I like Lorrie Moore’s short stories. That is, I like them
enough to read them when they come out in the New Yorker. I admit, I am not one
of the world’s big readers of short stories.
If they are not funny, like George Saunders when he was funny, I have a
tendency to begin with high hopes and invisible pats on the back (here I am,
fulfilling my cultural duty) followed by a tendency to peak ahead at other
articles, which engross me in I don’t know, some profile of a forgettable pop
singer, some crime story until I shake myself temporarily free of a text that I
know, rationally, holds a content as trivial at least as the short story
incident I have abandoned and return to characters that I have, in that brief
interval, forgotten to the extent that I have to begin over. What I am saying
here is that I am unfair to short stories.
But Lorrie Moore’s stories have such an easy flow that they
hold me, like a story about some celebrity will hold me – I am bonded to the
text by the lesser boredom of the text in contrast with the greater boredom
outside the text of other things to read or even, horrors, to do. It is in the
balance of boredoms that this little superannuated smartass, this me, shares the
Zeitgeist with all other readers of newspapers and magazines. Especially as
that balance of boredoms, now, is dispersed among the moronic inferno of the
internet, the twenty four seven access to the perpetually trivialized world in
which the sensational never really reaches the sensations at all. The
consumerist death of the nerve endings, y’all.
Anyway, to resume, so I picked up Lorrie Moore’s novel, A Gate
at the Stairs. I am not so far very happy with it. But I notice that Moore
sometimes needs to stumble around a bit at the beginning, so perhaps I will
persevere. What I want to write about here, though, is the narrator’s curious
habit of writing things like this:
“I had
come from Dellacrosse Central High, from a small farm on the old Perryville
Road, to this university town of Troy, “the Athens of the Midwest,” as if from
a cave, like the priest-child of a Colombian tribe I’d read about in Cultural
Anthropology…”
Perhaps
curious habit is the wrong way to get at what I find curious about this
sentence, which is the way that a learned, or least a bit learned allusion has
to be credentialed in American writing. You can’t just introduce a metaphor
taken from an anthropological text in a novel, apparently, in America without
immediately tracking it to its source in a classroom. For on no account are we
to think that there are characters out there in the American hinterlands so
bold and savage as to read “Cultural Anthropology” on their own, say in one of
the public libraries that every urb in America is equipped with.
If this
allusion had been to say the Sopranos, there would be no credential tracking
required. American characters are permitted to know about car types, sports
figures and tv shows without exculpatory information being provided as to just
how they know about these things. But of course, the American character doesn’t
come equipped, from birth, with knowledge of V-8 engines, the Dallas cowboys,
and Kim Kardashian. I think Moore’s gesture here – a gesture I fully recognize,
one I see made in numerous American novels – points us to the weather in our ‘meritocracy’.
The era of culture has long been liquidated in favor of the era of credentials.
There are the odd warriors out there who don’t accept this: for instance, Oprah
Winfrey, bless her heart, thought that one could simply pick up a Faulkner
novel and read it. Or at least read it in a book club (which mix, rather shamefacedly,
the classroom and the card club).
However,
the reader of Moore’s novel – Moore evidently thought – is not going to accept
the narrator throwing out allusions to Columbian peasants without some
explanation – otherwise, she wouldn’t be “real”. That is, she wouldn’t be
credentialed as real. In fact, she would be very real – you can go into, say,
the Austin library and look at Michael Taussig’s The Devil and Commodity
Fetishism in South America, which does indeed contain information about
Colombian peasants, and you will surely find out that it has been checked out
by people who are not taking courses in Cultural Anthropology at the University
of Texas.
I am not
taking the piss out of Lorrie Moore here, who only reflects the kind of
defensiveness that grows in a credentializing culture about “knowing” high
cultural things. What a relief to turn to entertainment, to drop the name
Michael Jackson or to crack wise about Metallica instead of, say, Thomas Mann!
The relentless tyranny of credentializing there takes the more perverse form of
fandom, with all of the secret contempt one has for the obsessive, the attendee
of sci fi or comic book cons, those who know all the lines from The Big
Lebowski, etc.
Still, I’ve
always been more on Ralph Ellison’s side, on the side of the Little Man at
Chehaw Station:
“All
right,” she said, “ you must always play your best, even if it’s only in the
waiting room at Chehaw Station, because in this country there will always be a
little man behind the stove.
“A what?|
She
nodded. “That’s right,” she said. “There’ll always be the little man whom you
don’t expect, and he’ll know the music, and the tradtion, and the standards of
musicianship required for whatever you set out to perform.”
Now, we blast a thousand holes through the little man’s
heart, we stuff his throat with SATs and grade point averages, we tell him that
we got an A in the class, we try to dance on his grave – but that little man
behind the stove is, I think, unkillable. Of course, I’m a romantic.
No comments:
Post a Comment