Do not let Mr Thomas stand around like a lemon

A friend brought this to my attention the other day and it’s so good I thought I’d put it here. It’s a set of guidelines for record store owners/managers to abide by for in-store appearances by a band called Pere Ubu. The guidelines are written by Pere Ubu themselves. The ‘Mr Thomas’ mentioned here is David Thomas, the band’s ‘project director’. Here we go.

Definitions:

  • IN-STORE means band members make an announced appearance at a record store.
  • MEET & GREET means band members make private appearances.

Note that Pere Ubu does not always do in-store performances as a full band.

1. Please remember that all in-store appearances must be approved in advance.

2. Mr Thomas gets nervous when the record store owner / manager offers free cds or merchandise. Should the record store want to make a gift the transaction shall be handled by a third party (the Record Company rep). The third party shall approach Mr Thomas discreetly, describing what gift is offered. Mr Thomas will then okay a formal presentation at which brief, formal speeches of presentation and acceptance are made.

3. The Record Company representative must do the following:

  • Immediately on arrival introduce Mr Thomas to as many people as possible, pointing out interesting facts & aiding the flow of conversation. Do not let Mr Thomas stand around like a lemon.
  • IN-STORE ONLY: As soon as possible Mr Thomas must be guided to a chair from which he may play his accordion & dominate the immediate space in an absolutist manner.
  • Mr Thomas should not be referred to as Dave or touched in an overly familiar way. His name is David. Shaking hands is all the physical contact that should be needed.

4. The record store MUST NOT play any Pere Ubu recordings for the duration of Mr Thomas’ visit. It is simply too embarrassing, draws undue attention to his presence & most importantly forces him to withdraw into a protective shell of weird uncommunicativeness. This is not desirable.

5. Please remember that the first 30 seconds of arrival in-store sets the tone for the entire episode. If Mr Thomas is allowed to slip into an Outcast Lemon Mode you will have an unsatisfactory experience. INTRODUCE HIM. ENCOURAGE CONVERSATION. TAKE UP ANY SLACK. If you know a fan who wants to meet him then by all means introduce them. Mr Thomas prefers civilians. He wants to be approached. He wants to talk in these circumstances since that’s what the gig is.

Mr Thomas can be the most charming & exciting personality if very simple steps are taken to avoid awkwardness. Once he gets rolling there are no problems, you can sit back, relax & observe a professional smarming his way into the hearts of all around him. The initial stages, however, are critical. Keep in mind that Mr Thomas undertakes these events as a performance.

MEET & GREETs are not a problem because of the informal nature of the event.

(With thanks to Damien Wilkins.)

by Personal Message

by Michael Dumontier and Neil Farber at Personal Message

 

Posted in Uncategorized

Skeleton notes on aloneness

1.

I was looking at the cartoon Garfield Minus Garfield the other day, and I started thinking about being alone.

via Garfield Minus Garfield

Jon always seemed to me a quintessentially pathetic character living in a hostile, hate-filled world. In Garfield Minus Garfield he is at last reduced to the stark reality of his situation: a miserable love life, no real friends, the companionship he built his world around an empty husk. In portraying the void at the centre of his life, these scenes feel realer, more recognisable, and finally more honest to me than the actual Garfield comics. I feel some sympathy for Jon when I see him alone like this. I imagine that this is his life now after the deaths of both Garfield and Odie; from here, he might be able to scrape back some dignity.

But why do I only feel this way about Jon when he’s alone? Why does Alone Jon seem to portray a complexity that I’m blind to when he’s with others? I’m a bit reluctant to ask myself this question because it means I’m going to have to say something about my childhood. AGAIN.

2.
As a kid, I absorbed the idea that being alone, even though it wasn’t all that fun, made me special. I don’t know where I got this idea from. For once, I’m not even sure that it was books. Well, anyway, these were the days before ‘reject’ and ‘reej’ were such fatal insults, way before having a group ‘to hang around with’ was crucial to your authentication as a human being, so in many ways I felt OK with having no friends, and on some days went out of my way to have none. I have a vivid memory of walking towards the adventure playground (a ricketty wooden tower with a prickly conifer growing through the middle), seeing my classmates and various screaming kids swarming all over it, and looking down to kick through autumn leaves with my shoes, hanging my head low, thinking, ‘I am lonely.’ I thought those words, but I remember feeling a vague boredom with having to go through with this rigmarole in order to seem special, to seem different. It probably would’ve been easier to make friends, but I didn’t know how. In high school, especially in the fifth and sixth forms, being alone was instead a source of deep shame and smallness. I would rotate my interval and lunchtime hiding places, at one point hiding in a small underground room behind the stage in the assembly hall, where my art class was stretching some canvasses. Somehow I’d managed to talk my art teacher into giving me the key to this room. There was a long narrow window just above the room where I could see people’s feet as they walked past, which always reminded me of that Quentin Blake picture book Snuff, when Snuff and Sir Thomas Magpie and the horses walk past the basement window wearing all sorts of fancy boots to scare the boot thieves inside. Even though I always felt massive relief when I got inside the room, because I could lock the door and be alone, time moved very slowly and unhappily there, and I’d feel an equal relief when the bell rang for class and I could leave – the truth was, I did like being around people, but only when there was some kind of order in place, as in a classroom. A classmate once asked me, looking slightly suspicious, ‘Who do you hang around with at lunchtime?’ I panicked and blurted, ‘Everyone!’

Everyone.

3.
One of the best things about being an adult is that no one will ever ask me again who I hang around with at lunchtime. I can wear my aloneness freely without needing to find a secret place to hide it in. It’s still not always easy for an adult to go somewhere for dinner alone or sit alone in a a busy cafe on a Sunday – see: Solo Date City – but the stench of social failure no longer hangs about you, at least not as pungently.

Still: ‘Everyone‘! In a second I can transport myself back to the mortification that led me to tell this outrageous hokum.

4.
Maybe I have a hyper-alertness to this stuff, or maybe this is something to do with the changing of the seasons etc, but – recently I’ve noticed more urgent expressions of loneliness, despair, sometimes numbness, on the internet. It feels like there’s a new energy in it, a new sharpness, even a new humour. I think if I were a highschooler again right now, I would find some kind of solace in it. (All things considered, though, I’m glad I’m not a highschooler right now.)

5.
The currency of Screenshots of Despair is the humorously bleak, and most of its bleakness stems from a sense of isolation so all-encompassing that it becomes absurd. The isolation loops back upon itself to become a kind of hysterical meta-isolation. An earlier site, Windows 95 Tips, does a similar thing, only here, the programme itself becomes the agent of the user’s doom.

Windows 95 tips

Both of these sites have had surges of popularity, I guess because they speak directly to the anxiety a lot of us share about the effect of web use on us as human beings. The sites confirm but also ridicule our fears that our lives online have disconnected us from reality, melted our brains, brought us to a deeper despair than we could ever have known offline.

See also: funny tweets about loneliness and/or dying alone.

@rare_basement

6.
I don’t mind this stuff. Laughing about it helps, kind of, to defuse our fears, even though the isolation being portrayed here borders on the surreal and is far removed from the reality of many people’s lives. What I feel violently allergic to is despair marketing (it’s the only way I can think to describe it) such as Despair.com (‘We offer the cure for hope’) and The Pessimist (‘Expecting the worst. Never disappointed). These sites invert popular self-help and motivational jargon with a result that’s just as phoney as the very thing it’s mocking. The stuff Despair.com sells – the pessimist’s wall calendar, the glass half-empty mug, demotivational posters (‘Sometimes the best solution to morale problems is just to fire all of the unhappy people’) – is no more useful or insightful than a stock image of a nondescript galloping horse emblazoned with an inspirational quote ‘to brighten your day’, as sometimes seen posted on Facebook (Eleanor Roosevelt: ‘Great minds discuss ideas. Average minds discuss events. Small minds discuss people’ – a masterful twist on ‘inspiration’ that causes the reader to feel mildly pissed off). Despair.com renders the whole notion of despair meaningless, just as the notion of calm stoicism has been emptied of heart by the plague of ‘Keep Calm and [Insert Your Text Here]’ merchandise.

7.
There’s a less direct, maybe more seductive way of portraying despair online. Two sites I used to look a lot are the Tumblrs This Isn’t Happiness (often NSFW) and Magnificent Ruin, both of which present photography, illustration, design, quotations, and other miscellanea from around the web. Often you’ll find really interesting, clever stuff taken out of context, and I’ve stumbled across things that have led me down ever deeper rabbit holes (worm holes?) of discovery. But these sites have always taken a stance of disquiet and disillusionment (as you’d expect from their titles) and I’ve finally reached saturation point with the ethos that drives their curation. Too many photographs of models alone in bare, dimly lit rooms, cigarette smoke unfurling from their mouths; too many cells of Charlie Brown at his most bleak; too many fragments of poetry by Bukowski and John Tottenham (whose work focuses pretty much solely on feelings of futility and bitter disappointment). These fragments fuel a kind of myth-making about feeling unhappy: that it’s interesting, mysterious, and, very often, beautiful. It is despair as an aesthetic, not as a human feeling in all its messiness and difficulty and struggle.

Many of the images on these Tumblrs also associate being alone with a kind of authenticity, even an emotional intelligence. A person’s character seems keenly delineated on its own. You’re apart, therefore you’re realer. I’ve fallen into this trap with the way I look at Alone Jon, whose unhinged outbursts just seem to me like honesty. And this comes straight back to that odd fantasy about being alone, that same fantasy I had as a primary schooler plodding through the wet grass on the rec, where I would cast myself as the disillusioned character in my own movie. But that’s all it is: a fantasy.

Anyway. Maybe the point of sites like This Isn’t Happiness is to reduce unhappiness to its bones, its signifiers. But suddenly, now, it makes me feel alienated, as if I were watching beautiful, blank-faced fashion models wearing city council recycling bags as they stalk down a runway, and being told that this is meaningful.

8.

I’ve begun to have a similar response to some artists who I used to really love, such as Bored Rita (er, also often NSFW) and David Shrigley, who – and maybe it’s just through too much exposure to their work – now leave me cold. Bored Rita’s work now seems hardened by bleakness and misanthropy. Is it the work that’s changed, or me? I don’t know. But I look at it and I feel as though Bored Rita hates me. Writing this, I’m suddenly afraid that she’ll discover this post and tear me to shreds with the same pointy teeth as her characters. In a similar vein, I can recognise that David Shrigley’s stuff is clever and original, that it walks a tightrope between stupidity and profundity, that it messes with perceptions of what important art is – but all I can really take from it, in the end, is hostility. Maybe that, too, is the point. But where do you go from hostility, what can you take with you into your life?

9.

This won’t go on for too much longer – there’s just one more thing.

10.
I read an essay recently about emotional ‘ache’, ie. what it is, what it feels like, what it’s good for. The essay tried to provide a universal description of ache, which, I would argue, is a nebulous, infinitely various feeling. When I finished reading the piece, I felt kind of grumpy and short-changed – as though I’d been offered a thin blanket to warm up when I was clearly frozen into some prehistoric peat. And I think the reason I found it hard to get anything from the piece was because the writer hadn’t really put himself on the line in confronting the feeling of ‘ache’ – instead, he’d thrown adjectives at it. I realised that there is a limit to description, to simile, to ‘the defining image’. Sometimes all that’s needed is story. The piece made me think about all the expressions of despair and loneliness online, and how interpreting them is often an exercise in navigating irony, double meanings, fashion. It’s rare to come across an expression that feels real, that feels like it’s come out of somebody’s lived experience, that touches us.

Unfinished Painting by Personal Message

Unfinished Painting by Personal Message

 
Posted in Uncategorized | 16 Comments

What I’m reading

Photographer George D. Valentine, a consumptive Scotsman who came to New Zealand in the early 1880s for his health, spent a week on Rotomahana in 1885 and took a series of photographs of the terraces. Later, after the eruption and their destruction, he returned to photograph the sites where they had been. They are, you cannot help but suppose, pictures of heaven and hell. Of wonder and despair. This sounds like a metaphor but isn’t: a small piece of heaven had come from the earth here and now all that is to be found are the fires of hell; paradoxically, out of these fires those wonders came, and may come again.

The aftermath was much photographed and remarkably so: one of the pictures is of a man called Rewiri sitting in front of the whare where he sheltered, and survived, and was dug out from after the eruption. He’s wearing a hat with a dented crown and has his elbows on his knees, the right hand loosely clasping the left arm. European clothes, trousers, shirt, a jacket, feet incongruously bare. The hut, of traditional design, looks largely intact, with the low door gaping open upon the blackness within. Leaning against it are two battered sheets of corrugated iron and in the background unidentifiable debris piles. Rewiri looks strange. What is he sitting on? A box or kerosene tin? A block of stone? Is his face tattooed or not? You can’t really tell. His gaze doesn’t quite reach the camera, it falls away somewhere between eye and lens. He seems to smile, the but the smile is uneasy; it has a hint of the sad clown about it.

from ‘The Pink & White Terraces’ in The Place of Stones by Martin Edmond (Holloway Press, 2012)

Everest

(conversation overheard on bus)

It’s the Palagi
getting around
wanting to touch everything
in this world
Touching, touching everything
Look at that one with no legs–
walked right up that hill

from Other Animals by Therese Lloyd (Victoria University Press, 2013)

Value

Baked beans became a subject for a while. Gordon worked out that each bean had a certain value to the world, but he felt it curious that some beans were eager for their own preferment. On toast, some of those beans had a truly remarkable orange lustre, and it seemed the biggest beans exactly understood – in a way the pulpy and burst ones certainly did not – what their role might be in the perfect meal. At his student flat in the Grassmarket, the dishes were known to pile up in the general desolation of a Belfast sink, but Gordon was busy accommodating the facts of life to a nourishing vision of the future. He never got drunk because he feared more than anything a loss of control, and so, on Friday nights, as the squads of local boys went skidding up the Lothian Road fuelled by pints of lager, Gordon would be inside the Cameo watching old movies about blind pianists or soldiers mangled by war and self-consciousness. He often picked up a bag of chips amid the broad, late-night fraternity of the Grassmarket, and would cradle them up the tenement stairs to have with his beans.

from ‘Gordon’ by Andrew O’Hagan in The Book of Other People edited by Zadie Smith (Penguin, 2007)
Posted in books, Uncategorized | Leave a comment

The point at the end of the world

“When Bill Clinton was inaugurated,” Alpert (Herb) said, “they had ten saxophone players at the party. It was mostly the young guns, but Gerry Mulligan was in there too. Afterward, he called me and said, ‘Man, you know, these young guys know all the modes, they know all the chords, they can play high and low and fast, and they can do amazing things, but the one thing they don’t know how to do is leave the bone alone.’”
– Charles Wright, Introduction to Best American Poems 2008
Petite fatigue by Nicolas de Crécy

Petite fatigue by Nicolas de Crécy

‘What’s poetry for? What’s the point? Why would anyone read a poem? Why would anyone write one? There’s no money in it – what’s the point?’ Ah, the point. Tapping along beside us, stabbing us occasionally in the solar plexus. I’ve never really had to front up to this sort of interrogation until the past couple of weeks. These questions all grow out of that central, baleful question: ‘What’s the point of poetry?’ It’s important to ask this, but sometimes the way it’s asked just makes me want to shrug my shoulders and pull my hood up and carve my initials in a desk. And my instincts say that any answer I give will be pretty much useless: it’d be too vague, contradictory, maybe even too selfish, to be of any use to anyone.

But yesterday I thought, why don’t I know even one clear answer to this question? Am I trying to avoid it by being confused? I’ve avoided too many questions in my life in this way. So I’m going to try to pin something down – or just catch something, never mind pinning it down – within the relative safety of this blog.

The Poor Poet by Carl Spitzweg (via Bibliokept)

The Poor Poet by Carl Spitzweg (via Bibliokept)

I should say first: I don’t think of myself as ‘a poet’ above all else. I’m just a person who writes poems sometimes. As much as I’m on poetry’s side, the word ‘poet’ makes me feel slightly uncomfortable, and lately I’ve been trying to get to the root of this discomfort, because I keep being defined as one. I think my beef with ‘poet’ is that it has a kind of assumed importance, which seems at odds with how a good poem (or, what I think is a good poem) works. The moment a poem starts posturing, lip-synching, vogueing, and telling me what I should think about things, I feel affronted and switch off. I can’t lie – I even feel slightly suspicious of anyone who considers that above all else, they are a poet. Of course I’m revealing my own insecurities here. But I do think poetry should sit among things, among identities. It has no business being held aloft and alone. (I’ll get in trouble for all this, but let’s plough on.)

Why write a poem? It feels good to make something. It feels good to work with tools you feel you’ve got a relative handle on. If I were any good at baking or boat building or composing jingles maybe I’d do that instead; turns out I like writing better. When you start out with a scraggly line or two and over time build it into a thing that, to your mind anyway, means something or is at the beginning of meaning something, that feels like a small success – regardless of whether the poem is ‘successful’ in itself, regardless of whether you’ll be the only one who ever reads it. At some point along the way your idea of a successful poem, of ‘a job well done’, will clash with someone else’s. Which is helpful, because it keeps your definition of a successful poem open-ended.

My second response is about me too: I find being social really hard work. And I find trying to articulate myself in person really hard work too. Poetry is a way for me to try to craft a response to things, an argument, in a small, slow, private way. At the same time as writing to please myself, I also imagine someone listening – so it becomes a fantasy of connection. One of my favourite moments from a tour with Kirsten McDougall and Pip Adam in March was reading to an audience at Beattie & Forbes in Napier. They were the most responsive audience we’d had so far. When I read a poem from my book called ‘Badly stuffed animals’, I could hear mutterings and exclamations in the front row. At the end of the poem I heard an elderly woman in the audience gasp, ‘Good grief!’ I thought, YES. Connection. I also thought, this is the best it’s going to get, and it’s still pretty good.

Reading poetry serves a different sort of purpose. It’s often said that poetry says the unsayable, and I do think it lends itself more readily to unknown and unacknowledged experiences than novels, short stories, essays, reportage – perhaps because poems tend to be full of ambiguity and suggestion and space, those moments when the writer ‘leaves the bone alone’. Space is absence, but when you put it around things it can reveal potency. A poem can swiftly push past what’s acknowledged and tap into different truths. And sometimes when it does that, it can feel electric. It gets inside you. I don’t want to say that poetry can make you feel less alone, because all reading does that, maybe even all forms of entertainment do it in some way. But poetry sometimes has a way of making you feel less stranded inside your own experience, less landlocked by your own life. The writer G. K. Chesterton, all pith, said, ‘Poets have been mysteriously silent on the subject of cheese.’ Maybe they had been when he said that, but not any more they haven’t. Where there’s a subject, there’s someone writing a poem about it (or around it, under it, beside it…). Even I’ve written a poem about cheese. It’s a bit clunky, but still.

Typewriter by Elliot Elam

Typewriter by Elliot Elam

A poem can change your mind. At one end of the spectrum there’s the poem that leaves you with a desire for something – such as change or justice or kindness. At the other, there’s the poem that subtly re-drafts your understanding of something. I guess, next to a political rallying cry or an in-depth report on, say, a humanitarian crisis, a poem doesn’t have an outspoken, practical aim (and if it does, it might be more propaganda than poetry). But it can go to work on how you think, on why you think the things you do. And that’s where new empathy can find purchase. (An odd example: I remember the first time I read the poem ‘White Butterflies’ by Frederick Seidel. You can read it here. It redrafted what I thought I knew about grief.)

Ah, man. I hope this isn’t getting boring. It’s easy to drift off into abstraction when talking about this stuff. Which is why, I guess, when you look for ‘definitions of poetry’ you’ll often come across startling metaphors, like:

    • ‘Poetry is the fox under our shirts gnawing at our hearts.’ (Charles Wright)
    • ‘If I feel physically as if the top of my head were taken off, I know that is poetry.’ (Emily Dickinson)
    • ‘Poetry is the synthesis of hyacinths and biscuits.’ (Carl Sandburg)
    • ‘Poetry is the lava of the imagination whose eruption prevents an earthquake.’ (George Gordon Noel Byron)
    • ‘Poetry is like fish: if it’s fresh, it’s good; if it’s stale, it’s bad; and if you’re not certain, try it on the cat.’ (Osbert Sitwell)

… and so on. Most definitions of poetry are sort of useful, in some way (I find Dickinson’s the most useful, because it comes back to human feeling), but there’ll always be other definitions to contradict them, which itself tells you a lot about what poetry isn’t: pin-downable.

Back to The Point (and suddenly, I think this post is going to need a Part Two): poetry reminds me what a beguiling and imperfect thing language is, and how forceful, even visceral, it can be. How a voice takes shape through language. How language can move through shades of meaning; how it can move me. How language, finally, has limits in what it can describe; how it can be totally dismantled to show its workings, to re-purpose it. I remember how bewildered I felt when reading e. e. cummings’s ‘my father moved through dooms of love’  as I came across upended verbs and nouns. It was the best kind of bewilderment.

my father moved through dooms of love
through sames of am through haves of give,
singing each morning out of each night
my father moved through depths of height

For the majority of readers these things are not enough. Relatively few people read poetry (it’s possible that more people write it than read it), especially here in New Zealand. If it were up to me, planes and blimps would do a weekly poetry book drop over the land. This would at least increase the odds of taking the top of someone’s head off. 

Posted in books, Poetry, Social media | 9 Comments

Don’t you know who I am in my head?

Two or three years ago I taught a course in prose and discovered my students were watching the soap operas every morning and afternoon. I don’t know when they studied. So I watched two or three just to see what was going on. They were boring. And the advertising! One student wrote a story about an old man who was getting ready to have an old lady to dinner (except she was really a ghost), and he polished a plate till he could see his face in it. It was quite well done, so I read some of it aloud, and said, “But look, this is impossible. You can never see your face in a plate.” The whole class, in unison, said, “Joy!” I said, “What? What are you talking about?” Well, it seems there’s an ad for Joy soap liquid in which a woman holds up a plate and sees—you know the one? Even so, you can’t! I found this very disturbing. TV was real and no one had observed that it wasn’t. Like when Aristotle was right and no one pointed out, for centuries, that women don’t have fewer teeth than men.
- Elizabeth Bishop, The Art of Poetry No. 27

In the past week I’ve been on the road with two wonderful writers, Pip and Kirsten. We’ve been reading from our first books and trying to talk sense about writing. For added authenticity our vehicle even looked a little bit like a van. My book, which I’d been using as a coaster, now looks like it’s been thrown out of lots of car windows, sat on at various small-town pubs, coughed up by a manatee etc.. Before this week, I hadn’t even read it back to myself. You’d expect that having written a book, you’d have it all in your bones anyway, but it’s as if, once the thing was printed, it morphed into a piece of mismatched furniture – like a weird collapsible office chair with the plastic still on that someone had given me and I was sitting on it out of politeness. After this week, though, I feel like I’ve got it at the right height and have figured out the levers (which are surprisingly un-straightforward even though they’re only up/down). I’ve swivelled around on it, fallen off it, stuck chewing gum on the underside (I’ve come too far with this chair metaphor to turn back now) and now I don’t feel as uncomfortable having it around.

All these manoeuverings were done in public. And I’d thought that I’d get better at it. But I think what actually may have happened was that I got worse. (To anyone who came to our second-to-last event and heard me try to answer the question ‘What is the function of poetry?’, I’m sorry.) 

The reason why it was unexpectedly hard is that I wasn’t used to seeing/hearing myself reflected back so much: my voice in a microphone, people’s faces as I read from the book, photos of myself, my voice faltering (often) when I didn’t know how to answer a question. I found that I didn’t have much control over any of those things – or, not the kind of control you have when you’ve got distance on your side; when you’re behind a screen writing a tweet, or a thing like this, or even when you take a headshot of yourself and put a filter called Nashville over it. It’s true that we try to control the things we find uncomfortable, and that when you can’t, this quickly turns to a ghost the person you think you are in your head. Now, I know that all this is also known simply as ‘being out in the world’, but I experienced being out in the world more intensely than usual because of the performance element of touring as ‘a writer’. It made me wonder whether people who have high-profile jobs get this process out of the way fairly quickly at the beginning, or whether they’re constantly cycling through it, re-shuffling their ideas of themselves. Maybe you get to a point where your reflection is innocuous: just a tool to help you do your job.

It reminds me of a conversation Kirsten and Pip had in the car, riffing on the old quip Don’t you know who I am? (which unfortunately we never got to try out): ‘Don’t you know who I am in my head?’ ‘Don’t you know who I think I used to be in the past?’ ‘Don’t you know who I look a little bit like, at certain angles?’ etc.. The incredulity is totally absurd, but I kind of feel for the asker of those questions. They’ve found out that they appear to be nobody in particular: someone with a pair of smudgy glasses on.

The tour made me more aware of old reflexes, too – embarrassing, small-minded ones. Mainly the reflex to avoid ever seeing myself reflected. If I know there’s a mirror coming up, I either hurry past it or come at it on an angle, like a crab. I avoid being in photos, particularly photos that show any bit of my body, unless they’re non-negotiable photos or carefully controlled selfies, with the crucial filter (‘Mayfair’, ‘X-Pro II’, ‘Valencia’; even ‘Normal’ starts to look like a filter), which has the pleasing distancing effect. There’s a sort of escapism in it: escapism from yourself, and from the reactions of others if they saw how you ‘really were’. Although the exposure of the last couple of weeks has sometimes made me feel like my skin and my head have gone transparent, it’s felt necessary, in the same way that properly dog-earing my book was necessary. It’s meant opening up, rather than letting myself lurk underneath like a coaster. It’s also made me start to adjust my ideas of a ‘bad representation’ – a bad photo, a bad answer to a question, a bad recording. I started to feel OK about saying ‘I don’t know’ or ‘Maybe I should just get a real job.’

A friend of mine says she has been trying to train herself to worry less about photos of herself by letting the ‘bad’ photos stand. Rather than rushing to delete them, she’s tried just letting them be there. (I tried a similar thing in a recent Twitter Poetry Night, in which I tweet people’s recordings of poems from PoetryNightNZ, and decided – the hell with it – to let my very average first-take stand. And saved myself a whole lot of faffing about.) Photo apps like Instagram make this an unusual stance – the whole idea is that you shouldn’t have to put up with photos that look a bit average; that pictures of yourself and your surrounds can be better, more interesting, can provide an easier reflection if you just manipulate them slightly.

A few weeks ago, rifling through a chest at my parents’ place, among all the VHS cassettes and spilled Monopoly notes and hotels, I found piles of photos. Many of them were in sticky old albums, with some attempt at chronology, but most were still in their faded envelopes from the Te Kuiti chemist, with stacks of disordered negatives. A lot were great. But a lot more were just terrible – really terrible. Blurry, red-eyed, at bad angles, with badly angled faces. The dog positioned awkwardly across someone’s chest as they slept; someone making a sandwich while grinning evilly; someone running in a way that made it look like they had no arms. I was glad to see the photos; maybe at some point, it had been decided that they were at least as relevant as the good ones and that they should be kept. They seemed somehow truer than the posed ones, and their absence of self-consciousness was comforting. I felt a bit of a pang for the more recent bad photos I’ve so readily deleted, even though I’m always relieved (and slightly drunken with power) at that moment when they’re gone. 

My brother JP, his friend Raj (with guitar), me

My brother JP, his friend Raj (with guitar), me

 

Posted in Memory, Poetry, Social media, Working | 1 Comment

The sharks are all sharks

Construction of the Jaws shark © 1974 Joe Alves/Courtesy of Moonrise Media (via FlavorWire)

Construction of one of the three pneumatically powered Jaws sharks, all named Bruce. © 1974 Joe Alves/Courtesy of Moonrise Media (via FlavorWire)

There isn’t any symbolism. The sea is the sea. The old man is an old man. The boy is a boy and the fish is a fish. The shark are all sharks no better and no worse. All the symbolism that people say is shit. What goes beyond is what you see beyond when you know.
- Ernest Hemingway

I haven’t written in here for a while. I wish I had a decent reason. The point is, this is about sharks. 

Even in a small inland town, it always seemed highly likely that I would one day be attacked by a shark. When swimming alone in a pool, I’d be gripped with fear – the drift of my legs, then the imaginary jaws latching on to one of them – and would galumph desperately to the pool’s edge. At the height of these shark fears I was probably about twelve, had read too many large-format Monsters of the Sea-type books, had had too many conversations with my brothers about shark attacks, and perhaps most crucially, had seen Jaws too many times; it would be years until behind-the scenes photographs of the construction and filming of the giant pneumatically powered, neoprene-coated sharks (there were three), which might’ve helped me get some perspective, came to surface. It’s hard to look at those photographs now – such as the one above, with art director Joe Alves standing beside one of his half-finished sharks – without seeing the simultaneous construction and reinforcement of generations of shark fear and loathing.

To me, the image of the man-eating shark – dead eyes, a mouth festooning with razor blades – was always more powerful than reason. It was the image of pure fear. Even Margaret Mahy’s picture book The Great White Man-Eating Shark, whose central character Norwin straps a homemade fin to his back so he can have the whole beach to himself, used to frighten me – simply because the image of a dorsal fin slicing through water was so viscerally terrifying. All this, when the biggest in-water threat when I was a child was being nibbled by an eel or struck by someone with a pool noodle. I’m pretty sure my fear of sharks also led to an even more unreasonable fear of any mysterious thing living in water: seaweed, jellyfish, even swirling schools of minnows, each no bigger than a paperclip.

It’s really only in the last decade that I’ve begun to think more rationally and compassionately about sharks, and in recent months I’ve been excited to come across artwork that depicts sharks very differently from those images I grew up with – depictions that break away from the old equation of sharks with soullessness and horror. (Most of these are by the collaborative artists Kozy and Dan. See their Campbell’s Shark Fin Soup sculpture, too – a grisly, important statement.)

Waiting sharks by Franco Matticchio (via Animalarium)

Waiting sharks by Franco Matticchio (via Animalarium)

The Shark Charmer by Kozyndan

The Shark Charmer by Kozyndan. The painting depicts an ama – a Japanese woman diver – hypnotising a hammerhead and a tiger shark.

Hunters: Charks an' Kittehs by (via koyzndan)

Hunters: Charks an’ Kittehs by Koyzndan

Detail from Charks and Kittehs by Kozydan

Detail from Hunters: Charks an’ Kittehs by Kozydan

As everyone knows, in late February 2013, a man named Adam Strange was killed by a shark when swimming at Muriwai in West Auckland; it was incredibly awful and sad, and traumatic for everyone involved. It brought up a lot of my old thinking about sharks. It’s easy to forget, amidst all the news coverage of a fatal shark attack, that these are wild animals, and that when you go into the sea you’re going into an often unpredictable place. The first thing to go, though, is perspective. These events are rare. Since 1852, there have been thirteen fatal shark attacks in New Zealand.

Growing up means finding less delight in being terrified (so, along with my slow waning of shark obsession went an obsession with UFOs and aliens, Big Foot, and Dean Koontz’s books), and once you look closely at the fear that fuels so much of our thinking about sharks, you find a lot of myths and strange contradictions. Even knowing the statistics on shark attacks, I think, puts very little dent in our fear. We know that, for example, you are more likely to die by falling off a chair than being eaten by a shark; your odds are actually 1 in 11.5 million, according to Oceana. And there’s the fact that sharks have become the prey of humans, that many of their species have been hunted to the point of critical endangerment.

I wonder if the place that sharks occupy in our language doesn’t help, where they’re always a symbol of vicious, self-centered behaviour – ‘loan shark’, ‘shark eyes’, ‘card shark’ (a hustler or cheat), ‘shark-like’. It’s been argued that, etymologically, it’s all the other way around – that, in the 16th century, the name ‘shark’ was given to the fish because ‘shark’ was at first a descriptor for a dishonest person who preyed on others; a rogue, a scoundrel. And in another odd reversal, in some mythologies sharks are wise, protective figures, such as the shark god Ukupanipo of Hawaiian mythology, who controlled the amount of fish a fisherman could catch (and occasionally adopted a human child, who he’d bestow with the power to change into a shark at any time); and the Fijian shark god Dakuwaqa, who protected fishermen from danger at sea. 

Shark by Franco Matticchio (via Animalarium)

Shark by Franco Matticchio (via Animalarium)

Camouflage by Kozyndan (showing bunnyfish riding a shark)

Camouflage by Kozyndan (showing bunnyfish riding a whale shark)

Partly, too, my thinking has been turned around through talking to my brother John-Paul, who in an interview on this blog a while ago had some interesting things to say about sharks (including a very good answer to the eternal question: ‘Would you rather be attacked by a crocodile or a shark?’ The answer MAY SURPRISE YOU). His most recent album Anniversary Day was inspired by a shark attack in Wellington Harbour in 1852: John Balmer, a musician in the 65th regiment’s band, was swimming after performing with the band, when a shark fatally attacked him. (To date, Balmer is the only person to have been killed by a shark in Wellington.)

Every year on 21 January, the date of the 1852 attack, JP does a swim out to the floating raft in Oriental Bay and back to commemorate John Balmer. It’s a lovely, strangely triumphant gesture, I think.

John Balmer Memorial Swim 2013 (by Bridget Giblin)

John Balmer Memorial Swim 2013 (Photo: Bridget Giblin)

Posted in Uncategorized | 6 Comments

These days sometimes go on for days

by Cary S. Leibowitz (via Visual Poetry)

by Cary S. Leibowitz (via Visual Poetry)

for a brief minute the light from the 23rd street was part of the tracks, the tracks were full of flowing light and for a wonderful few seconds I had forgotten about the subway (almost) the always being aware of not being aware.
Spalding Gray (January 15, 1969)

I’m not going to go all resolutiony here, but in the past couple of weeks, I’ve realised something. It is good to keep busy. Sometimes even frantically busy. I start to feel unhinged if I don’t. This is the freelancer’s lot, I guess – you’ll always be held accountable for the state of your own busy-ness. You’ve got to chase it. I’m still new to this, and my chasing has been more, well, running from tree to tree wearing camouflage pants and a little tree hat.

There are a few things I’d like to do this year. To get better at talking to people. No – not even that; just to talk to people more often. To start drawing again. And of course to start writing again. In short, to stop being such a goddamn lazy bum. I’ve been looping around, groaning, like a powerline in the wind. Partly it’s that I feel a strange old guilt when I write, like I’m wasting time. (I feel guilty just writing this post here. ‘I should be working instead.’) And partly I’m reluctant to look my writing in the eye and to wrangle with its flaws. Years ago, this was the reason I gave up playing the piano, and the flute, and today I still miss both. But not quite enough, yet, to sit down at a piano or pick up my flute and face all the hours of practise I’ve lost.

There is something that happens when you leave behind that dread of facing the work. You sort of disappear from yourself, for a time. Being immersed makes you weightless. For me this is a great relief, when I feel the weight lift.

Effetti personali by Franco Matticchio (via Animalarium)

by Franco Matticchio (via Animalarium)

Over Christmas I read the journals of Spalding Gray (a gift from my good friend Elliot), edited by Nell Casey (editor of the excellent Unholy Ghost: Writers on Depression). Gray was ferociously prolific; he needed to write to feel OK. (And he wrote on everything: when Nell Casey was going through all of his writings, she found notes he’d written on hotel stationery, napkins, pamphlets, receipts, even Tampax inserts). Gray’s form was the confessional monologue. He would sit behind a desk on a stage, in a plaid shirt, with a notebook and a glass of water in front of him, and would tell the audience what seemed like everything: his fraught romantic relationships, his New England childhood, his mother’s suicide in 1967, his neuroses, his bottomless self-obsession. And, as Casey writes in her foreword, he felt torn between ‘his compulsive desire to reveal himself and his fear that he may be foolishly trading his life for recognition’. There was always the question of how much truth could he tell, how many confessions he could make, while also keeping the final, secret, unspeakable truth for himself. In one of his entries he worried that he was becoming a ‘crazy, neurotic wind-up doll’. He feared that he could no longer experience something without the need to then turn it into performance – to craft it and share it with strangers. (I can’t decide whether Gray would have loved or hated Twitter.)

Shit! how forced I still am. My whole mind is a running commentary on all that I do. I can’t turn off the comments … walking through Central Park the wind … the not too cold wind and the distinct shadows remind me of early spring (early spring and late fall are two of my favourites or should I say – late winter … where the season is just ready to give itself over) I feel the wind on my face and I think I’ll cry and I do and see … am aware of the way in which the first tear of out of my left eye has caught and rainbowed the reflections of the afternoon sun.

Even happiness seemed to frighten him: ‘The worst fear is that I’ll learn to be happy at last and then get real sad when I see what I’ve missed.’ But he still kept writing and performing – apart from during episodes of serious mental or physical ill health – and you can see from this journal how working on the monologues calmed him. They gave him a sense of purpose. ‘The paradox is that when I talk about myself,’ he wrote, ‘I forget myself.’

Spalding Gray (Nancy Campbell/IFC Films, via NY Times)

Spalding Gray (Nancy Campbell/IFC Films, via NY Times)

Posted in Struggling | 3 Comments