| Other People’s
Grief Jan Clausen Specimen
Days Michael Cunningham Farrar, Straus and Giroux,
$25 (cloth)
8
When I heard that Michael Cunningham had written a book in which
Walt Whitman presides over scenes set in New York City in three
different eras—Whitman’s own day, the approximate
present, and a late 21st century whose human population shares
the sidewalks with intelligent life from another planet—I
got excited at the prospect of watching him hold our poet-father’s
feet to the fire. Moved as I am when reading “Song of Myself”
or “Crossing Brooklyn Ferry” by Whitman’s direct
address to posterity, at the same time I want to upbraid him,
not so much for his outrageous optimism as for his blockheaded
assumption that generations to come will be able to share it.
Thus, I looked to Cunningham’s novel to portray Whitman’s
reactions at seeing the adolescent democracy on which he had pinned
his extravagant hopes evolve into the senile hegemon whose “boots
on the ground” bestride our new millennium.
By bringing Whitman’s legend and his texts into a book
titled Specimen Days (after a volume of incidental prose compiled by
the poet near the end of his life), Cunningham seems at first glance
to be attempting to replicate the blend of canonical tribute,
biomythography, and clever social observation that made his Pulitzer
Prize–winning The Hours an echo chamber of eerie satisfactions.
And Specimen Days does offer a new edition of the trompe l’oeil
effects of The Hours, achieved through an artful arrangement of
arbitrary-seeming actions and images that repeat throughout several
narrative threads. The writing ranges from deft to gorgeous,
displaying Cunningham’s talent for coming up with compelling
lyrical images and splendidly unexpected details.
But Specimen
Days is not The Hours II. In contrast to the somber, fugue-like
unity of the earlier book, this one is more like an experimental
purée of tofu, capers, and raspberry sauce. And it is far more
ambitious in scope, nearly breaking out of the imperial cocoon that
makes “the way we live now”—i.e., how middle-class individuals
conduct their private lives—the compulsory focus of mainstream
American fiction.
I read Cunningham’s panoramic timescape, and in
particular his projection of a coming era shaped by a devastating
technological glitch (“the meltdown”), as a response to
existential anxieties that have been seeping into the cultural
groundwater since at least the bombing of Hiroshima and are now
resurgent, though often obscured. It is one of the chief mysteries of
our cultural life that the disasters of the past few years have not
pushed more literature to revisit that blunt Cold War question:
suppose we’re on the verge of the ultimate mistake, the one that
will do our species in?
That Cunningham addresses this issue while
repudiating the paranoia that typically projects our own destructive
potential onto some Evil Other is a virtue not to be sneezed at. For
example, he slyly imagines a post-9/11 New York stalked by terror in
the form of suicide attacks carried out by discarded American
children.
Yet the book is dissatisfying. The problems start with
Whitman, who, unlike Virginia Woolf in The Hours, gets only a walk-on
part. As if to compensate, his words are everywhere, slathered over
the surface of Cunningham’s narrative in sound bites recited by
holy fools and lyrical androids. Cunningham seems to want us to think
of Whitman’s poetry as a sort of American common text, a wellspring
of shared meaning as the Bible once was for Anglo-American settlers.
Instead, the snippets take on a fetishistic ring—a jarring
dislocation of the poet of long lines, who typically built up his
effects through layered connections and intricate parallels. This is
not Whitman channeled, but Whitman channel-surfed.
There is more to
be said about which Whitman or Whitmans Cunningham has chosen—one
drawback of being a multitude-container is the ease with which your
readerscan cherry-pick—but first it makes sense to look at the
novel’s overall design. Each of its three sections tells the story
of a (mostly platonic) threesome, made up of characters named Lucas,
Simon, and Catherine/Cat/Catareen. Each Lucas is a deformed,
precocious boy; each Simon is a hunk; the variant Catherines are
courageous, maternal beauties. The theme of their interactions is
always sacrifice, and each story climaxes with a scene that the
trailer for the superfluous movie version will surely label a
“triumph of the human spirit.” Each story is told from a single
character’s point of view.
In the opening section, “In
the Machine,” that character is “pumpkin-headed” Lucas, an
impoverished Irish immigrant whose stigmata are accompanied by a
verbatim recall of much of Whitman’s masterwork. This section is
essentially static, a dream world of terrible, beautiful images:
Lucas tending the metal-stamping machine that killed his older
brother; burning women perched on high window ledges before leaping
to their deaths near Union Square. Though “In the Machine” takes
place in the 19th century, the episode of the burning women evokes
the notorious Triangle Shirtwaist factory fire of 1911, while looking
forward to our own 9/11—a reframing as ingenious and suggestive as
the later image of homegrown suicide bombers.
Cunningham’s
immigrants are still haunted by Old World trauma, sleepwalking
through the daily nightmare of classic wage slavery. Here is Lucas,
worn out by his brutal industrial job, trying to tend his ill and
addled father:
He cooked the egg and boiled the cabbage,
and set a plate before his father. He was seized by an urge to take
his father’s head in his hands and knock it sharply against the
table’s edge, as Dan did with his machine at the works, knocking it
when it threatened to seize up, ringing his wrench against its side.
Lucas imagined that if he tapped his father’s head against the wood
with precisely the correct force he might jar him back to himself. It
would be not violence but kindness. It would be a cure. He laid one
hand on his father’s smooth head but only caressed it.
Here Cunningham’s compassionate vision merges physical
experience and fantasy to give specific weight and shape to a
character’s inner life, laying bare the emotional logic behind
thoughts and actions that might otherwise seem bizarre.
However, my suspended disbelief abruptly resumes when Lucas
develops an idée fixe (the dead, including his brother, live on
inside machines) whose obvious symbolism makes Lucas seem like the
author’s pawn. The boy destroys himself—literally feeds his body
to the machine—to save Catherine, who was his brother’s
sweetheart and is now pregnant with the dead man’s child.
Lucas’s death seems overdetermined, the product of
vicious historical conditions (the Irish famine, exploitative
industry); of mental unbalance (which runs in his family); and of the
novel’s need for an apotheosis of Whitman’s vision. It is hard to
decide how we are meant to connect these levels of meaning, and
eclectic formal choices in the novel’s middle and closing sections
only intensify the puzzle.
In part two, “The Children’s
Crusade,” we leave the slow-moving dream for a
plot-and-dialogue-driven detective novel. Less a character than a
genre convention, Cat is a plucky detective haunted by personal
tragedy. Like Irish Lucas, she is “other”: not only a female cop,
but black. Her decision to attempt the rescue of one of the child
bombers gives readers the never-to-be-exhausted pleasure of
identifying with the deserving underdog’s personal
solution:
He [the rescued child] had ended her life and
taken her into this new one, this crazy rebirth, hurtling forward on
a train into the vast confusion of the world, its simultaneous and
never-ending collapse and regeneration, its rock-hard little
promises, its owners and workers, its sanctuaries that never endured,
that were never meant to endure. To die is different from
what any one supposes, and luckier. The child kept smiling his
murderous smile. Cat smiled back.
Part three,
“Like Beauty,” transports us to yet another genre universe, a
curiously retro-tinged science-fiction future with overtones of
Margaret Atwood (a brush with a loutish bunch of fundamentalists
recalls The Handmaid’s Tale), William Gibson (dystopia bears traces
of utopias gone by) and Samuel Delany (multiculturalism figured as
intimacy between lizard-like aliens and humans echoes Stars in My
Pocket Like Grains of Sand). There’s even a touch of Frankenstein
in “simulo” Simon’s search for the father figure who fused his
cell lines with his circuitry. As in “The Children’s Crusade,”
the plot machine hums along; the conceit that Simon’s maker has
programmed him to be in Denver on a specific date is no sillier than
many a pretext for a literary road trip.
Cunningham playfully
comments on the pileup of hoary tropes through his choice of vehicle
for Simon and his companion, the alien Catareen. Together with a
sidekick named Lucas, they travel in “an ancient Winnebago covered
in faded decals that depicted guns, fish, and mammals.” “Like
Beauty” pointedly rejects the usual ambition of speculative
fiction: to offer an original glimpse of a possible future. But what,
then, is the point?
Whatever the intent, the effect is
emphatic reassurance that the future will not be new. It holds no
terrors we have not already been exposed to and will require no
innovative formal strategies. The mechanical maw that swallowed
19th-century Lucas is simply domesticated in the person of Simon, who
at one point, in one of Cunningham’s better satirical forays, has a
job impersonating really rough trade so tourists can enjoy the
nostalgic thrill of getting mugged in Central Park. Simon’s vigil
at the bedside of the dying Catareen, which is movingly written,
proves that machines have feelings too.
Whereas the classics
of speculative fiction evoked in “Like Beauty” portray the human
future as a dicey proposition, Simon-the-simulo’s story invites us
to believe that there will always be a safety net. Intelligent,
feeling life will endure and prevail, even as people morph into
cyborgs or engender half-lizard offspring.
* * *
A
derivative of the notion that blood is thicker than water animates
Cunningham’s fiction. This at first seems surprising given his
fondness for portraying refugees from standard patriarchal
arrangements. On close inspection, however, his post-1960s domestic
coalitions of disaffected straight women, homosexuals, and other
“others” (artists, the mentally ill, the racially stigmatized)
emerge as advertisements for rock-solid alternative family
values.
Gay readers have sometimes reproached
Cunningham for letting down the side by not writing more specifically
for a gay audience. Although I do not think any writer’s
imagination ought to be limited by identity politics, I confess to
nursing a related disappointment: I keep wanting Cunningham’s work
to be queer, and it’s just not. His characters, for all their
discontent, do not desire revolution. Although three of his novels
register the traumatic effects of HIV/AIDS, none of the protagonists
reaches the outraged conclusion of David Wojnarowicz in his
blistering AIDS memoir Close to the Knives: “When I was told that
I’d contracted this virus it didn’t take me long to realize that
I’d contracted a diseased society as well.” Cunningham’s
misfits—sexual and otherwise—seem to ask plaintively, “Can’t
we all just get along?” And when the answer comes back no, they
light out for the territory, a polluted yet idealized realm that
appears in many guises: “five miles out of Woodstock,” Death,
Florida, Art, California, or another solar system.
This motif of
escape obscures but cannot totally eclipse the novels’ apprehension
of a dark kernel of grief at the center of things, an apprehension
distilled in some of Cunningham’s most successful lyrical writing:
the half-chosen drowning death of Ben in Flesh and Blood, Lucas’s
dream world of industrial servitude in Specimen Days, and the eerily
tender portrayal of Virginia Woolf’s suicide in the opening section
of The Hours:
She comes to rest, eventually, against one
of the pilings of the bridge at Southease. The current presses her,
worries her, but she is firmly positioned at the base of the squat,
square column, with her back to the river and her face against the
stone. . . . Some distance above her is the bright, rippled
surface. The sky reflects unsteadily there, white and heavy with
clouds, traversed by the black cutout shapes of rooks. . . . Her
face, pressed sideways to the piling, absorbs it all.
It is
the subtle way in which this passage deploys point of view that,
together with its physical clarity, creates its emotional impact. The
image is one of effacement, yet Virginia Woolf’s face—the emblem
of personality, of individual consciousness—is still receptive,
still an “interface” with the world. The quintessential subject,
the artist-observer, has become the observed without being
objectified. Life and death communicate through a semi-permeable
membrane.
Point of view is perhaps behind my unease with how
Cunningham handles his darker promptings elsewhere. From A Home at
the End of the World to Specimen Days, the novels are narrated from
multiple points of view, but are almost always tightly bound to a
single center of consciousness within a given chapter or section.
This technique functions as a modern substitute for old-fashioned
omniscience: the meaning is in the whole, and God is whoever grasps
it. But unlike the older technique, which imposes a burden of
responsible commentary on the omniscient narrator, Cunningham’s
approach shuns explicit conclusions. It creates an illusion of a
level playing field, with characters’ thoughts and actions left to
speak for themselves.
Without a central voice helping us to decide
what weight should be assigned to these different perspectives,
Cunningham leaves us with many questions. Even powerful passages
depicting death and dying hang suspended like lumps in cake batter;
these events cannot be processed by the surviving
characters—neither dismissed nor articulated. While there is a
sense in which we do experience deaths as indigestible lumps,
successful writing helps us out, gives us a formal mechanism for
addressing, however provisionally, the emotional stalemate. By
habitually shifting the point of view to relatively buoyant
survivors, Cunningham makes it difficult to decide how much attention
we should pay to those darker intimations. Death, from this narrative
stance, is always someone else’s death.
The Hours is an exception
to this rule, as the passage about Virginia Woolf’s body
illustrates; the centrality of Virginia Woolf’s fictionalized
character helps supply clarity, as does the way in which her
mortality-steeped fiction haunts Cunningham’s text. In Specimen
Days, however, the many images of death—Lucas’s sacrifice; the
burning, leaping garment workers; the ravaged and polluted continent;
Catareen’s lonely end—are viewed from a distant place in which no
loss need be grieved too bitterly, for there will always be a next
time.
The materials are tragic. The treatment is
not. * * *
I have said somewhere that the
three Presidentiads preceding 1861 show’d how the weakness
and wickedness of rulers are just as eligible here in America
under republican, as in Europe under dynastic influences. But
what can I say of that prompt and splendid wrestling with secession
slavery, the arch-enemy personified, the instant he unmistakably
show’d his face? The volcanic upheaval of the nation, after
that firing on the flag at Charleston . . . will remain as the
grandest and most encouraging spectacle yet vouchsafed in any
age, old or new, to political progress and democracy.
—Walt Whitman, Specimen Days
Crazy, Simon thought. They’re all crazy. Though of
course the passengers on the Mayflower had probably been like this,
too: zealots and oddballs and ne’er-do-wells, setting out to
colonize a new world because the known world wasn’t much interested
in their furtive and quirky passions. It had probably always been
thus, not only aboard the Mayflower but on the Viking ships; on the
Niña, Pinta, and Santa María . . . It was nut jobs. It was
hysterics and visionaries and petty criminals.—Michael
Cunningham, Specimen Days
Specimen Days by Walt
Whitman was conceived, its author boasts, as the “most wayward,
spontaneous, fragmentary book ever printed.” The fragments include
an autobiographical sketch outlining his family’s farming roots on
Long Island, notes on his informal but arduous service as a
morale-booster to the wounded and dying in army hospitals during the
Civil War, and impressions of nature recorded during his own
convalescence from a stroke. Whitman offers his “common individual
New World private life” as a unique but representative
“specimen” of American experience in the mid-19th century. He
finds his political vision incarnated in the beautiful bodies and
vigorous psyches of the common man, repeatedly evoking an eroticized
republic of ferrymen, “stage-drivers,” and heroic Union grunts:
“I found them full of gayety, endurance, and . . . the most
excellent good manliness of the world. . . . I never before so
realized the majesty and reality of the American people en masse.”
He likewise praises the body of the continent itself (at one point
thrilling to a scheme to fill the Great Plains with forests). There
are times during his 1879 railroad trip out west when his rhapsodic
bulletins shade into press releases for Manifest
Destiny.
Despite their parallel upbeat rhetoric,
the temperamental and philosophical dissimilarity between Whitman’s
eccentric text and Cunningham’s pastiche can hardly be overstated.
For one thing, as the passage about the Civil War quoted above
illustrates, the first Specimen Days takes history seriously.
Whitman’s optimism fed on the belief that American democracy
signaled lasting progress for humanity as a whole—not because he
ever dreamed America would spread “freedom” at gunpoint, but
because he thought government for and by the people would confront
tyranny with the threat of a good example. He saw the Civil War as a
just if terrible conflict, both because it ended slavery and because
it vindicated the union on which he staked his hopes for society. As
much as he admired independence of spirit, he knew full well that
“furtive and quirky passions” need translating into democratic
structures. I can’t believe he would applaud Cunningham’s
instinct to answer the terrifying prospect of our shrinking liberties
and expanding imperial reach by simply changing the point of view.
Although its structure enacts a message of eternal recurrence,
Cunningham’s Specimen Days reflects received notions of the
nation’s upward-trending destiny. The past is full of hardship,
its immigrant masses toiling just to stay alive; the present is a
bewildering marketplace in which individuals freed from obsolete
strictures (of gender and race, for instance) navigate a blurry
landscape of threats and opportunities; the future is wide open and
the cheeriest time period of the three. The continent’s squandered
environmental and political inheritance notwithstanding, it will
always be Morning in America:
He would ride west, [Simon] thought.
He would ride to California. He would ride in that direction.
He and the horse might die of starvation or the sun. They might
be attacked by nomads and zealots. Or they might get to the
Pacific. They might go all the way to the far edge of the continent
and stand on a beach before what he imagined to be a restive,
infinite blue. Assuming of course that the ocean was still untainted. Though a pristine ocean seems unlikely given
what we’ve been told about the devastated heartland, Simon’s plan
seems less naive than Cunningham’s omission of global warming from
his vision of the late-21st-century landscape. In effect, he has
roused our fear that the “procreant urge” Whitman admired in the
world may prove to be no match for our destructive habits only to
beguile us with a tale as affably irrelevant as Ronald Reagan’s
fond belief that a nuclear missile launched in error could be
recalled.
In this scheme, which I’m
afraid all too accurately reflects most Americans’ insensitivity
to our predicament, death still happens to other people, not to
us. I’ll say it again: the materials are tragic. <
Jan Clausen's
most recent book is a memoir, Apples and Oranges: My Journey
through Sexual Identity.
Originally published in the November/December
2005 issue of Boston Review
|