Go Forth (Vol. 23)

Go Forth is a series curated by Nicolle Elizabeth that offers a look into the publishing industry and contemporary small-press literature. See more of the series.

Adam Wilson’s participation in literature ranges from Paris Review columns to teaching gigs to editing gigs and yet he still has an unpretentious vibe about him, which I think is a good example for other aspiring writers. His most recent collection of stories What’s Important Is Feeling is out now from Harper Collins, and it’s awesome.

—Nicolle Elizabeth

NICOLLE ELIZABETH: When did you realize that you were a writer?

ADAM WILSON: I’m not sure if I would have called it “being a writer”, but when I was in high school, I loved telling crazy stories, usually about stuff I’d done over the weekend—drugs, girls, parties. Most of these stories were only loosely based on actual events. I developed a reputation for hyperbole, exaggeration, and flat-out fabrication. But people didn’t seem to care; they liked the stories anyway. I had this moment of realization, like, Whoa, I’m kind of good at making stuff up. I always teach Isaac Babel’s story “My First Fee” to my undergrads on the first day of class. The story is about a teenager who tells such an elaborate wonderful, and completely fabricated story to a prostitute, that she has sex with him for free. He earns her empathy. The “Fee” referred to in the title is the character’s first literary fee, the first time he was paid for a story. In high school, no one had sex with me because I told good stories, but they did start inviting me to more parties. 

NE:  When did you decide you wanted to write for a living and teach writing as opposed to just writing?

AW: Well, the teaching came later, but I had grand fantasies about making millions of dollars from my writing dating all the way back to high school. At first it was songs. I was in a rock band, and I thought I was the next Bob Dylan. That didn’t pan out. I tried to write a book in college, and assumed I would be paid a large advance for it as soon as I graduated. That didn’t pan out. After college, I wrote a screenplay, and assumed I would sell it, and then retire to a mansion in the Hollywood Hills. Obviously, that one didn’t pan out either. But at some point I figured out that if you did freelance work, and taught, and were a mid-list author, then you could scrape by. That’s where I’m at these days. 

NE: How many times have you failed, as a writer, do you think?

AW: Innumerable times. Every day when I sit down to write I fail. It’s the nature of the beast. Writing fiction is a form of communication, an attempt to use language and storytelling to represent ideas, thoughts, and feelings that can’t ultimately be articulated. This is an impossible task, obviously, and all attempts to do it are valiant yet futile. Still, one must keep trying. 

NE: What do you tell writers who know they are great writers and feel like they’re failing?

AW: I think that to be a writer you have to have these two sides to your personality. One of those sides feels like it’s failing, always. That side is a ruthless critic. It second-guesses every sentence. That side is cripplingly self-loathing. Every day it must question the value of what you’re doing, and ask the question, does the world really need these characters I’m making up in my head? 

The other side must be wildly narcissistic, egomaniacal, and vainglorious. That side must say, YES! This thing I’m doing is the most important thing in the world, every word I type is pure gold, and I deserve to be hailed as the savior of mankind! 

If you have the first side, but not the second side, then I don’t know what to tell you, other than 1) you’re never going to finish writing anything, and 2) you’re probably a better person than me, and 3) you should probably see a therapist, because it’s unhealthy to have only self-loathing. But I suspect that if someone asks whether or not she’s failing, she does indeed already know she is great. Some people have both of these sides to their personality, and will turn out just fine. To them I say: patience, my dear. 

NE: A lot more than the craft of writing goes into being a writer professionally. What advice do you have for writers who feel like they know they can write, and have absolutely no idea how to approach “any kind of hustle” as it were.

AW: Oh man, I don’t know. Go to an MFA program, I guess? And then meet someone who can read your awesome writing and help the world find out how awesome it is? I think the main thing is to get the work in shape to show people, and then find the right person to show it to. All it takes is one supporter to get a career rolling. That person can be a teacher, a peer, someone from an internship, whatever. So long as you finish the book, and it’s awesome, and you can find someone to fall in love with it who happens to have an agent/publisher/editor etc. who they’re willing to send it to. You don’t have to make everyone fall in love with you, but you do have to make a couple people fall in love with your work. 

NE: Do you think it’s important for a great writer to be able to deliver a great reading, a great panel, maybe a great guest lecture or do you think they’re separate and the focus should be entirely on craft or do you think that is, sadly, naive or not at all?

AW: Not important, necessarily, but these things can help. It depends how good of a writer you are. If your book is the next War and Peace, then no one will give a shit if you can’t give a lecture or are awkward during readings. They’ll think it’s part of your genius. If you’re me, though, and your book is published as a paperback original to little fanfare, then it can be pretty useful to give an amazing reading, or panel, or lecture, as it might put you on someone’s radar, and someone who otherwise would never have known about your work might end up getting into it. 

NE: This column is for writers who want to learn more about the facets of publishing, do we tell everyone just to write from the heart and go from there and they’ll find their way, or do we tell them that they have to do more to sell themselves and if we say that, are we doing craft a disservice or are we helping it to see more readers?

AW: Honestly, I don’t know the answer to that question, and it’s something I struggle with all the time. It’s funny, I did an interview a few years ago with my friend Garth Hallberg, and I spent the whole interview giving him shit about not being on social media, and saying things like, “How are you ever gonna sell any books without a twitter account?” And Garth was just like, “Dude, I’m gonna send this book out when it’s done and just see what happens. If no one wants it, then maybe I’ll join twitter.” Anyway, Garth recently sent the book out after working on it for years, and he got a huge, amazing book deal, and I looked like an idiot. At the same time, though, Garth is a truly incredible writer. Not everyone can do that. My own work, for example, though I think a lot of literary writers fall into this category, doesn’t seem to have much mass-market commercial appeal. Church Moms in Des Moines aren’t buying my work, and if they did buy it they probably wouldn’t like it. But there is an audience that I think and hope would be into my stuff if they knew of its existence, and things like marketing and social media can help them do that. 

Three Trailers

)

There are trailers that tower so monumentally over their host films that make you wish you’d never seen the movies they promoted. The trailer for Sofia Coppola’s Marie Antoinette, for instance, the one featuring New Order’s “Age of Consent.” There is a heart-racing beauty and dying star sadness to this and a feeling at certain moments—such as the running-down-the-steps sequence beginning at around :22—that the trailer has captured a feeling of exhuberance that you forgot, in the cynicism of this world, was possible. Or an early trailer for Panos Cosmatos’s Beyond the Black Rainbow, so trippy and otherwordly that you knew from the first moments that the film itself would not compare, and that in its strange folds and depths, the trailer offered a truer version of the film than the film itself.

But there is also a rarer sort of trailer, one that hints at the secret interiors of the film, as if the film had withheld a part of itself for the trailer only. Movies, excepting single-take, no-edit films like Alexander Sokurov’s Russian Ark, already hopscotch through time and space, bending and shaping both in the service of narrative. Trailers do this one level deeper, taking a story that is already by its nature out of time and further wrecking its relationship to linear chronology. Presented out of order, the images in a good trailer suggest a weirdly tyrannical, yet false, coherence.

The carefully orchestrated turbulence of the trailer for the Brazilian film Neighboring Sounds, which lasts just over two minutes, is achieved not through what is depicted in any given shot but rather from the juxtaposition of the shots themselves. There are forty-nine total, all of them from the film, structured roughly like this:

Part 1: Three shots of a character keying an expensive white car.

Part 2: A twenty-two-second clip, comprising six shots, that reveals in one sentence—albeit obliquely—the film’s central plot point.

Part 3: Forty shots, set to music by DJ Dolores, each lasting between half a second and two seconds. 

The ghostly assembly of shots, in the third part in particular, conveys a danger that is felt but invisible, not communicated by characters except perhaps through code. This feeling represents the cumulative, boiled-down danger of the film itself — yet it adds a sense of violence and disorientation to what is found therein.

Two shot sequences stand out. Shots ten and eleven both involve forward movement but of radically different sorts: shot ten is a slow, gliding-forward tracking shot that pushes through a sunny soccer court filled with kids, while shot eleven cuts to a fast zoom-in revealing a security man on an empty street. The unexpected cut between languorous forward movement and whiplash zoom momentum shocks, even hurts. Some seconds later, shots sixteen and seventeen, edited together as they are, also have an unsettling effect: sixteen pans quickly to the left, seventeen to the right. The closest name for the feeling is urgency, an urgency borne out of fear. But fear of what?

//player.vimeo.com/video/42286779

Neighboring Sounds (Trailer) from Cinema Guild on Vimeo.

Nicholas Rombes’s full review of the trailer for Neighboring Soundappears in this month’s film issue.

The Soundproof Room: An Exclusive Essay from Tin House Magazine

image

All month long, the Believer and its favorite cousin, the lovely and talented Tin House mag, are offering up a joint promotion where you can get a year-long subscription to both magazines for just $65. (Subscribe today! Here!).

To celebrate, we’re running “The Soundproof Room,” by Lacy M. Johnson, which can also be found in the most recent issue of Tin House. It is an excerpt from Johnson’s forthcoming Tin House book, The Other Side, which can be ordered here. We hope you’ll enjoy the piece, and consider subscribing to two great magazines that look nice on the shelf right next to each other.

image

THE SOUNDPROOF ROOM

I won’t be coming in today

Tell me everything, he says. Start at the beginning. He does not mean the playground at the preschool with the rainbow bridge. Or the kitten tongue like sandpaper on my cheek. Or the potpourri simmering in the tiny Crock-Pot on the counter next to the jar of pennies in the kitchen. Though any of these could have been a beginning to the story I tell him. I want to see it, his little notepad, but he leaves the room to make some calls. No, I can’t call my family. No, not any of my friends. Nothing to do but to look at my feet, which are suddenly very, very absurd. Someone should cover them with shoes and socks.

He returns to lead me down a dark hallway, where every office is a room with a closed door, through a kitchen, where coffee brews and burns, out a heavy steel door to a parking lot, an unmarked car. A detective’s car. He gestures, as if to say, After you.

***

While waiting in the unmarked car on an unlit street in the dark shadow of an oak tree I realize that real cops are not at all like movie cops. Real cops are slow and fat. Their bellies, in various states of roundness, hang over their waistbands, cinched tight with braided leather belts. They do not converge on buildings with sirens blaring. They do not flash their lights or stand behind the open doors of their squad cars and aim their guns at criminals. These cops, my cops, do not wear uniforms. From the car, where I am sitting alone in the shadow of an oak tree, they look like fat men who have happened to meet on the street, who are walking together around the side of the fourplex toward the gravel parking lot, where they will find a discarded car tarp, a screen door flapping, all the lights but one turned off.

Just inside the door, they will find a dog collar, construction supplies, and a soundproofed room. I have told them what to expect. Meanwhile, waiting alone in the car under the dark shadow of an oak tree I start seeing things: no shadow is just a shadow of an oak tree. I press the heels of my palms hard into my eye sockets, sink lower into the seat. My thoughts grow smaller and race in circles. The adrenaline shakes become convulsions, become seizures, become shock. When The Detective returns, he finds me knotted into thirds on the floorboard: hardly like a woman at all.

***

At the hospital, The Detective leads me through a set of automatic sliding glass doors, not the main ones that lead to the emergency room, but another set, down the way a bit, special, for people like me. He leads me down a fluorescent-lit hallway, directly to an exam room where the overhead lights are turned off. A female officer meets me there, and a social worker who looks like she might be somebody’s grandmother. The Female Officer and The Social Worker team up with a nurse; The Detective disappears without a word. The Female Officer, The Social Worker, and The Nurse ask me to take off my clothes. They unscrew the U-bolt from my wrist. The Female Officer puts these things into a Ziploc bag named EVIDENCE.

Nice to meet you, Evidence.

The Female Officer takes pictures of my wrists and ankles. She speaks in two-syllable sentences: Oh, dear. Rape kit.

The Social Worker wants to hold my hand. No thank you, ma’am. She is, after all, not my grandmother. Her skin is loose and clammy. She asks what kind of poetry I write as The Nurse rips out fingerfuls of my pubic hair, spreads my legs, and digs inside me with a long, stiff Q-tip. Another Q-tip in my mouth for saliva. She scrapes under my fingernails with a wooden skewer and puts the scum in a plastic vial.

The Social Worker invites me to stay at her house. Or it is not her house, exactly, but a half-house for half-women like me. After the exam, The Social Worker gives me a green sweat suit in a brown paper bag. I’m supposed to dress in the bathroom. The clothes are entirely too large: a too-large hunter-green sweatshirt, a pair of too-large hunter-green sweatpants, a pair of too-large beige underwear. Like my mother wears.

The Female Officer doesn’t acknowledge that I look ridiculous when I emerge from the bathroom. She doesn’t acknowledge me at all. I know to follow her out the door, to the parking lot, her squad car. I know to hang my head; it’s the price for a ticket to the station.

Morning.

The phone call wakes my parents out of bed. Mom answers; her voice is thick, confused. She says nothing for a long time. In the background, Dad gets dressed. Yesterday’s change jingles in his pockets. His voice buckles: Say we’re on the way.

***

The Detective follows me to my new apartment in the unmarked car. He offers to come inside, to stand guard at the door, but I don’t want him to see that I have no furniture, no food in the fridge, nothing in the pantry, or the linen closet, or on the walls. I ask him to wait outside. I call my boss at the literary magazine where I am an intern and leave a message on the office voice mail: Hi there. I was kidnapped and raped last night. I won’t be coming in today. I call My Good Friend’s cell phone. I call My Older Sister’s cell phone.

While I’m in the shower, the apartment phone rings and callers leave messages on the machine: My Good Friend will stay with her boyfriend; she’s delaying her move-in date. Of course she hates to do this, but she’s just too scared to live here, with me, right now. You should find somewhere to go, she says. My Handsome Friend’s message says he heard the news from My Good Friend. He’s leaving town and doesn’t think it’s safe to tell me where to find him. The message My Older Sister leaves says she wants me to come stay at her place, which sounds better than sleeping alone in this apartment on the floor.

I pull back the curtains and see my parents standing in the parking lot talking to The Detective. My father shakes The Detective’s outstretched hand. My mother covers her chest with her arms, one hand over her mouth, a large beige purse hanging from her shoulder. She’s brought me a peanut butter and jelly sandwich and a snack-size bag of Cool Ranch Doritos. I’m not hungry, but the thought of wasting her effort makes my stomach turn.

I nibble the chips in the backseat of their car while they take me to buy a cell phone. They want to do something, to take action. With the fluorescent lights of the store, all the papers I must fill out and sign, and the windows wide open behind us, I feel dizzy enough to fall.

***

Driving to My Older Sister’s apartment, I watch the road extending behind me in the rearview mirror and try not to fall asleep. The boulevard becomes deserted intersection, becomes on-ramp, and interstate. The clusters of redbrick buildings give way to strip malls, to warehouses and truck stops, to XXX bookstores, to cultivated pastures growing in every direction: wheat-stalk brown, tree-bark brown, and corn-silk green.

My Older Sister meets me in the parking lot with tears in her eyes. Her hug is both desperate and safe. As she carries my bag up the stairs she says, You look like shit. Under any other circumstances, I’d tell her to fuck off. Today it’s a comfort. I do look exactly as I feel.

She isn’t able to get off work tonight, so she shows me how to use the cable remote, loads her handgun, puts it in my hand. It’s heavier than I would have imagined. She’ll work late tonight, but if I need anything, her next-door neighbor, The Sheriff, knows what happened. He might come by to check on me. Please try not to shoot him.

The whole time she’s gone, I watch the closed-circuit channel showing the front gate of her apartment complex. I sit in the dark with the gun in my hand and watch cars drive through the gate. I don’t know what I’m watching for, but I keep watching. A gray conversion van looks suspicious. I peer through a crack in the blinds.

I don’t eat. I don’t sleep. Even after My Older Sister comes home, offers me a beer, falls asleep with her arm around my body in the bed, I fix my eyes on the dark and wait.

And wait.

And wait.

***

Schrödinger’s famous thought experiment instructs us to imagine that a cat is trapped in a steel chamber along with a tiny bit of radioactive substance—so tiny that there is equal probability that one atom of the substance will or will not decay in the course of an hour. If one of the atoms of this substance happens to decay, a device inside the chamber will shatter a small flask of hydrocyanic acid, killing the cat. If it does not decay, the cat survives. It is impossible to know, with certainty, whether the cat is alive or dead at any given moment without looking inside the steel chamber, since there is equal probability of either outcome. And because both outcomes exist in equal probability, this creates a paradox: the cat is both alive and dead to the universe outside the chamber. These two outcomes continue to coexist only until someone opens the chamber and looks inside, causing those two possible outcomes to collapse and become one.

***

The form itself is simple: my name, the police records I am requesting, the case number, the dollar amount I am willing to pay for copying fees. These fees can be waived if the request in some way serves the public interest. I was the victim in this case, I write on the form. I can think of no way in which this serves the public interest, but I would like to see the files anyway.

A sergeant in the Public Relations Unit responds to my request within the week. After thirteen years the case remains open and The Sergeant needs to consult with the city legal advisor prior to making a decision, Since, you know, it involves a serious active case. Three weeks later, after speaking with the law department, as well as with the lead investigator, The Sergeant sends me a PDF file along with a polite offer of further assistance.

At first I decide I won’t open it while I’m at home—not while there is laundry to be washed and folded, not while there is food to be cooked, and children to be bathed and fed. I’ll wait until my trip to upstate New York in early summer. But then I spend whole mornings distracted by possibilities. Is the cat alive or dead? After two days, when my children are at school and My Husband is out of town, I open the file, thinking I’ll only look a little bit. Just a little. Just a peek.

***

The evidence file contains eighty-five pages of police reports, including an inventory of items collected from the crime scene: “chain,” “brown envelope with handwritten notes,” “two leather belts tied together,” and “film neg[atives].” It does not describe whether there are images on those negatives. It does not describe the results of any laboratory tests or the e-mails and correspondence I sent to and received from The Suspect, though they are mentioned. There are no facsimiles or transcripts of conversations I had with the prosecutors or the police. The file does not contain copies of warrants, though it lists the complete set of charges filed on my behalf.

The first half of the file contains reports of the same events during the same time period on the same day, each report from the perspective of a different officer, each report in part relating the story I told to one officer or another. The writers do not reflect. They do not sympathize. They express no pity or outrage or disgust. Each report simply records my story, but it is not my story, though it is the same version of the story I would tell. Almost word for word. Like something I memorized long ago and can still perform by heart.

***

And yet, as I read through the evidence file, I see things I don’t remember. Like how, according to the police reports, it was The Female Officer, not The Detective, who came out to meet me at the station, and The Female Officer also drove me to the apartment I’d escaped, and then to the hospital, and then back to the station. But in my memory, this role is so clearly played by The Detective, a man who looks vaguely like my uncle.

I try to remember my two fists pressed against the glass separating me from the two female dispatchers, the locked beige door to my left. I remember it opening, and I try to see The Female Officer’s face instead of The Detective’s face. I try to remember her dark-blue uniform, every corner pressed and in its place, the black belt with its gold buckle, the gold buttons, every hair on her head tied back into a neat bun. I can see the long hallway behind her. I can see the little notepad. And the office. And the black telephone. The carpet in the hallway is beige, darker in the middle than where it meets the walls at the edges. But when I try to see The Female Officer instead of The Detective the whole image starts to collapse, and then there is neither a female officer nor a male detective opening the locked beige door. There is no opening the door.

Until I looked through the police reports, I didn’t know that while I was waiting in the unmarked police car outside the basement apartment, one of the officers called the owner of the building, a man I knew as the bartender at our favorite dive downtown. He came to the apartment, maybe while I was waiting outside, and confirmed that he owned the building, and that his tenant, the same person as The Suspect, was a friend. After the landlord refused to tell the police where they could find The Suspect, and after he tried several times to call his tenant, he was arrested for obstructing a government operation. He was later processed and transported to the county jail.

I also didn’t know that, in the early days of the investigation, one of The Suspect’s former students showed up at the police department, admitting that The Suspect paid him $100 to help him build the soundproofed room. They spent an entire weekend working on it together. The owner of the building let them use his pickup truck to haul supplies and stopped by periodically to check on the progress. At one point he brought fresh watermelon and cantaloupe for them to eat. The student said he remembered that his former instructor had paid for everything with an envelope full of cash.

Until I looked through the police reports, I didn’t know that on July 5, the night of the kidnapping, The Suspect called the Mall 4 Theatres, asking if My Handsome Friend was working that evening. My Handsome Friend had told his bosses and fellow employees that some psycho might come to the theater looking for him, and asked them not to give out any information about him over the phone or in person, or to let on that he still worked at the theater. My Handsome Friend told police that for six months The Suspect had been following him, driving past his house and the building where he worked, because he thought we were having an affair. My Handsome Friend told police he believed that The Suspect might harm him. He didn’t know what The Suspect might do to him.

I also didn’t know that, after the story was reported on the news, people phoned in to the Crime Stoppers hotline to offer information they had about the case. One woman, an employee at a big-box hardware store, had helped The Suspect select glue for the Styrofoam he would later use to build what he called “a sound studio.” One man, who worked at a sound supply shop on the business loop, said The Suspect had asked him how to build a soundproofed room insulated enough to muffle a woman’s screams. For making movies, The Suspect had said.

***

According to the police reports, bank records reflect that sometime after 5:00 PM on July 5, 2000, The Suspect withdrew $750 from his checking account at an ATM only blocks from the building where I worked. Which means he may have gone to the ATM as early as 5:01 PM, moments before he approached me in the parking lot outside the building where I worked. Or as late as 11:59 PM, after he returned to the apartment where he had built the soundproofed room and discovered that I’d escaped.

Early the following morning, before I’d called my parents or returned to my apartment to shower and pack, before the nurse had finished searching the surfaces and cavities of my body for evidence, he withdrew another $750 from an ATM at a gas station at the intersection of two highways 150 miles away to the west and north by interstate. From that ATM he drove fifty-two miles south and parked his rental car on a street in the downtown business district of one of the few actual cities in the state, where it would be discovered by an officer from the Stolen Auto Division a month later.

On July 7, two days after the kidnapping, he purchased an airline ticket to León, Guanajuato, Mexico, at the Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport. After arriving in Mexico, after passing without incident through immigration and customs, he walked to the ticket desk and purchased an airline ticket to Porlamar, the largest city on Margarita Island, just off the coast of Venezuela. He got off the plane in Santiago Mariño Caribbean International Airport that afternoon and withdrew $1,200 from an ATM. That evening, just before the bank froze his account, just before I learned to accept the weight of my sister’s gun in my hand, one final debit for $29.56 posted to his checking account, from a restaurant at one of the island’s resorts.

***

One police report describes how, on July 12, one week after the kidnapping, at 9:10 AM, The Suspect called his stepfather at his home in southern Missouri: a cabin just this side of a shack, the only building I remember now along the gravel road stretching across a heavily wooded hilltop, where it seemed a fresh buck was always swinging from a tree, the red gash of its belly gaping open. I remember eating stewed squirrel in the kitchen at a card table, loading the woodstove in the cramped living room, watching the clouds of my breath from a mattress on the floor in the only bedroom. I don’t remember seeing a phone. But it rang three times, the report says, before his stepfather picked up. He asked, Where are you? The Suspect wouldn’t say. They talked briefly about the case. Yes, I did get her, The Suspect admitted, but he denied the allegations of rape. If you want to call Lacy, go ahead, he said. His stepfather asked again, Where are you? The Suspect refused to say, but then started talking to another person near the phone in Spanish. At 10:00 AM on July 12, his stepfather called The Detective to report the call. He said The Suspect seemed very upset about the media exposure on the case.

***

In another report, The Detective writes how, on July 17, twelve days after the kidnapping, he and another officer came to my apartment to talk to me about the case. I told them that The Suspect and I met while I was a student in his Spanish class at the university. I told them that I had been trying to break up with him for some time, for lots of reasons, but mostly because he had raped me on more than one occasion. I told the officers that when I finally did break up with him, six weeks earlier, he did not take it well.

The Detective writes that I told him and the other officer that The Suspect had been arrested before, in Denmark. I remember telling them the version of the story I was told: he was married for years and years to a Danish woman, they had two children together, and after they split up, he took the children to the United States, forgetting to tell her that he was leaving the country. The report doesn’t mention how the officers looked at each other when I said this, how they might have wanted to ask more questions about this version of his story but didn’t. The Detective writes that I said that the man kept the children in the United States while his ex-wife called and called and eventually convinced him to come home. She told him she wanted to get back together. A trick, I told the officers. He was arrested as he got off the plane, and while he awaited trial, his ex-wife flew to the United States to retrieve her children. The Detective writes that I told them that the ex-wife has avoided The Suspect since that time. They have no contact. She gets no child support.

The next report in the file describes a fax The Detective received from his liaison at Interpol, who located a record in the Interpol Criminal Register. The Suspect was convicted in Denmark in 1995 of depriving parental custody rights to his ex-wife and received a suspended sentence of sixty days in prison. Earlier the same year he had been arrested for rape, though the crime was dropped due to lack of evidence. The Detective speculates in his report that the victim in this dropped case is The Suspect’s ex-wife, current residence unknown.

***

In the final police report, dated August 14, 2000, I am identified as Lacy Johnson: VICTIM. I read this and feel certain it is true. I see myself as the officers saw me: someone who phones the police station to report a suspicious number on her caller ID. I am a subject to be questioned, a story to be investigated, a set of illegal acts that were perpetrated by a suspect who has disappeared.

And yet, when I close the file, I remember how the truth is more complicated than this. I remember, for example, making choices. I look into his eyes while I undress. When it is done he apologizes and finds me something to eat. I tell him everything is fine, just fine, and stroke his hair while he cries into my lap. He begs me to come back. Outside, in the hallway, his rifle leans against the wall. At any moment, he may or may not kill me. I remember how the two possibilities can coexist: I’m both alive and dead in every room but this.

“To die is very strange.”

image

Christian Boltanski on Death, Sex, Gambling and God 

Christian Boltanski’s art plays a shamanic role in our world. It attempts again and again to grasp the lost souls of humanity in order to preserve their value. We have the sense that if he could get any of these souls in a headlock, he would try to wrestle them into revealing something more about the fathomless. Hailed as one of the most influential artists of his generation, his work shares an omnipotence with its favorite subjects: Death and God.

Chance, a three-part artwork originally commissioned for the Venice Biennale of 2011, has recently come to life again at Carriageworks in Sydney, Australia, at an even greater scale. With images of newborn Polish babies spliced with images of newly dead Swiss, and digital installations of the numerical statistics of international births and deaths as they happen, this work, partly fed through an exaggerated printing press akin to a soul factory, is laced with his signature combination of mystery itself, and the longing to uncover whether life is happenstance or a mapped and meaningful destiny.

Chance makes the viewer feel uplifted and also small, and if we feel gratitude as well, it may be because after a lifetime of asking, the artist continues to question the invisible maker in order to pull us through the shamanic time warp, to be touched by an oeuvre that wants so badly to know.

I sat down with Boltanski under the colossal scaffolding of Chance, to talk to him about death, sex, gambling and God, and the altered state of being continually watched by a webcam.

         —Caia Hagel

THE BELIEVER: One of the striking sensations I feel from Chance is the shock of how random and fleeting life actually is the way you show it to us scientifically — when it feels so important while living it.

CHRISTIAN BOLTANSKI: The science about life is very optimistic. Every second, four people in the world die, and six are born. This is optimistic. But life goes very fast and is only interested in living; life is only interested in being alive while moving at a pace toward its own end. Some time soon there will be another artist sitting here, and another writer. They won’t be the very same as you and I, but they will be similar. We are unique, but replaceable. 

I like looking at the finger of God. Why it takes one and not another, why this one or that one, why now or why then. The finger of God is always on us. When you get older and you see your friends dying around you, you say “Why not me?” That machine is always there.

If there is a God, he doesn’t know us. It’s like if we walk in a forest and we kill some insects. He isn’t against us but he doesn’t know us. This machine is blind, it just takes what it can take, that’s all.

BLVR: I like it that you’ve entered this game of chance very literally in your wager with [art collector, gambler and Mona founder] David Walsh. How did it happen that you agreed to gamble your life with him?

CB: David is a very clever, incredible person. He wanted to buy a piece from me for his Mona museum. I thought he was so clever and so strange that I wished to play with him. So I sold him the right to have a video camera in my studio, where I live and work, that is filming day and night. He can zoom in and read my letters if he wants. What interests me is that he can see me getting older and older, he will have so many hours and hours of film, so many hours and hours of my life. It will be preserved. 

I sold him this piece at a price but I decided to ask him to give me the money every month, until I die. In five years, he will have given me all the money that I asked for. So if I die in three years, he makes good business. But if I die in ten years, it’s a catastrophe for him. He told me that he has never lost in his life and that he is sure that I will die within five years. Who knows, perhaps he is going to win. I hope not, but somebody who says that they have never lost is something very strange. It’s like saying that you are stronger than God, stronger than chance.

I sometimes say hello to him into the camera but we’re not in communication. We don’t phone each other or send mail. It’s better, I think, not to be friends when we are playing with my life. But I know that he looks at me.

image

BLVR: Is this a bit like a contract with the devil? 

CB: I have called him a devil but that is also because of the Tasmanian Devil. David is Tasmanian.

BLVR: Have you talked about what he will do with the footage?

CB: What I wish is that if there are thousands of hours, that they be made to go quick, speed them up to be faster than reality but with the possibility to stop the image. So sometimes you can catch me, sometimes you can’t.

BLVR: Then you will be as enigmatic as God.

CB: Perhaps. I’ve filled my whole life trying to preserve the memory of living, in the fight against dying. Perhaps the only thing I’ve done, since stopping death is impossible, is to show this fight. The fight itself does not satisfy us either. You go to my work, the mythology I created in Teshima, for example, where I’ve recorded the heartbeats of 80,000 people from different countries, some of them still alive, some of them not, and in this beautiful Japanese landscape, you stand with the heartbeats and feel only absence. 

When I die and this footage of my life is there, preserved, you will see me but you will feel my absence. We cannot really capture life. But for me it’s important to know that these works exist.

BLVR: You are good at the invisible. Is it sort of similar when you say that you never make art about the Holocaust? Because we feel that it’s there, floating inside everything that you do, carrying the souls of those dead and the ghosts of our collective past.

CB: I believe that at the beginning of the life of every artist there is some kind of trauma. We have a problem and all of our life we try to speak about this problem. My trauma was historical. When I was three or four, all the friends of my parents were survivors of the Holocaust; they spoke a lot about that. My father was hiding during the war, it was something totally present when I was a boy. It is sure that it has made me.

BLVR: It might be more powerful to speak of this trauma invisibly. 

CB: This is what is interesting about visual art. It is unfocused. Each person can see what they want to see in it. A table is a table, but an art table is a dog. Somebody can see a dog and somebody can see a table. It’s pretentious to say, but my art is like a little Zen story, a story with a question mark at the end. People can take from it what they need. If somebody says, “Your art is very funny,” I say, “You are totally right.” If somebody says, “Your art is very sad,” I say, “You are totally right.” In Japan they say, “Your art is very Japanese, you even look Japanese.Your great-grandfather was most surely a Japanese man.” And I say, “You are totally right.”

BLVR: I can see why every kind of person feels that they can appropriate you. Your subject is transpersonal; it impacts all of us. 

CB: Well, to die is very strange. You can know a lot of things, be very intelligent, and know where to buy the best cake. But if I kill you, you are a piece of shit. It’s a question that has no answer.

I work a lot with Swiss dead people because the Swiss are rich, they are very clean—and yet they die. It is very strange because they have no reason to die, but they die. Why? Why do we die even when there is no reason to die?

In science we see progress. In art there is no progress. In art the questions have always been the same. From the beginning of time till now, we are always asking the same questions. There are very few. We are looking for God, we are asking why we die, we are contemplating sex and the beauty of nature. The only thing that changes is that, in each period of questioning, we speak with the language of our time.

BLVR: What language would you say your death questions speak in?

CB: I was lucky to be born during the time of minimalism. I think I can be colder because of this. In form I speak with minimalism but my feeling is sentimental—I am a sentimental minimalist.

BLVR: Are you interested in nature or sex?

CB: Well, nature doesn’t interest me so much but I would like to ask questions about sex. 

BLVR: Why don’t you?

CB: I do. But every time I ask questions about sex, I always end up asking questions about death.

BLVR: Oh. That’s maybe a shame.

CB: Yes, you are totally right, it really is maybe a shame.

 image

Christian Boltanski’s Chance is on at Carriageworks, Sydney, through March 23rd, 2014.

Mona (Museum of Old and New Art)

Believer contributor Caia Hagel interviews artists, celebrities, demi-gods and monsters, in search ofthe sublime. Her personality profiles, travelogues, art talks and fictions appear here and there in magazines, on social media and TV networks internationally.

See more from this author.

The Case of S., or, the Metatextual Pleasure of Ergodic Works

image

A few months after reading Doug Dorst and J.J. Abrams’ S., I came across a line in Ruth Ozeki’s transporting novel, A Tale for the Time Being. A character is describing the handwriting in a stranger’s diary (that we, the audience, also read): “Although the color of the ink occasionally bled from purple to pink to black to blue and back to purple again, the writing itself never faltered…” I immediately thought back to S., its pages covered in the many different hues of Eric and Jen’s scribblings. Dorst and Abrams have spoiled me—now, when I read a diary passage or come across a letter in a text, I always want it to be reproduced in that character’s hand.

S. is a magnificent work of imaginative packaging. After one rips open the shrink-wrap, a seal still holds the novel within the slipcover. Break open the seal, slip out the book, and you’re presented with a book not called S. but instead titled Ship of Theseus, by one V.M. Straka, bound in an old-fashioned letterpress cover. A dewey decimal sticker on the spine is your first clue that this is a book meant to look as though it was pilfered from the library.

Once you finally open the book, and flip past the blank page stamped “Book for Loan,” you’re presented with the beginning of a written-in-the-margins conversation that flows through the entirety of the book. It’s the first storyline you’ll encounter. Jen and Eric, fellow discoverers of this book, started and continued their correspondence in these pages.

image

The pages of the book themselves are supposedly the final novel in the oeuvre of a mysterious author, V.M. Straka. They follow a man, the eponymous S., as he wakes up, devoid of any personal memories. He can speak, and walk, and write, but he cannot remember who he is, where he is, or what he was doing.

So that’s two storylines.

The third storyline appears in the translator’s footnotes, for it’s here you learn of V.M. Straka’s other works and life as political provocateur, possible assassin—endless fodder for conversation between Eric and Jen—and also, it’s where the book’s codes are alluded to, and a romance between the author and the translator seems to emerge. 

It should be noted here that there are a dozen or more other pieces of ephemera slipped between the pages. Postcards, cafe napkins with sketched maps, handwritten letters, photos, photocopies, newspaper clippings, and a codex are all placed inside the book at opportune moments for them to fall out.

image

That slipcover makes a lot of sense.

S. is just the most recent in a long line of ergodic literature, a form defined by Espen J. Aarseth as literature in which “nontrivial effort is required to allow the reader to traverse the text,” or, works that require more than just the reading and turning of pages. The oldest examples may be ancient Egypt’s walls of hieroglyphs that readers had to walk along to read. And more recently, Mark Z. Danielewski champions the form, his most celebrated work being House of Leaves, with its unconventional page layouts, mixed media, and maze-like text.  Just like S., House of Leaves’ text ebbs and flows, no preceding page promising the contents of a proceeding page.Dorst and Abrams might also have seen and been inspired by the Griffin and Sabine trilogy, by Nick Bantock. Bantock’s work compiles the postcards and art of two mysteriously connected strangers. Like S., the letters are actually included, opened from the envelopes glued to the page. Even more recently, the horror-mystery mash up novel Night Film by Marisha Pessl ended up a 2013 bestseller, which, along with some pages designed to look like articles on a website, goes so far as to suggest downloading a mobile app to unlock additional content.

But the outside of House of Leaves looks like a normal—if a little oversized—novel. Same goes for Night Film. And the three volumes of Griffin and Sabine, as noted, look like slim, 9×9 picture books that belong on a children’s bookshelf. S. is singular if only because the entire experience is curated, from the moment you swipe your letter-opener through the seal. It makes one wish that more novels were produced by filmmakers.

image

The inside of Griffin and Sabine

Last year at Symphony Space, Lena Dunham moderated a conversation between her, Doug Dorst and J.J. Abrams, supposedly about S., although just as much time was spent discussing Star Wars[1] and Star Trek. Dorst, who, it should be noted, wrote the book, the marginalia, the footnotes, and the ephemera (Abrams had the idea and seemed to act more as producer), mentioned that once he started adding layers, it became difficult to stop, “Every layer kept presenting itself as I was writing, and I didn’t have the good sense, really, to ever know when to stop with all the layering.” Sometimes, as a reader, you wish he did.

The actual nuts and bolts reading of S. is never as easy as turning the page and continuing from left to right, regular-book style, as ergodic literature demands. Instead, each turned page will have underlines and arrows. The pen colors that Eric and Jen use changes, denoting changes in time. Sometimes, a footnote refers to a different footnote. A postcard falls out, and it could be referred to by Jen and Eric on the page, or perhaps it’s just time to read it. The general rhythm of reading is continually interrupted—sometimes enhanced. At some points, the push and pull of the marginalia, text, and ephemera find a groove, like a jazz trio playing an old standard, and the wonderment sets in. When it doesn’t groove, however, it can really fall apart. Dorst’s writing never quite feels like the 1940s narration he’s trying to ape, and because every chapter is also a reference to a novel in Straka’s imagined work, it can feel like a collection of loosely connected short stories. Even the ephemera can sometimes disappoint—a napkin with a layout of underground tunnels proves to be unimportant in any of the many juggled storylines.

The questions without answers mount, and for those familiar with J.J. Abrams, it’s hard to trust that they ever will be answered. There is a mysterious island, after all (made of obsidian, though, not broken promises). The Ship of Theseus is both the ship’s name and a philosophical puzzle, not unlike some of the philosophers that shared their names with characters in Lost. Codes and numbers play special roles, as the text of the novel itself seems to be a code, and the translator is leaving a code of her own. 

The singular accomplishment of S. is that for all of the layers to poke through here, the book makes you want to poke through them. It is, perhaps, because the book is so assuredly put together, almost audacious in its commitment to its form. Some of the ink on Eric and Jen’s lines is smudged. The paper napkin with a map is actually a paper napkin. The photos are printed on glossy photo paper. All of it feels good to hold, and with all that thought put into the packaging of the words, it’s hard not to think that the words themselves contain something special—and so along with Jen and Eric, we dig. 

It’s disappointing, then, when the number of pages left is diminishing but answers aren’t coming. (I suppose I should admit that I never once used the codex, or tried to figure out any codes on my own, trusting that Jen and Eric would provide the answer. Which they almost always do.) For all the hemming and hawing the translator, Eric, and Jen all do on who actually wrote Straka’s books, it never feels very important. And, at times, S.’s fate falls out of interest, perhaps because his central mystery becomes a central metaphor. But I’m positive I didn’t find all the clues out there—only after I finished the book did I come across the websites that Jen and Eric allude to. And what’s with all those doodles in the back half?

Despite the mess, each time I returned to S. (as I did sometimes have to leave it, since it is not very good subway reading with all those little pieces), I was smiling and impressed by some new turn, some piece of the puzzle revealed. The backstory of Jen and Eric is particularly moving—their personal letters, when they arrive, provide incredible transporting moments, where their handwriting and their story and the narrative merge, and these are no longer just scribbling on a page, but real people, who held the book before you did. 

The back of S.’s slipcover is perhaps the one point in which the designers of the book faltered. Perhaps pushed by the publisher, it contains the summary and author biography that any book would have. It’s the only moment in which the facade is dropped, and the fact that this book was created by an author and a filmmaker is laid on the table.  However, it does have one revealing sentence – “[S.] is Abrams and Dorst’s love letter to the written word.” It’s true. This book is a love letter, and a gorgeous one, filled with passion, and the types of promises, possibly broken, that only someone who writes a love letter can make. 

One can only hope that more love letters like this are on the way, from anyone.

image

C.D. Hermelin is a creative writing graduate student at the New School. He currently lives in Brooklyn. Follow him on twitter @CDHermelin.

[1] Lena Dunham admitted that she had never seen Star Wars and Abrams acted as though he was about to leave.

An Interview with Mary Harron

The following is an excerpt from an interview with director Mary Harron that appears in this month’s film issue. The full piece is available to read on Believermag.com

THE BELIEVER: We should probably talk about American Psycho. It’s heralded as this great cult film, but that’s not the experience you had at the time, is it?

MARY HARRON: Five years after the film came out, I was shooting an episode of Six Feet Under and Susie Bright was on the set and she said she’d just seen American Psycho, and she asked me why it hadn’t gotten more attention. That was five years after it came out. It gets so much attention now that I’m bored with it, but it was only after five years that it got all this attention. There were a lot of YouTube parodies and Christian Bale became famous, which also helped.

BLVR: Many people say it would have been a much different film had it been shot by a man. You linger on the female faces, when a male director might not have. Were you conscious of that?

MH: It was a very conscious decision to play it off the faces of the women. That’s why I cast Cara Seymour, who is a great stage actress who could carry those scenes. Those scenes come through her face; most of the film focuses on him, but the perspective in those murder scenes wasn’t through Patrick Bateman but the women. That was a conscious choice.

BLVR: Were you nervous making that film, because the book was so controversial when it came out? What did you think it would do to your career?

MH: Yes, you can’t take on something like that without being a bit nervous. I’d already been through something like that. One of the things that allowed me to do it was having done I Shot Andy Warhol. I asked Guinevere Turner to come on—she had done the first big, successful lesbian film, Go Fish—so we knew that no one could lecture us about feminism. That gave us a lot of strength. We didn’t have to apologize or add some bullshit moral lesson to it. We felt we could trust our instincts and do what we thought was interesting.

BLVR: So many movies are so hypersexualized that even if the protagonist is a woman, the film is made from the male gaze. How did people react to American Psycho?

MH: Half the audience loved it. Half hated it. That, to me, was a good reaction, and an appropriate one.

BLVR: A lot of people talk about how with directing so much of the magic lies with casting. Leonardo DiCaprio was supposed to play the role of Patrick Bateman, is that right?

MH: I had already cast Christian Bale to play the role, and I was standing in my kitchen in the East Village, and I got a phone call saying, “You should sit down. Leonardo DiCaprio wants to be in your movie, and we’re going to pay him twenty million dollars.” I told them that was the stupidest thing I’d ever heard. He’s not right for the role, and he has a fifteen-year-old-girl fan base. You can’t cast him coming off Titanic. I think he’s a great actor, but he wasn’t right for it; Patrick Bateman is a very specific character. Christian Bale had something, an authority and a darkness, whereas DiCaprio is more of a poetic actor. Some actors can draw from their own darkness. Both Bale and Lili Taylor have this fathomless place in them; when you look at them you can go far into them. They can both play very saintly and very bad. I mean, Christian Bale played Jesus in something. Christian is also a great comic actor and he brought that to the role. We had a very similar take on the character. I think, being partly British, he thought the role of Bateman was funny and approached it with humor. He loved the patheticness of the character, how embarrassing Bateman was. Trying to be cool and failing so badly.

The Film issue is here! Featuring: Lili Anolik’s essay on Bret Easton Ellis’s The Canyons, Mike White interviewed by Toph Eggers, Fred Armisen in conversation with Carrie Brownstein, Mary Harron interviewed by Anisse Gross, a review of Tim Burton’s Batman, a poem about shark week, a DVD of short animated films by John and Faith Hubley, the shortlist for the Believer poetry and book awards, and more!

Read it: blvr.org/106

Buy it: blvr.org/buy106

Subscribe: blvr.org/subscribe

What’s inside:

The 2014 film issue’s bonus item is an exclusive DVD of short animated films by legendary animators John and Faith Hubley!

Selected Films of John and Faith Hubley, introduced by John Sayles

A Mind Forever Voyaging Through Strange Seas of Thought Alone introduced by Gideon Lewis-Kraus [Full Text]
An interview with filmmaker Mike Mills and a limited-time invitation to stream his new documentary online.

The Settlers by Katie Arnold-Ratliff 
A survey of Raison d’être dramedies, a micro genre of film dominated by the ennui and magical realism.

Animals Were Harmed in This Production by J. M. Tyree
An exploration of the roles animals play in cinema, using Robert Bresson’s Au hazard Balthazar and Robert J. Flaherty’s Nanook of the North as its guides.

Post-Empire Strikes Back by Lili Anolik [Full Text]

“Shark Week”: a new poem by Jennifer Willoughby [Full Text]

Mary Harron interviewed by Anisse Gross
Director Mary Harron talks about cinema, feminism, and the differences between Matt Damon and Christian Bale

Fred Armisen in conversation with Carrie Brownstein
The Portlandia stars chat about flip-flops, blondes, small deformities, and more.

What the Swedes Read by Daniel Handler

Stuff I’ve Been Reading by Nick Hornby

The Process by Carmen Winant

“Comics” edited by Alvin Buenaventura

Schema
A collection of original storyboard panels from the Hubley film, Of Stars and Men.

The Believer Book and Poetry Award Short Lists

Kleber Mendonça Filo’s Neighboring Sounds reviewed by Nicolas Rombes.

Tim Burton’s Batman Returns reviewed by Greg Kwik [Full Text]

Pillow of Air by Lawrence Weschler

Heba Thorisdottir interviewed by Kathryn Borel

Gordon Willis interviewed by Chris McCoy
A chat with legendary cinematographer Gordon Willis, the man responsible for the look of the Godfather films and Woody Allen’s Manhattan.

“A Camera Crew Films a Telenovel…”: a new poem by Traci Brimhall [Full Text]

Mike White interviewed by Toph Eggers
The actor and director talks about Enlightened and his creative process.

Real Life Rock and Roll Top Ten by Greil Marcus

Early sketches from Lisa Brown’s 29 Myths on the Swinster Pharmacy. This is part threeSee part one, part two.

There’s nothing about a little boy and girl in the text of the poem. But an illustrator gets to add stuff. It’s part of the job I added a boy and a girl because that’s what I always do. The girl is usually me (older, bossy) and the boy is a combo-version of my two younger brothers (annoying, eager). I made up the part about the girl being taller. I was, and am, smaller than everyone.

—Lisa Brown