you’ve read for pleasure in the last year have excited you?

“Zadie Smith
On Beauty I thought was brilliant—a really extraordinary, wonderful book about families. I read an early William Boyd called Any Human Heart, which I thought was very good and not like many of his books which are much more like adventure. His last one, which we just published, called Restless, is almost a spy-thriller.”

Your parents emigrated to New Zealand in 1949. It must have been a quite different country then. What do you make of all the changes?

“I was here in the 1950s and some people think that New Zealand remained in the 1950s for quite a few decades to follow. Louis [
Baum, Calder’s publisher/writer husband] was here in 1984 and I’ve been back a few times since, but the changes in the last 20 years have been enormous and really fantastic. It’s great to see New Zealand is now actually ahead of the world in so many respects, whereas it always used to be trailing behind and old-fashioned. I find it very exciting to see.

“I think the changes are really noticeable. The whole food and wine culture, the fashion business. The one thing that was always good, in a way, was the book trade and the booksellers. There were very good bookshops always, and particularly in Palmerston North. But things like food and clothes and wine or anything else were pretty grim. And the roads now are so wonderful! For an English person driving here, it’s a piece of cake. Hardly any traffic and these open, well-kept roads, easy to get from one place to another. And also architecture, just the look of things. You go into a little restaurant in the sticks, in some one-horse town, and it’s really, really nice, the food is excellent and they’ve got a nice little back place where you can sit in the sun. Lovely.”

Do you still have family living here?

“My sister, who’s in the Wairarapa, to whom I’m very close, and two brothers, one in Taupo and one in Wanganui, and we’ve just had a fantastic reunion, down the Wairarapa. I don’t come back that regularly. The last time was 10 years ago. But we keep in touch quite closely on the phone and one thing and another. My sister won’t travel, so I have to do the shuttling back and forth.”

You were here for your birthday?

“Yes. We had a hilarious time and sang all the old songs. In those days there was no television and there was nothing much else, and my mother played the piano. We sang everything, all the time: hymns and light opera and pop songs, as far as we had any. So we got out all the old music and went through it all again.”

Do you see the internet and digital media as a threat or an opportunity for books?

“I might be burying my head in the sand, but I don’t really think the sort of books I care about are threatened by the internet, nor do I think it’s an opportunity, particularly! I think great literature will continue to be published in the form in which we know it because of its tangible, long-lasting character. People will want to keep books, they don’t just want to download a pile of paper and put it up in their bookshelves. It’s not going to happen. And I don’t think people are particularly going to read their favourite authors on e-readers, either.

“But having said that, for publishing generally there are definitely opportunities. And although at the moment I don’t know how much publishers are making use of it, certainly in the areas of non-fiction and reference it’s the obvious thing because it’s something that can be constantly updated and books, say, on health and all these other subjects that need constant updating can be produced much more easily and cheaply.”

Have you seen the
Amazon Kindle e-reader?

“No. Bloomsbury is supposed to be developing one, and almost every publisher says they are, but I don’t know to what degree any of them have actually got them beyond the early stages.”

Haven’t publishers missed an opportunity to create customised author sites with multimedia content (podcasts and interviews) to drive book sales?

“You know, we do have that, in a way. Just before I left England our techie person filmed me talking to Joanna Trollope and her reading a bit, and it’s going out on the website. We haven’t got it going quite as much as you’re suggesting, but it’s definitely a good idea.”

What effect has the Harry Potter phenomenon had on JK Rowling?

“Obviously, when somebody gets as much success as that and as much money as that, you think that can’t be good for the soul. But from all I know—and I don’t know Jo Rowling that well, I’ve met her a few times—I really find her to be a tremendously sensible and unaffected, down-to-earth sort of person. The only downside, I would say, is that I think she puts on too much makeup now. But apart from that I don’t think she’s spoilt too much—although her life must be pretty weird. But she does give away huge amounts of money to charities and to concerns she has. What do you do if you suddenly get deluged with money?”

A pre-Christmas article in the
New Yorker quoted sociologists speculating that reading books for pleasure will one day be the province of a special “reading class”, as it was in the days before mass literacy. Do you agree with that?

“In some ways you could say it already is. You know, it’s not a mass habit in the way that football is, or movies are, really. We’re involved in this literary festival in Brazil and we get 25,000 people coming to that, which is really amazing in a country where the percentage of people who can read is quite small. The great mass of people in Brazil can’t afford to buy a magazine, never mind a book. But in the western world, I suppose, it is a fairly specialist pursuit, and hardbacks are out of the reach of most people, certainly young people. But that sounds a very gloomy prognosis—is that all the writer said, or did he say a whole lot of other things as well…?”

Latin-American and non-English-speaking writers are being translated far more nowadays, aren’t they?

“That’s true. When I went into publishing, you rarely saw a book by someone with a foreign name; and indeed, the booksellers didn’t like them. They didn’t sell and so you were warned off them, warned off translations—it’s too expensive, nobody wants them. And now it’s almost a selling point to have a name that nobody can pronounce. A certain kind of metropolitan reading community just really loves that feeling. I mean, look at the
Khaled Hosseini books about Afghanistan, there’s no way that 20 years ago I could have imagined a book like that selling what it sold. So that’s a positive thing. And as you say, many more publishers are translating them as a result.”

What’s the effect of publishing consolidation on unpublished or beginning writers? Do you have any advice for them?

“The really weird thing that’s happened in British publishing is that all the great editors have become agents. The fact is that there are a hell of a lot of agents now. So I would say to somebody who has written either a novel or a part of a novel and believes that it should see the light of day, they should write a good, short letter explaining what it is that they’re sending, but not rambling on about every other thing on their mind, and send in a couple of chapters with the letter, to one of these proliferating new agents because there are so many of them and they must be looking for new writers. And that’s the only way they’re going to get them—or that’s the most common way, anyway.

“The editor at Picador, Peter Strauss, became an agent three years ago and I thought that was extraordinarily sad for publishing because he was a very good editor and a very good publisher. I think it must be something to do with editors getting fed up with the whole corporate way of doing things and the dominance of the sales and marketing people, and they want a little more autonomy. As an agent they can build their list and do what they like with it, but soon there’s going to be no editors for them to send their books to. They’ll all be agents.”

Are you still involved in the
Groucho Club?

“No, we’re not. We were at the beginning but it was actually our idea, Louis’ and mine, but we then gathered a group of publishing people together and then we found some people who actually knew how to run such a thing as a club or a bar, so they really got the thing up and running, and it was great—it’s still going. We were on the board for about 10 years and then we got slung off.”

Slung off or you slung yourselves off?

“Well, it was a bit of both. But the executive members of the board wanted to sell out and they wanted us out of the picture, basically. And by then there was Louis and me and a couple of other publishers still on the board. It wasn’t our core business, by any means, but it was quite fun, seeing it grow. It has served a purpose and filled a need at the time. Now there are thousands of similar clubs.”

Sunday, December 23, 2007

Five minutes with Dave Cousins

(Cousins in the heyday of the Strawbs, courtesy of Strawbsweb)
I have a theory that the best way to study the impact of pop or rock music is to look at the effort fans will go to in order to document a band’s history. Strawbsweb is a case in point. The attention to detail with which Dick Greener and other Strawbs fans have populated the memorabilia section of the site proves a kind of devotion that, after so many years in the business, must be humbling for frontman Dave Cousins.

The songs of the Strawbs are about as close as music can get to being intertwined with my DNA. Cousins’s voice is so familiar to me that he sounds like an old friend singing to me personally. I listened to Bursting At The Seams, Grave New World, Ghosts, Nomadness, Hero and Heroine and Deep Cuts countless hundreds of times when I was a teenager. They were the soundtrack to my adolescence. In the early 1970s someone at A&M, their record label, felt sorry enough for this obsessed fan to send me the sleeves of every one of their albums to date (I already had as many of them as were available on pre-recorded cassette). I can still remember the intense joy I felt at opening the glorious gatefold sleeve of
Grave New World, with its William Blake ‘Glad Day’ cover and the stunning metallic effects of the interior art.

But what makes Cousins so extraordinary is the imagery in his lyrics. Although his words are open to wide interpretation (often because, in the days before
song lyrics were available online, you couldn’t understand every word he was singing), he was much more specifically descriptive in his imagery than, say, Bob Dylan, who tended to be more metaphorical than illustrative. Cousins’s songs like ‘Beside The Rio Grande’ (Christ’s crucifixion told in spaghetti-western form about a snake-oil preacher) or ‘Hero and Heroine’ (which is about the only lyric I have memorised and can quote like a poem—in fact, you could almost convince people it’s a Tennyson, Byron, or Wordsworth ode) are chillingly different from anything other writers were doing at the time. The only composer who comes anywhere close to him lyrically is Sting.

Cousins, born in 1945, has a degree in statistics and pure mathematics from the University of Leicester, so would be the ideal man to help the NZBC prove the Stratford Theory of Numbers. He even had a year’s experience in advertising agencies before becoming a professional musician. Between 1969 and 1979 he was a producer for Denmark Radio and subsequently programme controller for Radio Tees. Since 1991 he has been in charge of St David’s Research, where he has been involved in many successful franchise applications for UK local radio stations. He also runs Witchwood Records, the independent label that has re-released many of the Strawbs’ classic recordings. In 2007, he released his second solo album, The Boy In The Sailor Suit. Songs such as ‘The Smile You Left Behind’ are as timeless as some of the classics from the first, Two Weeks Last Summer (recorded in 1972), like ‘Blue Angel’ and ‘We’ll Meet Again Sometime’.
Thanks for 40 years of great music, Dave.

In the early 1970s, when the Strawbs were at their busiest and most successful, you took the time to reply personally to letters from fans—even writing long, handwritten letters and supplying details of the band’s
instruments and backline. Do you think you’d do the same if you were a young musician enjoying chart success today?

“I’m sure I would. In those days I was just a musician and only had to concentrate on writing songs—so I had time on my hands. In fact, it has paid off over the years as I have remained friends with many of those correspondents.

“Sadly I don’t have as much time nowadays, hence the delay in replying to this. Now I have to write songs, organise the band’s gigs, and organise the record company!”

The music industry was very different in those days; it seems innocent and almost primitive by comparison with today’s scene. What do you miss most about the days of A&M Records, Arnakata Management [Mike and Jim Dolan and Jim Dawson’s ill-starred company, which at one time or another also managed acts such as Judas Priest and Be Bop Deluxe], Summerland songs and having five consecutive albums on the Billboard charts?

“I greatly miss the camaraderie of A&M. The whole team were personal friends and were dedicated to making sure that our records were promoted in as many places as possible. A&M didn’t want us to leave, nor did I! It was a management decision which operated for their benefit and not the band. Hence I do not miss Arnakata at all. Summerland Songs was my own publishing company that was put into receivership without my knowledge. I bought back my catalogue of songs from the receiver.

“In fact, we had seven consecutive albums on the Billboard chart. We were quite well-known then. I don’t miss that accolade, although I wish we could trace all the people who bought our records then and tell them we’re still in business.”

What’s the story behind the
Bursting At The Seams-era band recording its superb version of the folk song ‘Will Ye Go’? It sounds so fresh it could have been recorded yesterday, yet apparently there was a bit of an oversight regarding the song’s supposed ‘traditional’ status that backfired on you. Could you elaborate?

“The usual arguments about publishing royalties! The B-side of a single attracted the same amount of mechanical royalties as the A-side. It seemed democratic for the band to share the writing credits for ‘Will Ye Go’, which I believed to be a traditional song. As it transpires, it was registered by the McPeake family from Belfast, who had a nice Christmas present of about £5000 that year. Later, I was told by Scottish folk singer
Alex Campbell that his father had written it. I couldn’t be bothered to put it to the test.”

Would you say the presence of the Strawbs’ albums on the Apple iTunes store has reinvigorated interest in the band’s earlier recordings, and what are your feelings about digital downloads generally?

“I think the interest in our early recordings has been more stimulated by the extensive touring we have done since the
Chiswick House reunion concert [the band’s 1998 30th Anniversary event]. This coincided with the release of many of the A&M albums on CD.

“I am all in favour of legal downloading. In fact, a number of Witchwood albums are now available through
Pinnacle Download and iTunes, Napster, and so on.

“I am fighting bootlegs as much as I can as they rip off the artist and fan alike. I am working with the
BPI investigation department regarding this, but it is very time-consuming.”

Dick Greener has done an amazing job creating and maintaining
Strawbsweb. Before the internet it was virtually impossible to find facts about the band and it’s easy to forget how difficult searching for anything was in the 1970s and 1980s. Do you have a complete archive of Strawbs back-catalogue material and press cuttings, or are there any important gaps?

“I have an archive but there are gaps where I left wives and girlfriends with large sections of press cuttings. The boxed set was largely compiled from my boxes of old contracts, tickets, badges, photos and so on.

“The Strawbs website has been a major factor in our revival, thanks to Dick Greener and his team. Many people consider it to be the best group site they have seen. I don’t disagree.”

In 2003 you fell from a ladder while renovating your farmhouse in France and broke your pelvis. Have you recovered fully from the injuries, or has the fall permanently affected your ability to play and sing for long periods?

“I fractured my pelvis and the house is not a farmhouse as such. I couldn’t put my left foot to the floor for 14 weeks, which was a pain. However, I religiously did all my exercises and I feel no effects of the accident at all.

“The reason we sit down for acoustic shows is that the guitar parts are a bit fiddly and [bassist] Chas [Cronk, one of the Strawbs’ longest-serving sidemen] wouldn’t be able to play the pedals standing up.

“On my upcoming solo gigs in the US and Canada I’ll be standing, although ‘Blue Angel’ is a bit tricky!”

The concert in London’s Queen Elizabeth Hall on the South Bank in July 1970, where Rick Wakeman was first acclaimed as a “keyboard genius” and which was released as the album Just a Collection of Antiques and Curios, is rightly regarded as a folk-rock classic. How much do you remember about the concert, and who was to blame for the ‘interesting’ note in the segue between the final choruses of ‘Song of a Sad Little Girl’ [a song about Cousins’s daughter Joelle]?

“I remember the concert pretty well. It was our first major concert as headliner and went blindingly well.

“Rick came out of it as a major star but the Guardian critic described me as a rough and ready club singer. His name was Lustig and I have always wondered if he was the son of
Jo Lustig who managed Pentangle. In the US and Canada my voice is described as individual, which I prefer!

“One of the songs was too rough to consider for an album and has never appeared anywhere. Others have seen the light of day later. In fact, I like revisiting old songs as I don’t think we necessarily did them justice at the time.

“If there was an ‘interesting’ note in ‘Sad Little Girl’, so what? The album was a recording of a live concert and appeared warts and all. However, we did cut out about 30 seconds of ‘Temperament of Mind’, as Rick got a bit hot and flustered.”

You recently released your second solo album in 35 years. What were the biggest similarities and differences between those recording experiences?

“Both albums were recorded essentially live. There are hardly any overdubs on either of them. The standard of equipment has improved markedly in the period, especially in the availability of effects.

“On the new album there is no echo on my voice. The separation is achieved by phasing, and that is all down to the skill of
Chris Tsangarides. I am recording some solo tracks with him after Christmas and the band will be recording with him in April. It is interesting that he was the tape operator on Grave New World. It’s all part of being a member of the Family Strawb.”

If NZBC readers read only one book this year, which book should it be (and can we expect ‘Dave Cousins The Autobiography’, or at least ‘The Complete Strawbs’ any time soon)?

“They should read
William Pitt The Younger: A Biography, written by William Hague, although it came out last year. It is beautifully written and doesn’t go into lists of obscure names that often confuse history books.

“I am learning about people and houses that we come across in our travels nowadays, such as Wentworth House near Rotherham, the largest private house in Europe. It has the most remarkable story, which includes a monument to
Admiral Keppell. There is a cottage just round the corner from my house that was named after the Admiral and now I have to find out why.

“How many people would read the story of the Strawbs? It’s all in the songs, anyway.”

What’s on your iPod’s ‘On the Go’ playlist at the moment, or are you an iPod refusenik?

“I don’t have an iPod, but I listened to one of our tracks on one recently to get the words of a song. I’m not a refusenik, either. Frankly, I can’t be bothered with the idea or putting loads of songs on a machine. It’s bad enough recording tracks to send to people when I want to record them.

“I like CDs. They are convenient and I’m told they sound better than MP3s.

“I don’t really listen to a lot of music. I still enjoy Bob Dylan and early Jackson Browne. I am enjoying
Sigur Rós and Radio Tarifa.

“When I started to write songs I didn’t listen to much then, either. I just sit in the pub, surrounded by people, music playing or not and write what comes into my head. If it fits a tune, fine. If it doesn’t, I’ll change the tune. If I don’t have a tune I’ll find one later. Sometimes, the tune comes first. It’s all a bugger’s muddle but I’ve had a lot to be thankful for and am still writing.

“The latest is called ‘Plainsong’ and you’ll be able to hear it in March.”

Sunday, September 23, 2007

Steely Dan: Time out of mind


There’s music and then there’s Music, folks, and that’s what J2 people and Radio Hauraki (co-presenters of the NZ leg of Steely Dan’s Heavy Rollers tour) don’t understand. The first kind of ‘music’ is what the airwaves are full of. As J2 discovered, Steely Dan videos are thin on the ground, although they may once or twice have given Donald Fagen’s New Frontier clip an airing. It’s been more than 10 years since I last chose to listen to Hauraki, but my guess is that the only Steely Dan they play is Rikki, Do It Again, Reeling In The Years and, very rarely, Haitian Divorce.

The other kind of music — the sort that doesn’t get played on J2 or Hauraki and never will — doesn’t require anything other than musicians and their instruments. No image accoutrements, no smug FM djs to introduce it, no recreational drugs to make it sound good. Donald Fagen may look like a greying old raven escaped from the Tower disguised in crooked Ray-Bans; and Walter Becker might have all the rock chic of an overweight chartered accountant who’s been hauled in to cover for a sick guitar player (“Gee, look at me, I’m in a rock ‘n’ roll band!”), but they do not need pyrotechnics, million-dollar light rigs and dancing girls to work their magic. Their songs do any required dirty work for them.

I’ve been listening to SD since the 1970s, have seen them live twice and countless times in concert on DVD and video. I know exactly what Fagen looks like. The sound of his voice is hardwired into my circuitry. Nevertheless, when I close my eyes, his super-ironic, nasal BeBop Daddy drawl emanates from an idealised Rock God face. And that’s the way it should be.

If you never bothered to buy
Two Against Nature or Everything Must Go or Kamakiriad or Morph The Cat or 11 Tracks of Whack, where you do get off demanding this band plays Rikki or Do It Again? In Melbourne, apparently, some guy in the third row wasted his breath shouting for Nightfly the entire way through the show. Eventually, at that show, The Donald lost his patience, and stopped the show during his Do It Again intro to shout back, “You’re annoying me now man. We play what we want, so just cool it.”

Touché. That’s exactly what the Auckland audience needed to hear. Just because you’re used to hearing music for a $10 cover charge down at your local pub doesn’t mean when you fork out $130 for it that it’s your own private show. Silences between songs at the Vector show were filled with the shouts of those who think that, having paid for a ticket, they have a divine right to hear whichever song they want. If you really want to hear Rikki, stay at home and put the record on. Or hire a Steely Dan covers band to come and play at your birthday party. I’m afraid I can’t make it.

The truism is that Americans can’t do irony, so this band must be the exception that proves it. The Dan oozes it; it drips from the stage; from the spoken introductions to every nuance of every song. I know this because it went right over the heads of certain elements of this crowd, who clearly didn’t need entreating to get wasted; many were far gone before they even arrived at the show.

Let’s take Hey Nineteen’s “the Cuervo Gold, the fine Colombian” chant as an example. People: it’s a song about an old man trying to seduce a nineteen-year-old (“No, we got nothing in common...”). It’s not meant to be an exhortation, or a blueprint for living. Nevertheless, Walter Becker was kind enough to suggest (and I paraphrase) that while it may be none of his business, if you do decide to try this kind of behaviour on a spring evening in Auckland, you might want to take along a cassette radio (to listen to the cricket, perhaps), as well as an umbrella. It rains a lot here, right?

The Dan’s music is what you might call aspirational — not in a career sense; it’s a kind of sci-fi fantasy of rock ‘n’ roll, played immaculately by jazz musicians. It’s a vision of alternative realities. Just check out the
lyrics to Pixeleen if you have no idea what I’m talking about; it’s the William Gibson of rock. Which is part of the problem for the kind of people who wouldn’t be seen dead at an SD gig: the mother of all perception gaps; the black hole of bigotry. Because if the larger part of this 8000+ house has only ever heard the ‘hit singles’ on Hauraki, imagine what the ‘hipper than thou’ element who grew up listening to Kiwi indie bands on Flying Nun (not that there’s anything wrong with that) think of them. I’ve heard friends trying to blur the line between SD and west coast rock (the very words make them spit), as though there were no difference between Aja and what the Eagles and REO Speedwagon play. I’ve even heard The Dan dismissed as, shock horror, “session musicians”.

Let me explain that term to you: session musicians are the ones good enough to play anything at any time for anybody. They are not people who have no soul. If you told these guys that a certain mid-song hand signal meant they had to start giving every seventeenth bar the inflection of a wryly raised eyebrow in a difficult time signature, not only could they play it they would make it sound like fun.

Some people wouldn’t know music if it fell on them like a Steinway grand from a 14th storey window. These are the people who were too busy hoarsely yelling for Rikki to listen to Keith Carlock on drums making the breaks in Aja skitter, stutter and tumble tantalisingly into the stabbing chords around them. Freddie Washington has played bass with
everyone from the Isley Brothers to Gladys Knight, and what he does on stage has very little to do with virtuoso chops; his simplest lines groove. But that’s like telling someone the bottle of wine they’re drinking from is among the finest in the world; if all you’re interested in is getting pissed and making a spectacle of yourself, you’re unlikely to be impressed by world-class tastes.

Even though to my mind there are few things more dispiriting than seeing untrained, middle-aged, fat white people trying to dance, I would be the last one to ban them from doing so after they’ve forked out their hard-earned readies to attend a Steely Dan show. I just wish someone would brief the over-taxed security staff about the venue’s policy on dancing before this spontanous outbreak of terpsichorean abandon is inflicted on me. If I want to see ugly white people wobbling out of time, I can do that any time, for free. We have mirrors at our place.

The real trouble with uncool people who think their own feet award them instant cool-points is that, try as you might, their behaviour eventually adheres to your shoes like dogshit, leaving a bad smell to follow you around for the rest of the night. Thus I will now never be able to banish the image of the sad old slapper who tried to attract Walter Becker’s attention during the band introductions. Christ knows what she wanted, but fortunately Walter has been through enough in his life to remain unfazed by such indignities. He gestured to her to wait, and then, when she persisted, paused to introduce her, as: “the lady in front who has had too much to drink”.

I feel absolutely no guilt about wishing her the mother of all hangovers and the dawning realisation that she did something terribly embarrassing last night.

At the front of the hall you get the spill of the backline from the stage but can still hear the vocals from the PA. You’re close enough to hear the unmiked sound of the drumkit and the same sound from the bass rig that the bassist is hearing. It’s the only way to listen to a show; as if you’re sitting onstage with the band. The word from further back in the auditorium was that there was a big hole in the upper bass/lower midrange frequencies. I was sitting about two metres away in front of Donald’s Fender Rhodes and I have no shame.

Back to the set, which was almost perfection and grace. I can see what they’re doing with the
Cubano Chant overture. It’s a nice way of warming up the crowd and means Donald and Walter don’t have to come onstage in the dark. It just goes on too long. Other than that, the newest song they played was from 1980, so the audience really had nothing to complain about as far as them flogging newer, unknown material was concerned. Personally, I would have loved to hear Jack of Speed (again) and Pixeleen live; but then, I’m not the musical director, and unlike some of the sad cases in the Vector Arena last night, I’m not selfish enough to think that this show was for my benefit. Walter put a different spin on Haitian Divorce by singing the lead. I love his voice on 11 Tracks of Whack — Down At The Bottom must be the ultimate in self-deprecation — but I doubt I would be convinced by his vocal contribution last night unless I was able to hear him do it again (bad pun acknowledged).

Home At Last is the story of Ulysses played as New Orleans jazz-blues — the kind of thing Dr John might do well — sadly, it doesn’t quite work with Fender Rhodes substituting for the grand piano of the studio version. It’s one of The Dan’s most epic songs, but Donald and the backing vocalists made the chorus sound a little too polite, like a cocktail lounge band doing a passable Steely Dan cover.

They changed the set very slightly from the
Melbourne show. It’s hard to imagine how they could do the vocal harmonies on Dirty Work live, but apparently the female backing vocalists can pull it off. They played Deacon Blues instead, and Donald’s “I cried when I wrote this song/Sue me if I play too long” was an unnecessary caveat because, in contrast with the Art Crimes tour (11 years ago now), soloing was brief and the show reined in at about an hour and forty minutes plus encores.

The highlight may have been the
Owsley Stanley homage, Kid Charlemagne. The fourth-verse scramble to clear the acid lab of its test tubes and scales, and the way Donald delivers the lines, “Is there gas in the car?/Yes, there’s gas in the car!” gets me whether live or on record. But, eventually, no matter how much I tried to focus on the stage, the lunatics had taken over the arena and some of the lunacy had been detected by the band.

Between songs, Donald — perhaps surprised by the dancing in the aisles and the crowd’s hoarse whoops of delight — described the audience as “mad”. Later on we were labelled as “wild dudes”. Before the band came back onstage for the encores, one such wild dude — a Mussolini lookalike in the front row — seemed in his tired and emotional state to have become convinced that the crowd was applauding him. He condescended to wave back, climbed up on a temporarily vacant chair next to us, revealing his torn underwear, exchanged some kind of il Duce salute with the house, before dismounting and announcing to my friends and me conspiratorially, with beery breath and eyes like pissholes in the snow, “My Old School!”

Eventually, he went away but, spookily, the encores were changed from Do It Again followed by Bodhisattva to Bodhisattva followed by My Old School. Even a BeBop Daddy, it seems, is not immune to the needs and desires of the great unwashed.

About World Party, SD’s support band, I will only say they did an admirable job, and it was both smart and brave of them to start the set with their
most familiar hit; especially as far as the dullards in the house were concerned. Karl Wallinger endearingly and modestly confessed to having written a hit for Robbie Williams, and then sang it with panache. The audience was suitably kind to them.

That Auckland set in full:

Cubano Chant
Time Out of Mind
Black Cow
Hey Nineteen
Home At Last
Peg
Babylon Sisters
Green Earrings
Haitian Divorce
Black Friday
Deacon Blues
Josie
Aja
Kid Charlemagne

Encores:
Bodhisattva
My Old School

Tuesday, September 11, 2007

“What have I left undone that I should have undertaken?”

McA (left) and Hem in Spain

Thinking about Robert McAlmon induces the kind of depression that follows a particularly malevolent hangover. It fills me with desperation and obliterates all hope. Well, not all hope because I soon remember that the fact that I am thinking about someone who died four years before I was born is itself a reasonable definition of hope.

At a time when the drive for profit and the disruption of media has made life for artists even more complicated and less secure than it was at the dawn of the 20th Century, it is reassuring to know that remaining true to one’s craft can still be rewarded by immortality. Even if it is the kind of immortality that needs treatment with Alka-Seltzer and a long sleep.

McAlmon (McA)’s gin-dry memoir,
with its much-imitated, much misunderstood title, Being Geniuses Together, recalls his time hanging out with the likes of James Joyce, Ezra Pound, Ernest Hemingway, Augustus John, Ford Madox Ford and Kay Boyle in 1920s Paris. And he writes about those insane war-sandwiched years in a way that still seems fresh.

McA would have been hard to match drink-for-drink, and he may also have been the kind of friend whose company would have soured long before closing time. He didn’t mind goading strangers — or the brawls that inevitably ensued — and when drunk he loved to wail his incomparable “Chinese opera”, described here in Geniuses:


“[James] Joyce wanted me to sing it, and I did. It is the corncrake and calliope wail of a Chinese virgin in a snowstorm, not understanding where she got her newborn babe, and the neighbour’s son claims it is not his inasmuch as he never saw her before. This is a performance that has had me thrown out of several bars and most respectable households and the police of various stations know it well. If they have any comedy in them it prevents them from putting me in for the night.”
Take it from me, there are not many doormen with that amount of comedy in them nowadays, let alone police officers, but such antics were certainly a magnet to the 1920s crowd. Sylvia Beach in her eponymous memoir of the Paris bookshop Shakespeare & Company (1959) notes, “Whatever café or bar McAlmon patronised at the moment was where you saw everybody.”

McA knew how to have a good time. William Weintraub of the Literary Review of Canada says McA’s roman à clef
Nightinghouls of Paris documents the “dyspeptic underside of the moveable feast”. Sanford J. Smoller, in his introduction to Nightinghouls, quotes from McA’s response to a 1929 questionnaire circulated in Paris by The Little Review:

Like: some people and some things.
Dislike: same answer.
Like: music, mainly jazz, and dancing, mainly my own, and gregarious life and lots of it.

Hard-drinking destiny
While living lots of this gregarious life, it was McA’s destiny to become tangled up with a great many more familiar literary names; so although his own writing has largely been forgotten, his name frequently recurs on the boundaries of other writers’ success.

He was driven by an uncompromising urge to publish work he found to be good and original, by writers who were undervalued or ignored by the big, commercial publishers. Often, this work was by expatriates and, when exported from France to Britain or the United States, their books were confiscated and destroyed at customs without McAlmon and US journalist and Three Mountains Press publisher
William “Bill” Bird (McA’s sometime partner in his Contact Editions publishing venture) being informed.

The reason for this was that McA wanted Contact Editions to specialise in books “not likely to be published … for commercial or legislative reasons”, which meant that many of these works were considered obscene. The printing was by poet
Adrienne Monnier and Sylvia Beach’s Dijon printer Darantierre.

Contemporaries talk of McA having been betrayed by friends and fellow writers. Certainly, most successively turned against him, having first fully availed themselves of his generosity. But, in spite of these disloyalties, McA continued writing, publishing and partying. By all accounts, he was more of a binge-drinker than an alcoholic and, like most latter-day binge-drinkers, knew when to stop when there was work to be done. From Smoller’s Nightinghouls introduction:


“…when McAlmon wrote concertedly, he would be, in Sisley Huddleston’s word, ‘invisible’, largely because he would leave Paris for a rural retreat such as Rambouillet, dry out, and get down to work.”
Surviving the “McAlimony” slur
While living in Greenwich Village after the First World War, McA befriended
William Carlos Williams, who would become his most loyal friend — until McA read and was disappointed by the way he was portrayed in the poet’s Autobiography. While there, McA also met Winifred Ellerman; known as a writer by the name Bryher. He married her and they went to Paris, via London. Bryher was the daughter of shipping magnate Sir John Ellerman, who is rumoured to have paid more income tax than any other man in England at the time. Sir John liked McA, but Bryher married him to simplify her movements with her lover, Hilda Doolittle (H.D.) and to deflect the disapproving gaze of her father, who trusted McA to domesticate her.

“Maintaining that he chose to marry Bryher because he loved her,” writes Smoller in Nightinghouls, “McAlmon repeatedly asserted that he was both surprised and distressed by her refusal to consummate their union. Williams, Sylvia Beach, and many other intimate friends strongly supported McAlmon’s account.”

When McA was granted a divorce from Bryher and received a large settlement from Sir John, those on the social scene began calling him “McAlimony”. But he rose above it. His sham marriage to Bryher notwithstanding, McAlmon
corresponded at length with H.D.

Also in the introduction to Nightinghouls Smoller says: “In early 1923, McAlmon received a gift of seventy thousand dollars from his generous father-in-law. (Whatever he thought about Bryher, he was a dutiful son-in-law and well liked by her family.) He used much of the money to establish the Contact Publishing Company so that he could publish his friends’ writings as well as his own.”

Even if the money came largely from his father-in-law, McA had no moral obligation to spend it on supporting the expat literati and their various habits. James R. Mellow (author of Hemingway: A Life Without Consequences, the final volume of a trilogy devoted to the writers of the lost generation) in his New York Times review of McA’s Village, ‘
Talent and all the right connections’, describes McA’s career as “one of the cautionary tales in the chronicles of the hard-drinking Lost Generation”:

“For a time he provided the always needy James Joyce with a monthly $150, he paid the expenses for Hemingway’s first trip to the bullfights in Spain in 1923, contributed to the welfare of indigent poets and, from 1922 to 1929, by way of the Contact Editions, published the works of the American vanguard writers…”

It could be a thankless task. In a funny third-person interlude in the 1924-1925 chapter of his first-person Geniuses, McA describes how, while the Gertrude Stein book he had decided to publish at his own expense (The Making of Americans) was at the binder, Stein refused to sign a contract with McA but asked Darantière, the printer, to ship all copies of the book to America behind McA’s back.

On the fateful trip to Spain (described in Boyle’s 1928-1930 chapter of Geniuses by Bird), it was McA’s munificence that made Hem’s novel The Sun Also Rises, about a group of expatriates in Paris who journey to Pamplona for the running of the bulls, possible:

“All the bills were paid by Bob, of course, but when a choice of seats came up at a bullfight, Hem would throw his stalwart honour to the wind and have to have the one good seat left, down by the ring, because he was ‘studying the art of it’ … Hem had to have his bottles of Johnnie Walker, or whatever the brand was, even in Spain, and at Bob’s expense. The price of them was enough to ruin a millionaire, and Bob was never that…”

(Hem — in the guise of his protagonist Jake — tells the story somewhat differently in The Sun Also Rises.)

As a thankyou for his patronage McA was as usual exploited, betrayed and gossiped about. The atmosphere was astringent and writers soon got bitchy with each other. Canadian novelist and Papa-pugilist Morley Callaghan describes the tensions in this well-titled Time article, ‘The Importance of Beating Ernest’:

“‘Scott didn’t like McAlmon. McAlmon no longer liked Hemingway. Hemingway had turned against Scott. I had turned up my nose at Ford. Hemingway liked Joyce. Joyce liked McAlmon.’”

Watered down
It was with not a little irony and perhaps a dose of bitterness that in 1934 McA wrote Being Geniuses Together, in which he says that, by 1926, it was “passionately the fashion to be an artist or a genius”. But in 1968 McAlmon’s contemporary Kay Boyle decided to revise, shorten and add alternate chapters to McAlmon’s original:

“McAlmon’s original text is approximately one hundred and ten thousand words in length; Boyle’s edition is one hundred and sixty thousand words, only seventy thousand of which were written by Robert McAlmon.”

Although she frequently substituted McA’s undeleted typescript for the edited, published version, Boyle also excised some important sections in order to accommodate her largely illusory impressions of a romantic link between herself and McA.

The poet Marianne Moore apparently rebuked McAlmon for anti-Semitism in 1921, but McAlmon railed against the Nazis in his solo edition of Geniuses. However, Boyle chose to remove these politically tinged interludes entirely; perhaps to make her own fantasies and reminiscences of her commune dalliances with the Duncan family (dancer Isadora and bohemian brother Raymond) seem less flighty.

But McA’s most famous work survived dilution and substitution by Boyle — in spite of contrary critical comment at the time of publication and later. Smoller, in his Nightinghouls introduction, questions whether Boyle much helped McA’s reputation by revising and editing Geniuses: “More than half the book is devoted to her story, and in lopping off the years 1931-1934 she deprived readers of his insights into the social and political unrest in Germany and France during this period. In Munich in 1932 with Seldon Rodman, for example, McAlmon watched a Nazi parade led by Hitler and his Brown Shirts; and in Paris he witnessed riots, police aggression, and clashes between fascists and communists. ‘Potential war or revolution was in the air, and hate and distrust,’ he correctly predicted in 1934 (McAlmon, Geniuses, 372).”

Notwithstanding her questionable role of partisan editor, we do have Boyle to thank for a resurgence of interest in McA’s life and contribution to literature. In her Note on Robert McAlmon in the Boyle-McA edition of Geniuses, she wrote: “It was McAlmon who, in liberating himself from genteel language and thought, spoke for his generation in a voice that echoes, unacknowledged, in the prose of Hemingway and that of other writers of his time.”

There is little doubt that Boyle championed McA, but romanticising his work as a writer and publisher and tying his life immortally to her own was really the last thing he needed. From her ‘1928-1930’ chapter of Geniuses:

“Bob was always seeking another name, and another face, in quite another place. I wrote a short story called ‘I Can’t Get Drunk’ about his endless search, saying: ‘Whatever you said to him was drawn with labour word by word from the bog of his interest in something else. Up and down and around he was looking for something that might catch his curiosity. If I stay up all night was he thinking, perhaps something will happen after all.’”

[My italics]. And Boyle at her most starry-eyed:

Nancy Cunard once said to me, her laughter quick, bright, and minuscule as a hummingbird, her eyes like jewels in her lovely head: ‘Ah, me, dearest, the nights Bob and I spent looking for you all over Paris, in and out of everywhere before I so much as knew your name!’ It was like the nights we spent looking for her, when we had to find her, or else for Bob it seemed the night would die.”

There are many clues here to Boyle’s illusions about McA. Most of us have friends whose attentions are elsewhere when we want them to be entirely with us, who are often somewhere else even when we are alone with them. It was in Boyle’s nature to imagine that McA loved her, just as it was in McA’s nature to be on the lookout for the next best thing.

It is also extremely telling that, of the 49 plates in the Hogarth Press Edition of the Boyle-McA edition of Geniuses, there is not a single photograph showing Boyle and McAlmon together. Even a poor, out-of-focus snapshot would lend credence to Boyle’s attempt to link her and McA in eternity, which was clearly her wish and would demonstrate the common bond and friendship that from her chapters was so important to her.

In Geniuses (1928-1930) Boyle recounts an episode when she began to quote one of McA’s poems (‘Oh, let me gather myself together’) back to him. He reacted aggressively:

“McAlmon did not say anything until we were near the farmhouse door again, and this time I opened it, and the light from inside fell on his face. ‘For Christ’s sake, six years saying the same poem? When are you going to grow up, kid?’ he said. Then he began jerking out — not laughter this time but the words of self-vituperation. ‘The god-damned, fucking, quivering pieces of me! Good enough to be flushed like you know what down the drain! Stinking enough to be tacked on the barn door in warning to the young!’ he shouted.”

As Smoller correctly notes in his Nightinghouls introduction, for McA to curse in one sentence and then hold back demurely in the next does not seem authentic. Boyle is almost certainly romanticising things again; but it is to her credit that she paraphrases McA on that very topic (Geniuses, 1928-1930):

“It was in New York or in Mexico that summer of 1929 that Bob met Katherine Anne Porter. He wrote Bill Bird that he was outraged over the pitiful size of the edition for her book the publisher was bringing out. ‘They expected to sell no more than six hundred copies,’ he wrote, and he added that both Katherine Anne Porter and Kay Boyle were better writers than Katherine Mansfield, but because no legends had been manufactured for them, their reputations would probably remain scandalously small. Katherine Anne, Bob said, was in his judgement the sounder writer of the two, for she wrote with greater authenticity, while Kay, come hell or high water, had to romanticise every situation. This may very well be true.”

Office boy’s revenge
McA was also James Joyce’s “drinking buddy”, and often dragged Joyce home and carried him up the stairs when he couldn’t keep up with McA’s appetite for the hard stuff. Nora was grateful. McA restored lost passages of Ulysses for Joyce and yet usually isn’t even mentioned by scholars — not even in the afterword on the reconstruction of the manuscript in the Penguin Twentieth-Century Classics edition of the book.

You would think that his efforts to restore such an important book from bowdlerisation might have been remarked upon in the book itself and not merely by McAlmon experts: “When a prude destroyed the only copy of the concluding erotic soliloquy in Ulysses, McAlmon reconstructed the text from Joyce’s notes, improvising as he went along.” McAlmon describes that process in Geniuses (1923-1924):

“…the husband of the English typist who was typing his work had destroyed some forty pages of the original script of Ulysses, because it was obscene… [Joyce] knew that I typed not well but quickly and had suggested it one night as we were drinking. I thought then, ‘Fifty pages, that’s nothing, sure I’ll type it for him.’ … his handwriting is minute and hen-scrawly; very difficult to decipher. With the script he gave me four notebooks, and throughout the script there were marks in red, yellow, blue, purple, and green, referring to phrases which must be inserted from one of the notebooks. For about three pages I was painstaking, and actually retyped one page to get the insertions in the right place. After that I thought, ‘Molly might just as well think this or that a page or two later, or not at all,’ and made the insertions wherever I happened to be typing. Years later I asked Joyce if he had noticed that I’d altered the mystic arrangement of Molly’s thought, and he said that he had, but agreed with my viewpoint.”

But Joyce was offended when Geniuses was published because McA depicted him as more of a drinker than as a writer, and tried to dismiss the memoir as “the office boy’s revenge”. But they never really had enough in common to be real friends: in William Carlos Williams’s Autobiography an incident is cited in which, in a half-drunken toast McA says to the assembled revellers, “Here’s to sin,” and James Joyce suddenly replies, “I’ll not drink to that.”

Flogging a dead dog
In 1923, McAlmon had paid to print Hem’s first book, Three Stories and Ten Poems, in Paris. The circumstances were (as Smoller writes in his introduction to Nightinghouls) that almost all of Hem’s manuscripts were stolen from Hem’s then wife Hadley at a Paris train station, and McAlmon offered to publish what remained. McA describes it in Geniuses (1923-1924):

“Hemingway had just suffered a minor tragedy. His wife had lost a briefcase containing the script of writing he had done over the period of nearly a year. However, he had three short stories and a few poems on hand … As I was publishing books in Paris, I decided to do his three stories and ten poems. One story ‘My Old Man’, was distinctly in the tone of Sherwood Anderson’s ‘I’m a Fool’, and some other race-track story of Anderson’s, but the other two stories, or, rather, sketches, were fresh and without derivation so far as I could detect.”

Hemingway would later complain that all he earned from this book “was the enmity of McAlmon, because it sold out while his own volumes remained in stock”.

Some say that Jake, the protagonist of Hem’s The Sun Also Rises, is based on McA rather than on Hem himself. Based on my reading of McA and my re-reading of Hem’s book, I didn’t detect many similarities and, as I’ve said, Hem’s telling of the Pamplona story differs starkly from McA’s in Geniuses. Nevertheless, Hem co-dedicated the shorter, limited print run version of his short story collection in our time to McA and Bird (among others), and a group of ‘Four Poems by Ernest Hemingway’ at the John F. Kennedy Presidential Library and Museum in Boston includes one called The Soul of Spain with McAlmon and Bird the Publisher.

And we should not forget that Hem once rated McAlmon highly as a writer. “‘Village is absolutely first rate and damned good reading,’ he wrote to Robert McAlmon from Schruns in Austria, in 1925. ‘We’ve all read it down here and everybody thinks it’s a knock-out.’ It was not simply a matter of buttering up the man who had published Hemingway’s first book … Hemingway, in fact, was just as enthusiastic about McAlmon’s novel when he wrote to Sylvia Beach of Shakespeare & Company with a bit of bravado: ‘McAlmon’s book Village came and is damn good. If anyone asks for it tell them it’s recommended by E. M. Hemingway, the famous Austrian skiing authority.”

But, as Morley Callaghan knew, Hem was fickle in his alliances and he also liked to fight; at least provided the pre- and post-bout PR was good. McA’s 1923-1924 chapter of the Kay Boyle edition of Geniuses details this account of the infamous Callaghan-Hemingway bout of 1929:

“[It] was reported to me several ways: by Hemingway, by Callaghan, and by Scott Fitzgerald. Callaghan’s report was that Scott was to referee, and they were to have three or four two-minute rounds. Hemingway was the taller and heavier man. Callaghan, actually, was short, and inclined to a look of flabbiness and rotundity. Scott was sure that Hemingway only needed to play with Callaghan, and let him down easily, without showing him up in a mortifying way. The first round did not turn out that way, however, and so Scott forgot to tell time. Callaghan had Hemingway backing away and getting winded, but the fight went on and on. Neither of the boxers wanted to suggest that the round-time was up, but after a long delay Scott did call time. Callaghan was sure that Hemingway thought Scott forgot to call time purposely.

“Hemingway’s story was that he had been drinking the night before and was boxing on three pick-me-up whiskies and that his wind gave out. The decision results, were, however, that neither Hemingway nor Callaghan could decide what the bout proved. Was one a better boxer but not so good a writer as the other, or was the other a better writer and boxer, or had Scott framed one or the other of them?”

McA’s glee at recounting this incident might have something to do with the fact that the rumours McA had been spreading about Hem among his gossip-hungry friends — that the Man’s Man was homosexual and so was his second wife Pauline — eventually came back to haunt him: Hem decked McA at the entrance to a Parisian bistro; some say with the words, “Now tell that to your God-damn friends!”, others claiming Hem called McA “a half-assed, fairy ass-licking, fake husband” (note the Steinian repetition). Try using that kind of language on your publisher nowadays.

A note in the Boyle-McA Geniuses says: “… Bill Bird writes that on one occasion when he ‘met Bob in a Montparnasse bar — his upper lip was covered with surgeon’s plaster. He could speak only very indistinctly, but made me understand that Hem had socked him. It was during that same period when Hem was assaulting [Theodore] Dreiser, Max Eastman, etc … it seemed to me that he felt flattered to be in such good company.’” Hem wanted the world to believe that McA was afraid of physical punishment, but according to Bird it’s unlikely that McA cared much about being hit: “Bob was quite cheerful about his wounded lip.”

According to Bird, this incident occurred outside Jimmie Charters’s Falstaff bar (retold in the introduction to Nightinghouls). Boyle heard about it from the artist Hilaire Hiler, but in Geniuses reckons Hiler couldn’t remember which bar it occurred outside.

(Incidentally, Charters, “the world’s greatest barman”, rated McA as a drinker, fighter and friend even if Hem didn’t. Practised drunks know never to underestimate the camaraderie of a good barman. In Boyle’s 1926-1928 chapter of Geniuses, quoting from Charters’s autobiography, This Must Be The Place, Charters says: “Bob McAlmon was one of my best friends among the writers … I don’t know much about Bob as a writer, because I have little time for reading, but I know he’s a good fighter.”)

Another episode, when Hem and McA saw the carcass of a dead dog on a flatcar next to their train in Spain, was used by Hem as proof that McA was “going soft” because instead of studying the carcass and taking notes to improve his craft, McA headed for the bar car for a brandy — where, McA pointedly notes, he was soon joined by Hem. There’s a nice (fictionalised) version of this story here, but it’s virtually impossible to get the ‘real oil’ on their relationship as each was a notorious needler and baiter, as Smoller notes again in Nightinghouls.

Needling each other about who was less of a man was just one aspect of the antagonism between Hem and McA. The latter had also stopped showing the necessary reverence for the former’s work, as exemplified in this passage from Geniuses (1923-1924): “Hemingway is always protesting and explaining his emotions, so much so that one is inclined to wonder if he has not invented some convention for himself as to how one should feel in particular circumstances: to be professionally brave here, tough there, gentle and inarticulate with tenderness somewhere else, the rough man, so reticent but oh so full of sensibility.”

There are also examples aplenty of Hem, his crony Fitzgerald and their biographers taking pot-shots at McA’s writing. But crucially it is McA’s first impressions (from Geniuses) that all Hem’s biographers use to describe Papa:

“At times he was deliberately hard-boiled and case-hardened; again he appeared deliberately innocent, sentimental, the hurt, soft, but fairly sensitive boy trying to conceal hurt, wanting to be brave … He approached a café with a small-boy, tough-guy swagger, and before strangers of whom he was doubtful a potential snarl of scorn played on his large-lipped, rather loose mouth.” (McAlmon, Geniuses, 155).

Ahead of his time
A key reason for McA’s feud with Hem and his friend Fitzgerald was the fact that Hem violently denied any homosexual tendencies, whereas McA seemed to think he knew better. But perhaps he was merely spreading the same rumours his new enemies were circulating about him. In his short stories, most notably those in Distinguished Air: Grim Fairy Tales (1925), McAlmon had recorded life in the decadent, gay subculture of Berlin with a frankness that was unequalled in the era:

“Compared to his stories, Christopher Isherwood’s later and more famous tales of the city seem almost tame.”

Edward N. S. Lorusso writes, in his introduction to the recent new edition of Village (University of New Mexico Press), that in a drunken moment McA had told Callaghan: “‘I’m bisexual myself, like Michelangelo, and I don’t give a damn who knows it.’” (Callaghan, incidentally, was the man who wrote of McA: ‘My curiosity about this generous man was immense … He was willing to help any writer of talent. And what did he get for it? Sneers and open hostility.”

Charles Shively writes that McA’s “precise rendering” of gay bar talk in Distinguished Air (1925) might be considered risqué even today:

“He uses terms like ‘blind meat’ (uncircumcised hard cock whose foreskin does not pull back), ‘rough trade’ and ‘auntie’…”

Don’t ask me what the euphemism ‘auntie’ means because I don’t know. I do know that Miss Knight, who gives her name to one of the four short stories in McA’s Distinguished Air was based on a real character called Daniel Mahoney.

Slipshod stylist?
Critics complain that McA was a slipshod writer. Shively points out that McA predated Kerouac with his “First thought best thought” approach, but that will always be part of the problem because it is not an axiom by which every writer can live.

McA, then, is not an all-time great but at least he writes honestly. His style at times is clumsy, but it is largely unmannered and not overly descriptive. His at times bald, unembellished method can be attributed to an ambition, as Smoller says in Nightinghouls: “to describe in precise detail, what he himself had experienced and observed, without embellishment”. He is, nevertheless, at pains to be seen in a favourable light — usually more by omission than by ‘creative’ writing (he never, for example, described being struck by Hem).

Smoller, again in Nightinghouls, of Village: “[It] has its flaws, deriving from the impatient, racy style dictated by McAlmon’s disdain for revision and his insistence that a writer should trust to the first flush of inspiration … That carelessness, indeed, occasioned Joyce’s suggestion that McAlmon label his 1922 collection of short stories A Hasty Bunch.” He also refers to McA’s tendency to overwrite descriptive passages: “McAlmon clearly never learned from Ezra Pound — as Hemingway had — to ‘distrust adjectives’.”

But McA did know how to be mischievous and humorous in his writing; as here, discussing the sad case of Abraham Lincoln Gillespie, a former maths teacher who had been hit by a truck and suffered some kind of logorrhoeic epiphany:

“Someone had remarked that he had a head shaped slightly like Joyce’s, and so Lincoln had grown a goatee and come to Paris.”

McA was right, being a genius was fashionable in the 1920s, and even a bonce shaped like a famous writer’s was in those days reason enough to head for ‘gay Paree’.

Exploited, betrayed, neglected, deceived and imitated
James R. Mellow closes his NY Times review of Village with the words: “Clearly, it is time to rescue McAlmon the writer, to make a long overdue assessment of his real contribution to American literature.”

Bird, in Boyle’s 1928-1930 chapter of Geniuses, calls McA “the third corner in every triangle” and says, “McAlmon had been exploited, betrayed, neglected, deceived and imitated beyond recognition, but anyway preyed on by the vultures of the writing world.”

The evidence is there. It is my contention that in his writing McA confused honesty with spontaneity. His impatience to get the words down on paper without artifice rarely led to the spare prose of writers like Hem, who honed their sentences and their craft conscientiously.

Boyle in her 1984 Afterword to Geniuses, echoes Robert Knoll’s question from McAlmon and the Lost Generation, A Self-Portrait, about why McA was incapable of making full use of his gifts in his own work:

“It is perhaps William Carlos Williams who has best answered that question. ‘He cared for nothing so much as excellence in his craft as a writer,’ Williams wrote, ‘but he could not be a liar to obtain it. And he had an eye and a fierce tongue when he saw others among the writers about him — liars in one form or another —who were lying to make their reputations. Many of them were doing just that. Not he. But he suffered for it in the world’s estimation.’ And to that Knoll adds: ‘Men of fierce integrity being rare, he does not deserve oblivion.’”

But even McA with his disdain for rewriting, must have recognised the frustration of not being able to correctly express a thought, an idea or a sensation; after all, the helpless yearning for the right words was all there in the poem he rescued from the poet William Carlos Williams’s wastepaper basket, as McA describes in Geniuses:

“[Williams] is apt to think his best [poem] not worth publishing because it has come straight from a direct and stark impulse, it does not perplex and torment and irritate him and make him restless. In New York I kept him from destroying one such poem, one of the most beautiful in any language. It was the ‘Portrait of the Author’, which appeared first with Contact, and later in his book, Sour Grapes. Marianne Moore later commented on it, saying, ‘It preserves the atmosphere of a moment, into which the impertinence of life cannot intrude’.”

And this is not merely McA, having failed as a poet, trying to take credit for saving another poet’s work. The incident is verified from Williams’s point of view in Orientalism and Modernism: The Legacy of China in Pound and Williams by Zhaoming Qian: “Williams told us that he discarded the poem because he found it imitative of Pound but that Bob McAlmon retrieved it from a wastebasket and called it one of his best.”

I urge you to read ‘Portrait of the Author’ [on the internet this poem seems also to be known as ‘The Light-hearted Author’]. If McA had felt the frustration Williams did in the struggle to express oneself, would he have worked harder at honing his own craft? And if he hadn’t believed in “first thought best thought” would his legacy be intact? Would he be remembered as a writer, alongside Joyce, Hemingway, Fitzgerald and the rest, instead of just as a drinker and wasted talent?

I don’t know and I don’t even care; I have exorcised McAlmon’s ghost. All except for that eerie wailing that sounds like Chinese opera reverberating around a Paris police cell.

Robert McAlmon died on 2 February 1956, James Joyce’s birthday.

Further reading
Explorations (1921, poetry)
A Hasty Bunch (1922, short stories)
A Companion Volume (1923, short stories)
Post-Adolescence (1923, novel)
Village: As It Happened Through a Fifteen Year Period (1924, novel)
Distinguished Air: Grim Fairy Tales (1925)
The Portrait of a Generation (1926, poetry)
North America, Continent of Conjecture (1929, poetry)
Not Alone Lost (1937, poetry)
Being Geniuses Together: An Autobiography (1938, memoir)
Robert McAlmon in the Encyclopædia Britannica
Robert McAlmon in Wikipedia
Bryher’s Wikipedia entry
Bill Bird’s Wikipedia entry
Kay Boyle’s Wikipedia entry
Three Mountains Press and Contact Editions
Hemingway and McAlmon
Ernest Hemingway at Knowledgerush
McAlmon’s poetry

Saturday, August 04, 2007

Fantasy & Science Fiction

Opening the September issue of Fantasy & Science Fiction (F&SF) is like stepping out of a time machine into a cosier, chrome-finned reality. Compare the latest issue’s cover design and its interior typography with some of the early examples and revel in the conceptual continuity. When I first glanced at its curious, old-fashioned Contents page I felt I’d fallen backwards into my adolescence; Mad magazines and Marvel comics carrying back-page classified ads for sea monkeys and 3D glasses.

But then again, US publishers have always tended towards the conservative. And before I’m accused of anti-Americanism, I will also add that US small press publications generally boast a higher standard of subediting and more professional production values than their European or Australasian counterparts. This issue of F&SF contains what must be a rare subediting error at the top of page 154. It’s standard practice for the authors of stories published in even small press US magazines to be sent proofs to correct, so “this shop will be remain standing” may have been introduced by the writer and missed by the sub. I was also a little disappointed to find on the final page, “The minimal plot centers around…” Something “centring around” something else is perpetuated by those who utter nonsense of the “very unique” variety on TV cookery shows, so Douglas A. Anderson should know better.

I’m nitpicking, I know. That F&SF is a premier-league genre fiction publication is immediately obvious from the quality of its ongoing contributors. That it has managed to survive as a monthly print magazine since 1949 is nothing short of a miracle in this part of the world, where local fantasy and science fiction writers struggle to find publishers because they are told there is no market for either. Meanwhile, UK agents and publishers say 40 percent of their fantasy and SF sales come from Australasia. Go figure.

Bryn Barnard’s cover illustration for one of the more accomplished stories in this issue (Ted Chiang’s ‘The Merchant and the Alchemist’s Gate’), although proficiently executed, appears a little too generic and, unless I’m mistaken, doesn’t depict a scene in the story.

The issue opens with Andrew Jablokov’s magic realism piece ‘Wrong Number’, which he says was inspired by a car he once owned and a garage called Uncle Russ’s. He launches straight into the action and it’s vaguely reminiscent of some of Stephen King’s short stories. But too much of the exposition occurs through the dialogue. The transformative vehicle driven into the story is a shamanic mechanic who prescribes the gluing of a crude replica cufflink to the inside of a car’s engine to act as a magical charm. This is to protect our protagonist, Stephanie, from a cufflinked man she fobbed off with an incorrect phone number because he came on to her at a party. In the context of the story it reads as implausibly as it does here. I can’t help thinking this story might have worked better in the form of a short screenplay.

Charles De Lint’s column, ‘Books to look out for’, is followed directly by James Sallis’s ‘Books’, and the two could easily have been merged; after all, Sallis’s reviews are not about books one should avoid at all costs. He gives NZBC friend
Paul di Filippo a mention, for example, for his stories ‘Personal Jesus’ in The Solaris Book of Science Fiction and ‘Wikiworld’ in the Fast Forward 1 anthology (which was also Boing Boinged). These reviews unnecessarily interrupt the flow of the fiction, and one can’t help wondering why both books and films don’t form a discrete reviews section of the magazine.

We’re soon back to the fiction with ‘Envoy Extraordinary’, written by Albert E. Cowdrey, who used to work at the US Army Center of Military History. Cowdrey may have a grasp of diplomacy but he suddenly jerks us out of what we assume to be a third-person viewpoint focusing on our apparent hero, Vincent Khartoum (although we ‘hear’ his thoughts as well as experiencing his actions), to one of an omniscient narrator. We discover Vincent has been booby-trapped by Second Secretary Balabanov in order to kill sleazy tyrant King Drax, but the shift is just too jarring; in the final two pages we’re suddenly privy to Vincent’s parents’ beliefs. Although it has been skilfully told until then, that fault-line in the plot cheats us and it’s a shame.

Heather Lindsley’s story ‘Atalanta Loses at the Interpantheonic Trivia Bee’ is almost as exhausting as its title. It weighs in at around 3500 words and just isn’t substantial enough to support them all on the strength of its one-liner premise: some Greek gods including Aphrodite, Athena and Artemis are putting together a team to compete in the aforementioned trivia contest, but need a human on the team because “it’s in the rules”. The story is told charmingly enough, but the gag has paled even before the introduction of a question to which the answer is the Spice Girls.

John Langan’s contribution, ‘Episode Seven: Last Stand Against the Pack in the Kingdom of the Purple Flowers’ is, as its title suggests, post-apocalyptic. It’s 27 pages long (around 8000 words) and is told in a single sentence — if you don’t count the essential colons and question marks — punctuated largely through the use of dashes in one virtually breathless paragraph. If you think that might get tiring, it soon does. The gimmickry intrudes unnecessarily on Langan’s craft as a storyteller. Anyone writing post-apocalyptic fiction set in the States inevitably owes a debt to Stephen King’s groundbreaking novel
The Stand, and Langan’s story opens with an epigraphical quotation from The Alarm’s song of the same name.

Kevin N. Haw’s ‘Requirements for the Mythology Merit Badge’ is a far more successful attempt at joking around with mythology than Lindsley’s; largely because it’s shorter (around 750 words), funnier and written in list style.

Lucius Shepard’s film reviews, under the heading ‘Once were movies’, open with a crushing denunciation of Lee Tamahori’s Next, an adaptation of Philip K. Dick’s story ‘
The Golden Man’. Shepard also has a detailed dissection of Grindhouse, the Quentin Tarantino and Robert Rodriguez collaboration, and he doesn’t like that much, either. He’s more upbeat about Alex Infascelli’s Hate 2 0 and the long-overdue DVD release of Alejandro Jodorowdky’s cult movie El Topo.

One of two highlights in this issue of F&SF is
prolific author Robert Reed’s ‘If We Can Save Just One Child…’, which might be described as a ribofunk thriller of genetics, in a world where the only true taboo left is cloning people without their consent and where the elderly and sick are routinely given tissues and organs grown from stem cells. We’re set up to believe that Gary Olsen has been mistaken for a paedophile while trying to collect his son, Pepper, from school. Sub-plots are elegantly revealed through interwoven narrative rather than indigestible chunks of back-story. A mother agonises over what she believes to be a crude device to steal her child’s DNA, installed on a slide at the playground; a boy teases his younger brother, Evan, telling him he was born in Brazil as a clone raised by cannibals. It’s hard to fault this story, which has a twist at the end when Evan confronts Olsen, the man he suspects of illegally pedalling DNA. I won’t spoil it, except to say that Reed paces it expertly and doesn’t allow hints of comedy to undermine the tension he has lacquered, layer-on-layer and glass-hard, over his artful narrative.

I didn’t much enjoy Paul Doherty and Pat Murphy’s column about Second Life and the ’Splo — an “Exploratorium” Doherty built for this online metaverse — mainly because this multi-player role-playing game has lost any appeal it might once have had through its sheer time-wasting potential. There is also something oddly ‘retro’ about the way in which it is written; it reminds me strongly of computing and gaming articles from Mondo 2000 magazine in the early 1990s. If you’re a Second Life addict you’ll doubtless feel differently and may even be convinced by Doherty’s bold claim that “things you experience in Second Life can change your brain”. I’m too busy trying to change my brain by what I do in my first life, such as reading good speculative fiction.

‘The Merchant and the Alchemist’s Gate’ by Ted Chiang is the other long story (approaching 8000 words), but it’s a gem. Set in Baghdad, its structure follows the ‘story within a story’ framing device of The Book of One Thousand and One Nights, consisting as it does of three connected tales embedded within the main one. It’s more fantasy than science fiction, but the author says it was partly inspired by the work of physicist
Kip Thorne; famous for his controversial theory that wormholes might be used for time travel. I don’t pretend to understand physics well enough to decide whether the “many worlds” interpretation of quantum mechanics, tangent universes or restricted action resolution could explain how, in Chiang’s story, time-travellers cause a single item of jewellery, transported from two points in the future to a point in the past, to exist in triplicate. Perhaps Thorne’s theory — that any situation in a time travel story permits many consistent solutions — is correct. But if it isn’t, it doesn’t make Chiang’s story any less entertaining.

It would have been more satisfying if this were a mix of long, short and short-short fiction — nowadays, I consider a 5000-word story to be quite long enough — but balance is the most difficult thing to strike in any magazine. F&SF’s “Coming attractions” will include a story by the great San Francisco author Robert Silverberg, so it deserves a revisit if only to read that.

A single issue of F&SF costs US$4.50, but a year’s worth (that’s 11-issues for $3 each) on Amazon will set you back just $32.97. If you’re trying to establish yourself as a fantasy or science fiction author, you could do worse than invest in a F&SF subscription to find out what’s new at the forefront of your chosen genre. The editors seem to have a preference for mythologies and creation myths rather than hard sci-fi, but don’t be swayed by genre typecasting — this is a magazine of literature, and these days you will find even the MSM
grudgingly conceding that science fiction may have had a greater impact on the way we live than any other literary genre of the 20th century. Science fiction has often foreshadowed science fact, and that’s no fantasy. For that we can thank institutions such as F&SF.

Click here to read other blog reviews of F&SF.

Wednesday, July 25, 2007

Inland Empire: Resistance is futile

I am writing this as if in a dream. The words go down onto the page not quite right and I am trying not to edit them to make them right because this is about a David Lynch film, and nothing is ‘right’ about that, either.

I came out of the Sky City Theatre into the light at lunchtime feeling hungry, somehow punch-drunk, with pins and needles in my butt and with my head buzzing. This is a film that grabs you by the nuts, drags you down a dark hallway into a bright alleyway, punches the crap out of you and then when you finally come round, feeling hungover and disorientated, you’re in some other place entirely.

Why? Because David Lynch wouldn’t have it any other way.

As he explains in his book Catching The Big Fish (Meditation, Consciousness, and Creativity), Lynch is a man who likes a story that holds abstractions and that’s why he makes films. He also insists on remaining “true to the idea”, usually to the point of absurdity: “You fall in love with the first idea, that tiny little piece. And once you’ve got it, the rest will come in time.” My problem with Inland Empire (and let me be clear that this is my problem and not his) is its sheer surfeit of ideas. They keep coming, crashing over you like breakers, dragging you down in the undertow. You do not have time to fall in love with the 50th idea before the 100th has hit you.

In case you were wondering, the
Inland Empire is an area east of Los Angeles County, including Riverside and San Bernardino County. Laura Dern’s husband, Ben Harper, comes from there. Dern gave Lynch the idea for the film’s title and delivered a long monologue that became a key scene in the film. Lynch’s parents have a log cabin in Montana. His brother was cleaning up there one day and found an old scrapbook behind a dresser. It belonged to Lynch when he was five years old. Lynch the child had given the first picture in the book the caption “Inland Empire”. Add about another million coincidences to that and you might begin to approximate what’s going on in this film. But probably not.