Archive for November, 2009
A Belated Tribute to Kurt Vonnegut
Posted by Tony Hatter in Books on November 21st, 2009
I was reading today. Yeah, so what’s new? But today I was flipping through The Best American Non-Required Reading of 2008. Okay, I was reading something only a very, very small handful of other people will even be aware of, once again what’s new? There was a section in it titled “The Best American Kurt Vonnegut Writings”. That sounds retarded, yes, but there was a good reason for it to be there. I thought it was strange at first, but I went with it because I like Vonnegut. I like Vonnegut a lot. So I was reading the one-line excerpts from several of his books, enjoying it all immensely without questioning why an anthology of writing from 2008 would include a section of quotes from a writer who hasn’t published anything recently until I reminded myself of something I said once upon a time: “He’s easily the funniest man alive.” So it goes. Yeah, sadly, Mr. Vonnegut left the world of the living last year, and this chapter was included to commemorate a giant among American writers.
I would like to say that Vonnegut and Joseph Heller are the reason I never joined the military. The truth is, long before reading Slaughterhouse V or Catch-22 I considered applying at the Air Force Academy. What stopped me? Push-ups. All of the military academies required P.E. classes, and I sure as shit wasn’t signing up for that.
That’s enough about me, though. I’m writing about Kurt tonight. A military man himself in his youth, Vonnegut as a writer was one of the most vocal pacifists ever to get much attention.
“I certainly heard plenty of last words by dying American footsoldiers. None of them, however, had illusions that he had somehow accomplished something worthwhile in the process of making the Supreme Sacrifice.”
Hocus Pocus (1990)
He wrote extensively on the subject, and never lowered himself to spouting the now hackneyed quote that I’m about to throw out, but… can’t we all just get along? Agreeing to disagree is a much-maligned state of affairs, but isn’t it preferable to killing each other? His views on killing are obliquely described here:
That there are devices such as firearms, as easy to operate as cigarette lighters and as cheap as toasters, capable at anybody’s whim of killing Father or Fats or Abraham Lincoln or John Lennon or Martin Luther King, Jr., or a woman pushing a baby carriage, should be proof enough for anybody that, to quote the old science fiction writer Kilgore Trout, “being alive is a crock of shit.”
Timequake (1997)
Kilgore Trout, of course is the fictional character recurring in several of Vonnegut’s books who represents the lowest common denominator of public sentiments. Vonnegut, of course, treasured life. His own sentiments about life are more accurately shown in a line from the same book. “I am eternally grateful… for my knack of finding in great books… reason enough to feel honored to be alive, no matter what else might be going on.”
Despite whatever shit we may encounter. No matter what wreckage we may have to dig through, whether it be something as immensely devastating as the rubble left of Dresden in WWII or something as relatively simple as digging for change between couch cushions for gas money to get to work for a paycheck that will keep food on the table, human life is something that should not be taken lightly.
And I realize that I’ve taken a much darker angle than I intended. I set out to sing praise for a man who did, in fact, dig through the rubble after the carpet-bombing of Dresden in WWII and still found it in his heart to appreciate and love life in a way that few adults are capable of. I wanted to wish out loud that I, like Vonnegut, could manage to face the world—all that shit piled high for as far as the eye can see—and still find humor at every corner—still manage to never truly grow up.
Maturity is a bitter disappointment for which no remedy exists, unless laughter can be said to remedy anything.
Cat’s Cradle (1963)
In a way, he begged us all not to grow up. The heavy, dark themes he wrote on tell us that he endured a lot of pain. The puerile humor that laced those stories tells us that he was a strong man whose inner child lived on and made him probably the most well-adjusted adult I’ve ever “known” (and despite never meeting the man I do feel that I know him, in a sense).
But I’m not really going anywhere with this. At least not anywhere coherent. So I leave you with two more lines that I hope will be at least a bit inspirational.
If you want to really hurt your parents, and you don’t have the nerve to be gay, the least you can do is go into the arts. I’m not kidding. The arts are not a way to make a living. They are a very human way of making life more bearable. Practicing an art, no matter how well or badly, is a way to make your soul grow, for heaven’s sake. Sing in the shower. Dance to the radio. Tell stories. Write a poem to a friend, even a lousy poem. Do it as well as you can. You will get an enormous reward. You will have created something.
A Man Without a Country (2005)
Listen: We are here on Earth to fart around. Don’t let anybody tell you any different.
Timequake (1997)
Adventures in Literary Theory
Posted by Tony Hatter in Adventures in literary theory, Uncategorized on November 18th, 2009
How exciting does that sound? I was dicking around today, reading some of the things I’ve written for MFA classes, and stumbled on this bit of oddness. I thought to myself, ‘who the hell would want to read that?’ So here it is–the first in what may become a series of short, ill-concieved essays from MFA discussion boards–an experiment to see if there is anyone out there who actually wants to read this crap.
A Brief History of Point of View
When reading Alan Cheuse’s essay, I was struck with the same realization as his writer friend; that I had never considered point of view as having ‘origins’ suddenly troubled me. Of course, when language was originally developed for communicative purposes, the idea of a first and second and third person, in both singular and plural forms was necessary, and subsequently as literature came into being, progressed and changed over the ensuing years the idea grew and grew. I suppose this comes from the idea of the Burkean parlor; I entered the discussion so far into the game that the idea of forming the different vantage points was old news, and the different aspects currently occupying the hot spots of the discussion took the front burners. What strikes me so thoroughly about this is going back and reading my own recent work and realizing that I was not the least bit conscious of my calamitous floating between various modes of the third person. Especially since the workshop story I am turning in this week, fresh off a few days of break before yet another draft tonight benefits greatly (as I see it) from sticking close in the third person and not drifting into the minds of other characters.
I also had not made the connection between the camera’s gaze and POV. I spent two years in film school, and in doing so spent lots of time studying, discussing and critiquing what we called ‘gaze’ in those classes, effectively learning point of view in another medium without ever realizing it. Specifically, the idea of filmmaker as ‘auteur’ (to use the French film term), as compared to the modernist novelist breaking the fourth wall Cheuse spoke of is an intriguing way of looking at point of view. The reader is conscious that the narrative voice is actually that of the author, but suspends disbelief in giving that voice to the narrative character (and in some cases giving it back to the author) just as the moviegoer knows that the director/cinematographer chose what the camera shows and what it doesn’t, but suspends disbelief in giving the view to the narrative eye of the film.
P.S. I’m too lazy too look through my books and find the Alan Cheuse essay. If anyone does care, just ask. I’ll find it somewhere.
P.P.S. The keyword suggesting software I use, which is admittedly rather pathetic to begin with, read this entire entry and returned one suggestion–crap.