Friday, March 4, 2016

Homage as Criticism: On The Ballad of Black Tom

Victor Lavalle is one of my favorite living writers. Like Edgar Allen Poe, he is able to layer weirdness on top of weirdness so that, as you dig through the monsters and the radical suicide death cults and the mysterious librarians, you find it's our real obsession with higher powers and our real attitudes toward mental health that are truly strange.

His new book, The Ballad of Black Tom is an homage to the work of H.P. Lovecraft (based primarily on "The Horror at Red Hook") that draws elements from Lovecraft's entire ouvre into a story about a young black man from Harlem trying to make his way in the world. In some ways, Lovecraft is as influential to horror writing as Tolkien is to fantasy writing, providing a lexicon, a fundamental structure, and a mythology that horror writers still use today. Lovecraft was also racist. And not older-relative-after-a-few-glasses-of-wine-at-Thanksgiving racist; he was hatefully, maliciously racist.

Lavalle has talked about what it means to be an African American author writing an homage to a racist so I don't need to here, but I think he does something interesting that reveals one of the powerful, critical aspects of homage. Homage can be more than just a celebration, more than just a retelling, more than just a depositing of a story or style in a new place or time (though all of those are fun, important aspects of homage). Homage also allows authors to critique those past works, turning up the volume on certain traits, emphasizing certain ideas, elucidating aspects that are not otherwise obvious, and even re-appropriating the works for different, even opposed purposes.

What made Lovecraft's work powerful, and what still resonates in the horror genre today, is the idea of another world of unseen forces pushing us this way and that through life. Whether it was magic, Cthulhu, or some other mysterious force, the characters in Lovecraft's stories were subject to forces vastly more powerful than they were that determined the course of their lives or even their deaths. We might feel as though we are in control, we might even believe we can harness some of those powerful forces, but that is only because we haven't dug far enough into the basement, sailed far enough into the ocean, looked deep enough into the eyes of the stranger. Lovecraft made daily life's simple anxieties visceral, bodily, and horrifying. Lavalle's homage taps into that existential anxiety, but by twisting it ever so slightly, by setting it partially in Harlem and by making one of the protagonists a young African American man, Lavalle has revealed an aspect of Lovecraft's unseen forces that Lovecraft himself never saw.

At one point, Tom comes home to find that his father has been murdered by the police. Tom's apartment was searched in connection to an investigation and one of the investigators saw Tom's father with a guitar, assumed it was a gun, shot him six times, and—because the officer “feared for his life”—reloaded his revolver and shot five more times. For most people, for pretty much everyone in this country who is not a straight white cisgendered man born in America, those mysterious powerful forces casually dealing death and destruction, those otherworldly beings, those dark underground cabals deciding the fate of those they do not regard as worthy of dignity are real. They are not forces of magic or hauntings or Cthulhu, they are institutional racism, systems of power, and the residual structures of colonialism. They are Jim Crow, mass incarceration, and 75 cents on the dollar. In some ways this really isn't even a metaphor. If a magic spell is a string of words able to bring about some kind of corporeal action, “Hello, police, there's a man in my neighborhood, um, he's tall and black” might be America's deadliest spell. Is there any ritual that signals the loss of one's personal agency more than the chanting of “Stop resisting?” I mean, the Klu Klux Klan leaders call themselves wizards and dragons for fuck's sake.

What is most interesting to me about this is how otherwise faithful to Lovecraft The Ballad of Black Tom is. The creeping unease. The protagonist in way, way over his head. The magic. The monsters. The skin of the universe peeled back for just a second to reveal the contorted organs of being beyond our conception. And yet twist it all just ever so slightly, and an entirely new conversation is created. Lavalle has been utterly faithful to Lovecraft and told a story that would've horrified him.

To me, this is where the real power in literature resides. All books are only semi-stable. Though the words on fixed on the page, the efforts of readers give them vitality, make them move, transform them into something (and some things) beyond the imagination of the individual creator. The act of writing is powerful and flexible enough that a potent reader can transform the work of a malignant racist into a statement on the experience of institutional racism. No story is ever really dead. No work of literature ever irredeemable. The Ballad of Black Tom begins with Tom delivering a magic book, which in its complete form would give the reader the complete magic alphabet and access to unspeakable power. Of course, we already have the complete alphabet and when it's used by a writer and reader like Victor Lavalle every book is magic.

Wednesday, February 10, 2016

The Last Books I Bought Xmas Gift Card Edition

As I'm sure applies to many booksellers, I always get gift certificates to Porter Square Books as Xmas presents and this year was no different. Ergo, welcome to another exciting installment of my semi-frequent blog series about books I have bought. (Rather than grabbed the galleys of, begged for comp copies for, or only gotten out of the library.)

Voyage of the Sable Venus by Robin Coste Lewis

A debut collection of poetry won the National Book Award, you say? A collection anchored by a long narrative poem? Well, then sign me the fuck up. I got this one out of library and halfway through said long narrative poem, the titular "Voyage of the Sable Venus" I knew I had to own it, because the poem is amazing (more on that later) but also because I want to live in a world where debut collections of poetry in hardcover are bought in meaningful numbers (more on that later as well) and one of the ways I can contribute to that world is buying debut collections of poetry in hardcover.

On to "Voyage of the Sable Venus" itself. As described in an author's note that's pretty remarkable in its own right, the poem was composed using only the titles and descriptions of works of art and other museum pieces in which "black female figure is present." The explanation of her formula, in about a page, grapples with the nature of art, identity, history, erasure, appropriation, the white gaze, the white museum gaze, and the nature of poetry to transform descriptive, critical, faux-critical, and accidentally-critical prose into an entirely different and powerful from of expression.

Blue Laws by Kevin Young

I cannot describe to you, even with my penchant for vulgarity, how much I hate contemporary short-line, short-stanza poetry. Few things make me want to extricate my eyeballs with a dull spork to stab at the searing pain in my thinking brain, than a poem that is clearly nothing more than a boring sentence about a bird you saw driving to work Cuisinarted into something that looks like a poem if you don't think about it for a goddamn second. Which is not to say that I think long-line and long-stanza poetry is inherently better—there is plenty of terrible poetry in every form to go around--but that, in my reading experience, longer forms attract a little less laziness than the “Oh, the white space is my way of communing with the silences of the universe,” “my work seeks to elevate the spirituality of the mundane through verse,” “Well, Bukowski did it and so did Emily Dickinson,” bullshit Like-A-Poems so prevalent in so much contemporary poetry.

Except for Kevin Young. He writes mostly in short-line, short-stanza poems and he's a fucking genius. His short lines sing. His white space vibrates. He dashes like Dickinson. He goes long when he needs to. I want to live in a world where people buy their favorite poets' books in hardcover and so when I can, I buy my favorite poets' books in hardcover.

The Road Beneath My Feet by Frank Turner

Frank Turner is my Bruce Springsteen. (Don't get me wrong, Bruce Springsteen is also my Bruce Springsteen, but, well, you know what I mean.) His political consciousness, his sense of irony and humor, his exuberant atheism. I got to meet him very briefly when I bought a t-shirt from him after his opening set for the Dropkick Murphys and I told him that it felt like he crawled inside my brain and wrote songs about what he found there. And his live shows are singalong revivals. I follow him on social media so I've known this book existed and have been waiting for it to be available in the states (he's much bigger in the UK) for ages.

In related news:

Dear Overlook,

Frank Turner plays in Boston all the time. His shows always sell-out, often months in advance, and he often adds shows. It's just leaving sales on the table if you don't piggy back a signing/reading/event at a local independent bookstore the next time he's in town. And I'd give him one hell of an introduction.

Sincerely Yours,

Josh

A few other notable purchases not previously discussed that I am just now noticing on my desk: The Mirror Empire, Rails Under My Back, and The Lost Art of Finding Our Way.

Nope. The gift card did not last very long indeed, did it, Precious. Not very long  indeed.


Monday, February 1, 2016

The False Distinction of “Realistic.”


One of the critiques I've seen leveled against Bernie Sanders presidential campaign, is that his platform is completely unrealistic, that there is no chance our current Republican Congress (barring an unprecedented electoral swing) will pass any legislation drawing from Sanders's platform. Clinton supporters have been quick to point out that Sanders can say anything he wants, but even if he is elected president, we are not going to get universal single-payer health care, we are not going to get free tuition for secondary education and we are not going to get the massive infrastructure investment our country so badly needs, and we certainly aren't going to get the tax raises needed to pay for any of it.

They are, of course, correct. Even the more moderate incarnation of the Republican Party from the Reagan and even Bill Clinton, eras were fundamentally opposed to the kind of federally driven social and economic support structures that Sanders is suggesting and even more fundamentally opposed to the taxes he would raise to pay for them. I doubt our current crop of Republicans have even bothered to look at his actual policies. He's a socialist, therefore he is a threat to the American way of life. Full stop. The critics are correct when they say a Sanders presidency will be, at best, a legislative slog.

Thus, they argue, that Clinton's more moderate policies will have a much greater chance of getting through, in some meaningful form, our Republican Congress. Starting closer to the middle and presenting less radical policy goals will increase the kind of conversation that leads to compromise and passes laws. It's a rational argument, if you completely ignore the last eight years.

Congressional Republicans have negotiated in bad faith, abused the filibuster, refused to compromise on moderate policies, refused to support policies that were once Republican ideas, blocked nominees, held legislation, flaunted their disrespect for Barack Obama at nearly every opportunity, and ran John Boener out of the Speakership, all with no clear legislative or policy alternatives to replace the, again, very moderate, policies offered by the Obama administration and congressional Democrats. Why would we assume Clinton's more moderate policies would inspire the Republican party of Donald Trump and Ted Cruz to suddenly and miraculously grow the fuck up and govern like fucking adults? Simply put, we have no reason to believe that Congressional Republicans will work with any Democratic president regardless of their platform. It is true that Clinton's policies proposals are more moderate than Sanders's and if you agree with those more moderate polices, great, but it is not true that those more moderate policies will be treated any differently by congressional Republicans than Sanders's more radical policies. You can argue that Clinton's policies are better for the country, but you cannot argue that they are any more realistic than Sanders's policies.

The best either Sanders or Clinton could hope for in their first term as president is to replicate the success of the Obama administration; vetoing the worst nonsense the Republicans churn up, using their appointments wisely, and (as we're seeing now) using precise but not radical looking executive actions to drive progress. Bernie will have to do that and as a bill writer for the last couple of decades, I think he is capable. Hillary will have to do that and as an effective executive in various capacities over her long career in politics, I think she is capable.

Unfortunately, there won't be any major legislative policy shifts (unless something really crazy happens in the 2016 elections) until after the next redistricting in 2020, at which point, hopefully, we can create an electoral map that actually represents the American people, rather than contorting itself to elect Republicans whose policies represent a radical minority of American thought. If we want to talk about “realism” and “electability” in terms of Clinton and Sanders, perhaps our target shouldn't be this coming presidential election, but the 2020 state elections. Which presidency is most likely to lead to the kind of turnout at the local level Democrats will need to gain enough re-districting power to undo to gross distortions created by the Republicans in 2010? Who has the best long-term ground game? Who will be most able to leverage the organizing structure Barack Obama created? Whose re-election will inspire voters?

There are many good reasons to vote for Hillary Clinton in the primary. If she is the Democratic nominee, I will vote for her in the general election. But I think it's important that we distinguish these two candidates on their actual policy differences, rather than on the weird and problematic political calculus of “electability” and “realistic proposals.” (In the book length version of this post, I might argue that Bill Clinton's “triangulation” calculus of “electability” is major reason we have the Republican party we do today.) Ultimately, whoever is elected and whatever their national campaign platform is, they'll have to deal with our congressional Republicans and our congressional Republicans haven't given a fuck about reality for eight years.

Sunday, January 24, 2016

Better Book Tour

Since I started working at Porter Square Books in 2004 I have seen hundreds of author events. Some were great, others painful, and most, somewhere in the middle. Perhaps the most frustrating of the events were those in which a brilliant author, read from their brilliant book in a boring, monotonous voice. Here was this great book that I wanted readers to discover, fall in love with, and, of course, buy from the store and yet none of the audience could hear the brilliance over the author's droning. Furthermore, these authors (and their publishers) were spending the time, effort, and money, to visit stores, but their actual performances didn’t do much to create sales of their books.

I don’t remember which event in particular it was, but after such an event, it struck me how little the author needed to do to dramatically improve their performance. A different perspective, a few core principles, and some practice would be enough to transform the monotonous reading into a performance that would actually sell books. “Someone should coach these authors on performing in bookstores,” I thought. After hosting and seeing so many events, performing in various venues from book stores, to dorm rooms, to bars, to auditoriums packed with high school students, and going on my own book tour, I eventually realized that “someone” could be me.

So I am proud to announce the launch of the author education service, Better Book Tour. Better Book Tour offers three services: hour-long one-on-one workshops, feedback on performance samples, and a complete guide to performing at bookstore events.

In some ways, developing this education service, wasn't that much different from writing a book. I started with an idea and then I worked on it until I felt confident enough that I could get feedback from fellow booksellers, publishing industry professions, and other people I trust. Then I incorporated their feedback into all of the materials and read everything over another dozen times to make sure it was perfect knowing full well that I'd find a typo the instant I pushed start. And now, I'm letting Better Book Tour out into the world to see what happens.

There is an element of talent in performance, but I truly believe that a small investment in time and education, will help make any author an engaging performer who makes the most of their bookstore events.

Wednesday, January 20, 2016

It's Brett Conolly's Fault

Connolly in his natural habitat, not scoring.
There have been times this season when it seemed as though the sun revolved around the Earth. Early on, the Bruins' power play wasn't just the most dangerous offensive force in the NHL it was the only thing keeping them in games. They were blowing two goal leads and third period leads all over the place and their penalty kill was abysmal. The first two months or so, we had a bizarro Bruins and it looked like Don Sweeney's first season as general manager was going to be an utter disaster. The Chara window had closed. Blow up the team at the trade deadline and rebuild around Bergeron, Krejci, Pastrnak, and Rask.

But then, the Bruins figured things out. Their structure tightened. Kevan Miller came back from a stretch of healthy scratches at a much higher level of play. Even without Chris Kelly, the penalty kill fixed itself and is now as good as it has ever been. Colin Miller has been making steady progress. Brad Marchand has taken a big step forward as a goal scorer. Spooner is getting better every game. Vetrano, Ferraror and Tyler Randall are all contributing. Rask, after a shaky start, is now, back in his usual spot as an elite NHL goal tender. The team can now trust Gustafson. Krejci, before his most recent injury, was shredding opponents in the offensive zone, and Patrice Bergeron, along with everything else he's called up to do for this team, is the leading scorer and taking another big step towards the Hall of Fame. And the power play is still the most dangerous offensive force in the NHL.

But the Bruins are still only a wild card team, and with the East as ridiculously tight as it is, very vulnerable. They are fourth in their division and seventh in the conference with 3 or even 6 teams within easy striking distance. They're 5-4-1 in their last 10 (as of this writing), but 3 of those 5 wins came in their last 3 games. They blow leads. They are inconsistent.

And it's Brett Connolly's fault.

Even in the controlled space of sports, there is still enough chaos that both blame and accolades are impossible to definitively distribute, especially in team sports. We can make educated guesses, but there is still luck, there are still decisions beyond a player's control, there is still the schedule, the referees, the surface of the ice. Simply put, there is only so much any player, even the greatest players can do to influence the outcome of the game.

But Brett Connolly was brought to the Bruins to score. After eye-popping numbers in juniors, impressive numbers in the AHL, and one hell of a snap shot, it looked like Brett Connolly was about to make the transition to being a goal scorer in the NHL. Probably not a 40-goal scorer, or even a 30 goal scorer, but definitely a 20-25 goal scorer. That's why the Bruins got him last year in their attempt to make the playoffs. But right now he has 6 goals in 43 games and the gap between goal 6 and goal 7 continues to grow. Frank Vatrano has 6 goals in 30 games. Tyler Randall 4 in 20. Pastrnak 4 in 14.

The job of the General Manager is to present the head coach with an array of talent and most often that includes a mix of top players and role players. Top players use their talent to contribute in all parts of the game, whereas role players are expected to do well in specific parts of the game and hold their own in the others. So even if Connolly were just level with Jimmy Hayes (who, it should be noted, got 40% of his current goals in a blowout of the Senators) or Matt Beleskey, at 8 goals, both of which I think we'd still consider as under-performing, the Bruins could easily be second in their division or even their conference. A team can struggle when top players aren't contributing, but also when role players fail to fulfill their roles, even when they play well in other aspects of the game.

Which is why I feel doubly bad for calling out Brett Connolly. Not only is it rare for blame to be reasonably affixed to an individual player, but he has actually been playing pretty well. He is winning puck battles along the boards. He is playing well in the defensive zone. He is getting opportunities. But when you go through the Bruins' recent personnel moves, extrapolate the various players' roles, and look at their stats, Jimmy Hayes at 10 goals and 11 assists for 21 points seems OK, even if you want to see his +/- a bit better, and Belesky at 8 and 14 for 22 is lower than what we'd like but not catastrophically so, especially when he's sitting on a +10, and the B's haven't gotten much from Talbot and Rinaldo, but I don't think they expected much from either one of them.

In short, if you imagine what Don Sweeny saw when he looked at his roster this summer, and what he expected to get from every player on that list, really only Connolly is not meeting the expectations.

This is mostly good news, especially given how the Bs started this season. They are in the playoff structure, have sorted out the problems caused by adopting a new system, have maintained the success of their power play, and Brett Connolly (or anybody else) isn't dragging the team down despite his struggles with his particular role. And if the Bruins want to make a deal before the trade deadline, assuming no injuries, they know what they need; someone to make up for the 10-15 goals expected from Connolly that haven't materialized. And, it should be noted he could always turn his season around, go on a hot streak, and land the 20 or so goals the Bruins expected from him.

Though the Bruins don't necessarily need to do anything, I think the “healthy scratch” is under-utilized coaching tool that might do Connolly a lot of good. First off all, given how much of playoff success is drawn from, if not based on, the health of key players, I'd like to see Julien use the healthy scratch as a way of preserving the health of players in general. Second, I don't think it would be that difficult to re-frame the healthy scratch away from punishment for poor play and towards a learning opportunity. You can see things watching a game that you simply can't playing a game. Third, it matters who is also in the booth with you. From what I've seen, Connolly's biggest problem might be his spacing, that he is not quite in the right place to cash in on his opportunities. Loui Erikkson is very good at being in the place to score goals, so maybe giving Connolly a two or three game break with one of those games with Loui Erikkson with him to talk through spacing around the front of the net is exactly what he needs to break out of his goal scoring slump and help the Bruins secure a playoff berth. And you know, it probably wouldn't be that bad of an idea to check his hand.

So, where do the Bruins go from here? What does the rest of the season hold? Have you been watching the season? Did you think the Capitals were finally going to pull it together? And what happened out West with the Kings and everybody else? And what happened to the Canadiens? Sure, Price going down is big, but as far as I know, Markov is technically not injured. And how are the Penguins so bad? And what the hell happened with John Scott? And how the hell do the Bruins, the Claude Julien Boston Bruins have the best power play in the league, by a wide, wide margin. I'm not much of a fan of prognostication in general, but anyone who says they know what's going to happen to any team in the NHL this season is lying to themselves.