Sunday, December 12, 2021

Advent 2021, Dec 12, Sarah Minor: The Greatest Nature Essay Ever


After Brian Doyle

THE GREATEST 
NATURE ESSAY EVER


. . . WOULD BE AN ESSAY about death. About the sins of every father who forgot his maker’s name. The opening scene would describe a stag in his prime. The stag has come to teach the children about sex. About viability and forest fires, anticipation and mystery, sperm and egg. We are watching Bambi on the living room floor when a gunshot silences the forest and takes mother away. The children’s eyes are wide. Mother here is her regular conduit; a plot device, a motivational hole. 


The second paragraph would engage our senses. In the air, the smell of a rotten horse polluting the writer’s local stream. Or perhaps it is autumn and all around us is the flavor of death’s crisp accrual. Death, we know, happens mostly in nature, to plants and birds. Not to Justices on screen with first names for last names, like a pope. Death, they know, is natural, though ideally preventable, but also legal whenever it is conducted as justice in the form of a plural, national revenge. Inside the essay is a story and inside the story we can just make out something else, crouching low. 

 

The next two paragraphs would get a little crass. The essay would show us a near future, where the brittle song of the 7-year cicada is getting drowned out by a parade. In the street below, women who were paid to have their aborted tissues harvested walk hand in hand with patients who survived heart disease by taking a drug built with fetal stem cells, the drug prescribed to most supreme court justices. The greatest nature essay would eventually liken Kavanaugh’s crying face to a rutabaga with a specificity that would stop our breath. Or the essayist would recall “eating Plan B for breakfast” with her girlfriends, paying in cash at the clinic down from the high school. Or the essay would feature a close-reading of the moment in The Daily’s coverage of the 2021 Roe hearings, when the line before the first commercial break—“…and then the conservative views came into focus"—was followed directly by an ad for Exxon Mobile’s carbon capture program. We had almost forgotten this was a nature essay. That Nature is the god every state aims to play, the higher power AA describes. In the background, in the kid’s shows, Mother dies and dies.


The next paragraph would slow us down with a scene. Syntax is emotion, and in any great nature essay the details on the page, passing as quickly or slowly as they passed in life, carry all the emotion we’re going to get. Now the sentences go long, short, long. Three “escorts” in matching rainbow vests sit in front of a pink clinic where they are rhythmically spritzed with holy water by the women marching along the sidewalk, holding a poster featuring the mangled body of a one-year-old child. The baby is white, the baby is the audience; the baby cannot die. Traffic passes close by and every time the clinic’s automatic doors swish open, two men dressed as giant infants in diapers wail and shake pastel rattles. 


The perfect nature essay is quite short. You can feel it narrowing. Nine inches, fifteen calendar weeks. Maybe that’s cheap. The essay leaves us wanting. But then the essayist asks you a question. Plenty of time to decide. A breath, a bridle, a breakthrough bleed, forty hours, a feature film, a semester's leave. "What’s the question?" you ask, but time is running out. The crouching thing moves back to the dark; now the essay can return to that smart, backlit stag. The greatest nature essay ever would compare nature to a shaft of light. Or nature to a bee sting. Nature, a comet. Nature like a gong. Nature burnt rubber. Nature trails a string of lube. Nature wakes with a “hot and ready” sign on her forehead. Nature wearing gel polish. Nature, a park view. Nature, AFAB. Nature lining the tarmac. Nature, Poleo Chino. Nature, Pennyroot. Nature bears her father’s child. Nature on Mars. Nature on T. Nature: Jaundice and thrush. Nature a stench, an oiled gull, a traffic cone. Nature via metaverse. Nature, my surname. Nature, justifiable homicide. Nature dead doctors. Nature puke green. Nature a clothesline. Nature a vacuum. Nature a medical hose. Whatever the image, the essay’s last paragraph would teach us what the great nature essays do: That fine details reach the broadest audiences. Not because truths are “universal,” or because most readers have walked into a grim, pink clinic, or smelled a neighbor’s horse, dead in the creek, but because to live anything is to live it by the details. We have turned again to the nature essay, not for a choke of hope or for the life that could have been, but to be reminded of what it feels like to be present with living as it happens. The essay almost brushed our hand, but then it pulled back suddenly. A relief that reminds us of our tenuous presence, our particular strangeness, leaving a coppery-sadness like autumn behind.






1. The writer Catherine Lacey says, "Syntax is emotion."
2. Brian Doyle wrote "the perfect nature essay is quite short" as a denouement to the original essay.
3. During the 2021 Roe hearings, Justice John Roberts suggested that 15 weeks is "plenty of time to decide."
4. During the 2021 Roe hearings, Justice Sonia Sotomayor described the "stench" of a certain politics the court might not survive. 
5. "Justifiable Homicide" was coined by Paul Hill, who shot and killed Dr. John Britton and James Barrett outside a women's clinic in 1994. The phrase was later adopted in the language of a 2011 anti-abortion bill proposed in South Dakota. 



Sarah Minor is the author of Bright Archive (Rescue Press), and Slim Confessions: The Universe as a Spider or Spit (Noemi Press). She currently teaches at the University of Iowa’s Nonfiction Writing Program. Find her online at www.sarahceniaminor.com and on twitter at @sarahceniaminor


Saturday, December 11, 2021

Advent 2021, Dec 11: Mo Daviau, In the Trance Room



IN THE TRANCE ROOM

by MO DAVIAU


Five years and change after leaving an abusive relationship that, for better or worse, has irrevocably altered my brain chemistry, I quit going to therapy. Talk therapy works for a while, but it has its limitations. Talking about what happened and how I felt no longer alleviated my pain and shame and confusion and anxiety. 
     On the advice of a friend, I start seeing a shaman. Her shaman. A white man who is a shaman. 
     Yeah, I know. That's some white people shit right there.
     I have nothing to lose; talking about who did what and why and how it messed up my mind has lost its clinical efficacy, and I figure the only healing modality left to try is magic. I go to my friend’s shaman. His name is Eric and he practices a South American lineage of shamanic healing in his office in a fancy neighborhood in Portland, Oregon. His work promises to unravel the trauma that lives in my body. There would be spirits to cast out, but mostly, the idea is that trauma lives as a cluster at one’s solar plexus—a jumbled heap of wires and ribbons made of energy—and journeying through my body would ease trauma’s hold on me. He adds that Americans, as a culture, do not maintain relationships with the dead, and that I should enter a trance state and call upon my ancestors for help. So I do. I ask my grandparents, two of whom died very, very young, to come and speak to me.
     Amid a cloud of palo santo smoke, I lay on Eric's futon, preparing to welcome the spirit of one of my ancestors into our practice. In my altered state, I find myself sitting at a bar in another era—I don't know what year it is, but it isn't one that I have lived through. There is smoke and when the smoke clears, I see that I am in a saloon with mirrors on the wall behind the bottles of liquor. I wish for it to be my grandfather who shows up to have words with me. Some closure, as he was an ancestor I knew in this life. But no. It was Zelia Daviau Grondin, born in 1892, murdered the day before Halloween in 1913, who bellied up to the bar that day and tapped me on the shoulder. Zelia, so young, her Wilson Administration-era bun a mess.
     Help! she says.
     Help? Help who?
     Eric sprinkles my face with Florida water as a steady drumbeat pours out of his computer speakers. He makes a clicking noise with his tongue while holding my forehead down on the futon.
     I quickly sit up with my nose full of tears and snot and ask Eric for a tissue.
     I wonder who it is who really needs help.

My paternal grandmother, Zelia (how did it sound to say it in French?) is sixteen-years-old when she marries John H. Grondin in their hometown of Waterville, Maine. Grondin is twenty-two and holds a job as an undertaker at the town funeral home, as evidenced by a document I find in the Kennebec County registry that shows that in 1910, the year my father was born, he pays the state his $5 embalmer’s license fee.
     Although my father never spoke of his parents during our brief time together (he was sixty-five when I was born, I was sixteen when he passed), he did share with my mother that he knew that his grandparents, who adopted my father and his older brother after the murder, begged their daughter not to marry his father. During a time in which marriage was expected, honored, and necessary for a woman’s economic survival, one would surmise that a marriage proposal from a man who wasn’t flat broke was something, but there is some really bad handwriting on the wall with John Grondin, my paternal grandfather, whose name is not my name.
     The Daviau family owned the pharmacy in Waterville. They were a family of means, with a large house and ten children who ate well every night, who sent their boys to Colby College and law and medical schools. Waterville in the 1900s was a small town where the French Catholic families knew each other quite well. That there was precedence to believe that John Grondin would have made an unsafe husband for any woman, and that someone would be so bold to say it out loud, had to have meant that there was something uneasy about him. Something intuitive and unsettling. And something that was alluring to sixteen-year-old Zelia, who couldn’t see what her parents did. Or was too in love to notice or care. I don't know if there was language for what we might call creepy in Quebecois French in 1908, but maybe it would have helped someone if they could name what they saw.
     While I have never seen a photograph of John Grondin, I do have a studio portrait of teenage Zelia, colorized, her hair flecked with golden strands, her skin a perfect, pale porcelain. It’s hard to see a grandmother in a photograph of a teenager. I look for the girl who was defiant, who ran off and married a man her parents disliked, and I can’t tell if she chose to marry him because she wasn’t going to let anyone not let her have the man she wanted, or if the man in question was in control and she, quite simply, was not.

I can’t blame Zelia for falling in love with an unstable, dangerous man. I did the same, exactly one hundred years after the man she loved turned up the gas lights and blew out the flame so that gas would fill the room and asphyxiate her. She was literally gaslighted. I was just gaslighted in the modern, metaphorical way. John Grondin must have been so bright and shiny in her eyes. Of the few people who know this story, or the uncountable stories that are very similar, the fact that she was so young when she married him and therefore couldn’t have known any better comes up and I bite back: I was not young when it happened to me. I was thirtyfuckingeight.
     Bright and shiny doesn’t fade with age. Mistakes don’t suddenly stop being made because you are pushing forty and have been to therapy.
     But maybe it was written into my DNA that one hundred years hence, this couple's youngest-by-a-lot granddaughter finds the dangerous but sparkly man that no one has the guts to warn me about, whose evil I only see with my own eyes when it is too late, and fall way too in love, and lose myself, quite possibly forever. They say that we are genetically more similar to our grandmothers than our mothers. And this, another affirmation: like having brown hair and being tall, you were genetically vulnerable to evil men. It was in your blood to do as your grandmother did.
     Whether or not this is true doesn’t matter. It’s a comfort. It’s solidarity with a ghost. It's an answer to the problem. It's a dodge, too. This attraction is epigenetic and therefore fated. 
     My grandfather tried to kill Zelia at least twice, that made it to the record of the courts. Once, in Portland, Maine, (there are records that indicate that they moved around Maine several times) and then a year later, after he had moved Zelia and their two sons to Los Angeles, where he ultimately succeeded in killing his wife, with his son, my father, then two years old, in her arms.
     How would he have done it in my era of electrical lights, I wonder?
     Their generation of Catholics didn’t divorce. Ruffling the clergy was a greater sin than cranking up the gas.
     Or maybe he would have just messed with her head. Got her committed to a mental asylum. Got her sent away, with the whole world believing she was some lunatic who didn’t deserve anyone’s love.

Many of the records of The State of Maine vs. John H. Grondin can be found in a simple Google search, and after communing with the dead Zelia Daviau in the shaman’s office that day, I went home and googled and came across the court brief in a book of Maine legal proceedings. 
     What I know:
John Grondin made at least two attempts on Zelia’s life, that made it to the Maine court system.
     In early 1913, John Grondin moved his wife and two sons from Maine to Los Angeles. Nobody knows why. It might have crossed the minds of Zelia’s parents that they may never see her again.
     On October 30, 1913, John Grondin turned up the gas jets in the room where Zelia slept. My father was also sleeping in the room, but he survived.
     John Grondin produced a suicide letter allegedly written by Zelia that the court tossed out as a forgery. The only quoted content from the letter that exists was quoted in the New York Times, stating that she had allegedly killed herself so that Grondin could “be with the woman who truly loved him.”
     There it was. She knew there was another woman. 
     While Grondin was eventually arrested and extradited back to Maine, in the weeks following Zelia’s death, his mistress, a Mrs. Derocher, left Waterville, Maine, and traveled to California to see him.
     Wait—a mistress? Who was married? Who somehow got out to California from Maine in the era before commercial air travel?
     John Grondin arranged for a detective posing as a priest to coerce a confession of infidelity out of my grandmother, who had been drugged to the point of illness for the occasion. This is the most twisted, bonkers detail of my grandfather’s mission to get rid of my grandmother. Or maybe it isn’t. Certainly abusers enlist friends and family to help gaslight their victims. But how brazen it was for him to hire someone to do this dirty work? And how easy it must have been to spin the story of Zelia as the one who was committing adultery?
     In spite of all this, the jury ultimately declared her death a suicide, and John Grondin walked free.
     Without my shamanic journey and visit with Zelia’s spirit, I would not know this part of the story: that John Grondin had a mistress. She was in on killing my grandmother. She had to have known about the effort and the theatrics and the fucked up-ness that went into eliminating the mother of his children so that they could finally be together. Just as The Abuser had a woman who was in on killing me, albeit metaphorically, and who lapped up whatever romantic tales he told her as to why she was better than me, who helped him mess with my head.

I find a register of citizens of Waterville, Maine, in the 1910s online. There are six women in Waterville, Maine, who are married to men named Derocher then, and though her first name does not appear in the surviving court records, according to the records I can access, I take a guess that the Mrs. Derocher I’m looking for is Rose Derocher, who died only a few years after Zelia’s murder. She had two children, too. I can never know what propelled Mrs. Derocher into John Grondin’s arms and all the way across the country, feeling very romantic about the gas and the fake priest and the poison and the four children who were being abandoned in this scenario, for she believed that he loved her better. The Waterville records say she died in 1920 of whatever communicable disease was going around at the time. And maybe that’s true, or maybe my grandfather got away with murder twice.
     According to an article that ran in the New York Times on January 26, 1914, “Grondin’s counsel said that shortly after he was arrested last night he was taken by detectives into a darkened room, where the ‘ghost’ appeared and demanded in gloomy tones, ‘Why did you murder me?’ I imagine this recording being a scratchy Victrola of a distant, spooky female voice, chanting “why did you do it? Why did you kill me?” 
     I try not to get hung up on the antique technology that made this bizarre moment of jurisprudence possible. But I do get a little hung up on why the prosecution thought that this move was a way to get a confession out of him. Insofar as anyone in my family had anything to say about John Grondin, the story there was that he was crazy. Zelia was a beautiful young victim, Grondin was a violent nutjob, and their two little boys suffered the consequences. Was he muttering things about ghosts? Was he acting remorseful? Was he acting crazy to get out of a prison sentence? My mother seems to remember hearing from my dad’s family that John Grondin spent a chunk of his life in a mental institution, but I can’t find any proof of that. 
     In the aftermath of my abusive relationship, I join a couple of online abuse survivor support groups. We would compare notes—mostly what unimaginably awful things our exes had done, what meds we were put on to calm PTSD symptoms, and reports that our abusers had moved very quickly onto new women, and how all of them, to a person, were all over social media declaring their gooey, fated, brilliant, unstoppable love.


Eric the Shaman places a framed photo of the late Mexican singer Chavela Vargas, a haunting chanteuse who was a lover of Frida Kahlo's, next to the futon in his office. He tells me he will be calling in her spirit during our session. Vargas turned her pain into great art, and he knows that was what I did, too: take the darkness the world hands to me and turn it into novels and essays and the occasional interview-format podcast. He also warned me that her spirit had been known to cause other female clients to develop sexual attraction to women.
     "Sounds great!" I say and give my enthusiastic consent to be made gay by the spirit of Chavela Vargas. (Note: regrettably, it doesn't work.)
     The truth is, I'm scared to call in the one ancestor that I really don't want to hear from: my father. 
     Ghosty, spiritual people tell me that he is always with me. That he watches me. An intuitive counselor once called in his spirit in one of our sessions without warning me first. She told me that he watched over me, that he had told her to tell me that he thought I was the most beautiful creature he had ever seen and had become a wise and wonderful woman and he was so proud of me. I sobbed unbearably for a week afterwards.
     My father cannot give his blessing for me to tell the story of his parents, except maybe in this magic trance space. The pain and stigma attached to it compelled him to lie about it for the entirety of his life, but it's a story that I glom onto to soothe my own pain. Abuse is in my lineage in every direction. If I can see it and name it, and have others see it and name it, then I am not the crazy, desperate, pathetic girl that my abuser wants people to think I am. 
     Under the guidance of Eric and Chavela Vargas, I do not meet with my father in a trance. I do not see Zelia, or my maternal grandmother. I don't see John Grondin, though a year later, I will travel to Waterville to try to hunt down his grave in the Catholic cemetery. 
     In fact, I do not go into a trance at all. I lie on Eric's futon as he chants and clicks and I appreciate the effort. I enjoy my sessions with him, but making contact with the dead feels invasive. I feel a little better when I walk out afterwards, into Portland's anemic sun, to the quiet space of my car, where I sit for a minute or two before I return to my regular life and its attendant sadness and unease. I try to hold in my head a little longer the magic, even if it isn't real. 


*


It's a little presumptuous of me to think I have any business "covering" this essay by the talented and delightful Jacqui Shine. I was really struck by its vulnerability and beauty when it ran in The Sun in 2014. This essay shares with Jacqui's the experience of going to a white shaman and feeling uneasy with it but being desperate enough for help that you'll give anything a try. The tones are somewhat similar, but Jacqui's is much softer (earthworm!). You know what? I like Jacqui's essay way more! I've been trying to write about my paternal grandmother's murder in different ways for a long time and have never really liked what I've come up with. Maybe "covering" Jacqui would give this essay the emotional and organizational boost I've been seeking all these years? To wit: my housemates and I tried to play "Pictures of Matchstick Men" (Camper Van Beethoven's cover, of course) during our after-dinner sing-along at Thanksgiving this year and while Victoria nailed the violin, I was sloppy on the guitar, but we got through it. I feel the same way about my essay. Mad respect to Dr. Shine.


*


Mo Daviau is the author of the novel Every Anxious Wave (St. Martin's Press, 2016). Her nonfiction has appeared in The Rumpus, The Toast, The Offing, Nailed Magazine, and in three previous March Xness tournaments, and she has a story in the recently-published Ursula K. LeGuin tribute anthology, Dispatches from Annares (Forest Avenue Press, 2021). She DJed college radio in the '90s and gets low-key pissed if you speak ill of In The Aeroplane Over the Sea. These days, Mo lives in an old, creaky house in Los Angeles and is working on her third novel.

Friday, December 10, 2021

Advent 2021, Dec 10, Megan Baxter: A Model Home

After After Ted Kooser’s ‘Small Rooms in Time’

I was once the kind of person who gave extravagant gifts. December reminds me of all the time I spent sewing bathrobes, hunting for signed first-hand editions, or piercing leather to craft slippers cuffed with coyote. I thought that these gifts said something about my love. That I tried so hard, and perhaps it did. I was a girl who wanted love more than anything else. But I also hoped for a gift in kind. Sometimes I got it. Sometimes I didn’t. I remember these gifts like I remember all things that I have crafted with my hands, with a kind of exacting, physical detail so precise that given leather, or flannel I might recreate them again now, although the recipients are long gone from my life. 

A gift, I realize, is intrinsically something you know won’t return to you. A negative in the weight of our lives, transferred from one household to another. And so it shouldn’t matter to me that I don’t know where some of these objects ended up. They were given with no expectation that they should ever be mine again, even if I had labored over their making or buying, hunting, as I did, for that perfect object that captured something other than the physical restraints of its existence, more than weight or texture, function or beauty. These weren’t gifts so much as containers, into which I poured all of my passion, and confusion, and hope. There is only one gift that I lost track of, one that disappeared before it could become beloved. I could show you the shape of the thing but I couldn’t tell you what became of it. Did we throw it away before our move off that bitter coast? Did we leave it behind in the cabin?

At the time of the gift’s crafting, I was living on an island off the coast of Maine in a town that spent its summers dressed in the finery of WASPy retreat, having replaced the Rockefellers with Martha Stewart who was rumored to task her groundskeeper with sweeping the woods on her property clean each spring. There was lobster ice cream on the pier where the big cruise ships disembarked tourists for an afternoon and a National Park where Ansel Adams had captured the shell of a moon rise over birch swamps. A signpost showed where you could stand and shoot the same image although it could never be the same. But come Labor Day the town boarded up – language which I always thought was purely metaphorical until I saw the plywood on the glass storefronts and the pubs nail two-by-fours across their doors. They were closing for the season, the signs read, but also to the season because in fall the winds rattled at those boards, clawing their way into every crack and mortar fracture.

The wind came into the bedroom in our cabin every night. One evening we watched as snow waltz through the cracks in curls like you see in cartoons, circling white in the warm pine of the room. There were many other faults in the place but we pretended to love them like we did most broken things because they had pasts, something that we, at eighteen, had very little of. All we had was a high school romance and a desire to become writers. Our parents encouraged this because they feared that if they weren’t supportive, we’d simply vanish and become lost children rather than college freshmen at a tiny liberal arts college on an island in Maine.

The cabin was a kind of practice house and as such, a perfect first home for me. I’d been making homes of the sort since I was a girl. To say that I played house as a child sounds gendered and but I just as often played a lumberjack or bushwhacking widow. The homes I built were mostly in the semi-wild wood lots behind the cul-de-sac where my parent’s house rose up out of what had once been farmland but was now scrub pine and brambles, with only the memory of the plow hidden in the old dumps I dug through as a child, uncovering the bones of bed frames, and the friendly grills of ancient tractors. It was out in the mess of second growth, past where the tended lawn became field and the field became scrub that I played home. I had homes in the trees, sometimes as simple as a board nailed high between two branches, and in the hollows where I fashioned rooms from the skirts of spruce branches, here the living room, here the kitchen, the bedroom, the hall. I’d lead my siblings and friends through these spaces, making sure that they saw what I saw in the dimensions. Later those same small hands helped me construct a treehouse, a huge teepee, an underground pit fort dug into the soft loam of the field and covered with my favorite Little Mermaid bed sheet so the light came through all technicolor, and looking up I thought I’d made something like a cathedral for myself with nothing but a shovel and several long summer days.

Of course, I had a real home but I spent a good part of my childhood running away from it. I ran away not for the usual reasons or at least the reasons the children in my chapter books did, bad parents, dead parents, adventure, but with a plan to build a house for myself somewhere not too far down the road. I’d pack up my red flyer wagon with salami sandwiches, Kleenex for the constant drip of my allergic nose, and a neatly folded poster illustrating the history of the dinosaurs, which I considered my prized procession, this picture of the oh so obvious march of time. And off I’d go, up the gravel drive, along the dirt road of our neighborhood and out onto the paved shoulder of the fast state highway. I walked with a peaceful grin, the stupid joy of the hope, knowing that the future was just a few more miles out ahead. In those days I loved the stories of children who lived alone in strange places like boxcars and the trunks of old trees. While I could only hear the train across the river at night, I did find a rotting oak in the backyard with a hollow so large that for a while I could squeeze inside and look up into its center. It wasn’t big enough to build a fire in or to set up a bed, but for some time I was small enough to imagine it as a home.

A body only needs so much space, a child even less. I was small then, and now small though fully grown, short enough to walk the deer paths in the forest without so much as a bend in my back. I liked as a girl, and still do, the feeling of being surrounded. I loved best small places and the creatures who burrowed and nested in them, luxuriating over the soft grass beds of white-tailed deer and the little circular openings of the homes of mice in the hayfield. There was an exactness to the size of these homes and a practical grace to their architecture, surely more beautiful than the big boxiness and high ceilings of my family’s home where even with my door locked, I couldn’t seem to find a second of peace. I took to hiding, building holes in my closet and under my desk where I could read, draw, and become the cartographer of new worlds for my characters and myself. I traced the maps of Middle Earth and sketched my backward with the same deliberately archaic lines. 

Eventually, I outgrew these places, like I did the playhouses and forts I constructed. One board remains in the crown of a knotted pine in my parents' front yard and looking up I wonder at my bravery to climb so high just to gain the sort of aerial perspective that my map-making encouraged. I remember a moment of sharp sorrow as a girl when I outgrew a particular play structure in our basement. It was a bright plastic thing with walls that fit together like puzzle pieces, a short slide, a little platform, and a climbing ladder but what I loved most of all were a series of large round holes like Swiss cheese passing through one wall. Because of these holes, I called the place my ‘mouse house’ and played at squeezing through each hole, from top to bottom. At first, it was easy, but then it became a game of contortion. Finally, one day in grade school, no matter how I angled or pushed I could no longer fit through any of them. I was too big, having outgrown the house. I wept at the realization that the dimensions of my physical self no longer fit a space I called home.

Perhaps the whole process of growing up is more a process of outgrowing. I think of snakes and crustaceans building new homes around themselves. But maybe the metaphor is too physical. Homes are more than dimensions. You might call a lesser structure a house or a living space. Home has that big wide ‘o’ in it like ‘hope’ a noun that means more than it describes. A home, I knew even as a girl, said something about who a person was, what they wanted, what they had, and what kind of future they might be capable of creating from all of the practical pieces of construction. My family’s house and the choices they made in it – my mother’s music room sprawling over a third of the ground level, my father’s meticulous study of the family’s growth in yearly photo collages marching like the ages of the dinosaurs across the second-floor hallway. What they put in it altered the dimensions of the space but the home itself wasn’t unique. My best friend had the very same house.

Katherine’s family lived in a similar neighborhood, a few miles up the state highway. We took the bus to and from school together and would often pretend that we were orphaned sisters being sent off by train into new families who had adopted us separately. We’d cry as we parted, walking down the steps to our waiting mothers who, at least for a second, still looked to us like strangers. Katherine was just as good at playing make-believe as I was, which was probably why I liked her so much. For many years we slept in the same room in our matching houses and when we grew older both of our families built rooms in their attics except that my family created two rooms while hers kept it an open loft which was so big and empty that at night, I stayed awake long into the dark spooked by the exposure.

I made other observations about the matching houses. Her parents didn’t have a music room, as we did. Instead, they had a playroom where we could watch cable TV. And years later, after her parents got divorced and mine stayed together, her father put a swimming pool in the backyard and I remember soaking in the chlorine while he brought out sodas and set bowls of chips on the patio furniture. By that point, there wasn’t too much alike between Katherine and me, besides our houses. I started to pay more attention to the differences and forgot that we walked the same floors and slept in the same room. 

It was around this time that I began designing my dream homes. There was a game the girls played called ‘MASH RAP’ whose letters stood for future houses and financial standings – mansion, apartment, shack, house, rich, average, poor’. Not included in the title but in the following components of the game were categories for husband, car, number of children, and job. The dimensions of life could be reduced and predicted just like that. You picked a number and the number gave you all the answers. The goal, of course, was that it would create some sort of predicament where you were rich but lived in a shack and were married to the bald gym teacher, had fourteen kids, drove a Range Rover, and worked as a belly dancer. The only constants were those of home. In the Game of Life, I loved to sort through the house cards, weighing each potential self out, a woman who would fit into a split level, a woman in a Victorian estate, a cabin, a colonial.

One of the traps of aesthetics and perhaps creativity itself is that it constructs the spiritual out of physical materials – a woman into a house, a space into a dream. And so of course the process of building homes was always about being and about being known and the home itself was me and us, and all of the things I hoped for. Love builds structures around us, walls and buttresses and open windows where we can pass through halls of memory and into rooms where we read and slept, the same slightly moldy towels, the same unknowable sorrow when you were outside looking in and it was winter and snowing and inside pots on the stove steamed the windows, warping the image so that the figure moving from stove to table was just an, love in the abstract.

I was once told by my allergists that dust is mostly human skin and I’ve come to think of growing as casting off, leaving behind small ghosts, so ordinary it is only by accumulation that they cause any notice. All the possible women I’ve been in all the places I’ve called home going on as if I never left. A woman in Oregon, in Michigan, in California, South Carolina, Maine. The dream women go on living in their dream homes like the one I designed in fifth grade which contained, on its first floor, an enclosure for the Yellowstone wolfpack whose restoration I had supported through allowance-sized donations. Above the wolf pen there was a movie theater and, on the roof, an Olympic-sized swimming pool. If growing up is the casting off of potential futures the woman who lives in this house is the one I hope to become again, our forms aligning, living sandwiched between water and wildness. She is nothing like the woman I was when I set up home in the cabin.

The house in Maine was a practice house. Not just for me, learning to live with another, to cook and clean and care, but for the house itself which was built by our landlords as a sort of trial before they felt confident constructing the larger and more complicated home in which they now lived, just a few hundred feet from of our eaves. The practice house had been a success, I suppose, in that it convinced them that they could do better. But, as the landlady said as she took us on our first tour, they had made mistakes. Nevertheless, we paid her a deposit, coaching each other through the process of writing a check for the first time.

It wasn’t just tiny, it was miniaturized. Small houses have their own expectations of space and dimensions which differ from that of their larger cousins so that a small house is not simply a larger one, shrunk down to scale. But the cabin was clearly designed to be bigger and its measurements had simply been reduced in construction so that the ceilings felt too close, the turn in the stairs too sharp, the shower head set so low that even I had to stoop under it. There was a porch but it was too shallow to put a chair on and a backdoor that leaped out into space with nothing beneath it. For all of its bad design, despite all of the half-moons of missed hammer marks in the soft pine boards, I loved it because it was a home.

That fall, as the boards nailed over the storefronts on Main Street and the winds came off the Atlantic, I began to wonder if I had made a mistake. I disliked the college and the coursework and spent most of my time working in a general store on the lower floor of a two-hundred-year-old house with a resident ghost, and a crowd of lobster fishermen who streamed in each morning, flushed bright from the sharp wind. They bought coffee and breakfast sandwiches before dawn and beer and cigarettes at dusk, as regular as the tides. One of them proposed to me, getting down on his knee in front of the register, offering up a toy ring he’d pulled from a trap in the bay. I told him I was taken and flashed the gold band I wore on my left hand, a promise that never became any more than that but that, for a season, held the weight and heat of something real. He asked me instead to come to a bonfire he was hosting on the beach. And later that evening, when the real darkness washed in, I left the cabin with some sort of excuse and drove around, coming so close to the fire on the coast that I almost wept before turning back to the pines and the practice house.

It was there I learned not to store flour next to laundry detergent, to keep Halloween candy away from mice, and that almost everything can grow old. But I remained hopeful. At nineteen I suppose hope was my crucible. Still, there were moments when I would pause at the windows and see myself from outside and wonder what that girl was doing. This kind of splitting in my case is purely a creative projection, but I suspect that for many years the practice produced the same kind of physic damage that near-death experiences or psychosis may have on the self. A doubling that only reinforced the complicated fractals of my dream homes and dream selves, looking in and looking out.

It's not the fault of the house that a person would live and dream such things within its walls, after all, homes are meant as containers, shaping the vast churn of infinity into something linear, a life, as we understand it, having a beginning, middle, and end, a story containing plot, rising action, climax, and falling action. Naturally, we play the heroes of these dramas so that a house is a story and not just a realization of walls and timber. But I’m still drawn to the exactness of the dreams that these spaces contained and to my ability, years later, to move within rooms that may now be cluttered, abandoned, or demolished.

That winter I built the cabin again and then, after gifting it away, it vanished. It was a scale-model architectural rendering constructed from cardboard and popsicle sticks which I crafted as part of my art class, for pedagogical reasons that I comprehend now as little as I did at the time. Everyone at the school majored in “human ecology” and was required, as a freshman to build such a thing. There was, doubtless some sort of hippie philosophy behind the project, as there was behind everything at the school where we were tasked with miming the deforestation of New England as part of the freshman ice-breaker. Although we could pick any structure we wanted, I constructed a model of the cabin in the pines. I charted the place with the cold metal tongue of a measuring tape and night after night I stuck wood to cardboard until my fingers were strung with hot glue spider webs and the cabin rose from its yard of plywood, perfect in its exactness. There the shallow porch, the cramped loft, the door to nowhere, the windows through which we looked in and out.

I gave this miniature house to my love for Christmas. I remember him startled at the thing and then peering inside, his eyes walking the floors we lived in during those days. He could hold it in both hands, like a tray and it weighed nearly nothing, just balsam, and paper. His hands were soft, the fingers round, his skin fair. But I can’t tell you about his wrists. I’ve forgotten the dimensions. I can’t tell you what he said, or where he set the model and I can’t remember what became of the thing when we moved a few weeks later, giving up on the dream of college on the coast of Maine and packing up for the Pacific.

I didn’t think much about the place in Maine until years later when I drove by its twin. I stopped and pulled over on the shoulder of a quiet suburban street. There it was, the same dimensions, the same odd size of the practice house but in a new town, a new state. I learned later that the plans were sold as part of a build-it-your-self kit published in the ’70s to include not only blue-prints but also instructions so that anyone could follow along. The hopeful but skilless builder can download similar plans now for tiny houses, container houses, hobbit houses, all kinds of hopeful small places where given very little you can imagine yourself having it just right.

I lived in another duplicate house years later, a cottage on a creek in Vermont. It was so cold in that place that my cat jumped from chair to chair like a child playing don’t touch the floor. A decade later I woke up in a house I had quickly toured before renting in a rush, and realized that it was the same house as the one by the creek. Rising, the dimensions tripped me up, and walking to the bathroom I was overcome with a feeling of full-body déjà vu until I realized that it was truly the same space. The same floors and rooms and proportions. Built, like the cottage in Vermont, by a couple escaping the city and wanting to learn how to put together something real with their hands. I haven’t been able to find the name of the kit, or locate the exact plans. It's out there somewhere, a ghost of a house I’ve lived in twice.

The model house was gone by the time I lived in Oregon but it's my apartment there in Portland that I haunt the most, although I failed to call that rainy city home. Ever since I moved out, I’ve dreamt that I still rent the place and that it is sitting empty, looking over the Wilmette towards the peak of Mt. Hood, a container for a dream that died a long time ago. I wake, worried that the rent check hasn’t cleared, or that the maintenance department needs to install a new fridge and wants a key that I haven’t held in over a decade, a key which I remember slipping into the mail slot of the manager’s office on a bright morning with my car loaded for a cross country trip back to the East Coast. When I returned to the city years later, I drove by the place and saw beach towels hung to dry on the railing and felt myself split again – worried about the towels blowing off the third-floor balcony– but they were not my towels and I no longer lived there. 

Perhaps I fixate on space because I’ve spent much of my time farming, measuring out the earth with my body, my almost exactly 5 feet of body, or maybe it’s the running, training for long races that teach the body and the mind to mark out miles and against the roll of the road but either way, I find myself creating identity through dimensions. Since giving the gift of the model house I’ve had the chance to design a space for myself and see it rise out of raw materials, from open-air to a container for a future I hope grows towards the light. But I can’t stop thinking about the ghosts that move through the houses that I lived in once, sometimes briefly, sometimes for many seasons. I wonder at the girl who made that miniature house, what she hoped it contained as she gifted it. How extravagant an idea to craft a model of something that was still living, still forming in the unraveling of the everyday, a place she where she washed dishes, and learned to make pancakes from her father’s recipe, and grew tired of some poets and fell in love with others, learning how to bundle beneath snow devils to stay warm, how to keep a house open to the heat and closed to the winter, how to kill a trap caught mouse with a frying pan, how to write a check, signing her name in her school-girls cursive, how even in a dream house there are dreams to be outgrown.

*
Megan Baxter is the author of 'Farm Girl: A Memoir' released in 2021 from Green Writers Press. She has won numerous national awards including a Pushcart Prize. Recent publications included pieces in The Colorado Review, Hotel Amerika, The Florida Review, and Creative Nonfiction Magazine. Megan lives in New Hampshire where she teaches writing at Colby-Sawyer College and Southern New Hampshire University. She can be found at meganbaxterwriting.com

Thursday, December 9, 2021

Advent 2021, Dec 9, Brooke Champagne: Shitty Fifth Drafts (With Praise and Apologies to Anne Lamott)

After Anne Lamott's "Shitty First Drafts"

Of all the people to whom writers are shitty—readers we make work harder than necessary, families we by turns ignore or exploit, acclaimed, undeserving writers we trash-talk—we’re probably shittiest to ourselves. I’m not just referring to the ordinary, neurotic self-loathing, like composing then deleting douche-chilly promo Facebook posts. I mean we have a hard time even saying what we are. How difficult of a sentence is this: “I am a writer.” I know writers who’ve published novels, essay collections, chapbooks, their words all over the goddamn internet…but if they haven’t written lately, or even beautifully enough to their liking, well, they’re not writers. If they don’t make a living from writing (who are these unicorns?), well, they’re not writers. They’re measly teachers or marketers or administrators or physicians, basically bums who also write on the side. Not saying any of us are the literary equivalent of Kim K, but I doubt she wonders whether she’s still an influencer if she takes a few days off Instagram. Why do we do this to ourselves?

Clichés become so for a reason, so I’m not even going to apologize for saying this. I blame the famous old/dead guys. I’m not as much of a dinosaur as I sometimes purport to be, but look, when I attended college in the 90s, I was introduced to two types of writers: the handful of women who wrote beautifully and then went on to kill themselves, and the scores of men who wrote beautifully and long enough to publish writing advice treatises (and only occasionally kill themselves). Before I wrote much of anything, but thought it would be like-a-totally-cool-thing-to-do, I became addicted to the “how does one write” books. And most that I found through Dewey Decimal were written by men.

In his Zen and the Art of Writing, Ray Bradbury says that a writer must write with gusto, with zest, with joy, to call himself such, and yes, he uses that gendered pronoun purposefully. This text, published not in 1890, but in 1990, references dozens of preeminent artistic, literary, and musical figures across time, the virtuosos, the best—every one of them men. In this book, he also says his first memory was his trip down the birth canal, a claim I found so obnoxious, he’s the reason I never got into sci-fi. It took me awhile to see the theme emerging in these “on writing” texts, in my teenage years when I was thinking I would like to be a writer: most writing advice was by men pointing to other men (or to themselves) and saying, “THIS GUY! Do it like him!”

Walter Mosley says, “if you want to be a writer, you have to write every day.” Hemingway famously advises to be brief as possible, and also never to think about your story when you’re not working on it, so your subconscious will take over, or some shit. Hardly daring to call myself a writer, I’m loath to challenge Hemingway, but when the story you’re writing is your life, as is the case for memoir-essayists like myself, following his advice becomes impossible.

This is why as an undergraduate, when I discovered Anne Lamott’s Bird by Bird: Some Instructions on Writing and Life, I knew I’d found the writing guide I’d been longing for. Written by a female, for one. As suggested by the title, this book proffers advice not just for writing, but for living, and without sounding self-helpy or gross.  Her main prescription is “keep heart,” a dictum that’s a bit earnest for my tastes, yet she says it in a funny way.  She’s also totally vulnerable, the dipshit narrator in many of her stories. Hard on herself and kind to her reader, everything a fledging writer needs. One essay in particular, “Shitty First Drafts,” became a mainstay in the creative writing and composition courses I taught during and after graduate school. The first drafts are child’s drafts, she says, a place to go crazy (and have fun!) without allowing your internal critics to shout down your stupidity. Historically, my students have loved this essay, because it allows them to say “shitty” in class, and it offers them the freedom to be screw-ups in their writing from the start. “Shitty first, better later” is a paradigm they can live with.

I recently revisited Lamott’s “Shitty First Drafts” in preparation for an Intro to Memoir class I’m teaching next semester. And I found it’s still great for those starting out, fearful of the blank, white page, but no longer as useful to me. First of all, she cycles through only two main drafts: the “down” draft (the first, shitty one), where you get it all down, and the “up” draft, where you fix it up. Again, two cycles of writing/revision work great for my students, but for me? I need at least five more drafts than that (and many more months) to achieve semi-coherence. I’ve been writing for two decades now and like, yeah, I’m confident my first drafts are going to be shitty. I don’t remember the last time I looked at the blank computer screen fearing the shittiness to come. That’s how deeply Lamott’s advice penetrated when I first encountered it. I expect to be bad at first, really bad and possibly for a while, and it doesn’t bother me. I fully embrace the shit.

But what about once you’ve moved through the first draft and second and third, and it’s been a few months since you started working on it or maybe a year and definitely at least a decade since you’ve been thinking and writing about this subject. What if it’s still shitty, then?

Near the end of her recent gem of a writing advice book, Seven Drafts: Self-Edit Like a Pro from Blank Page to Book, Allison Williams provides a snippet of sane, sage advice I’m likely to never follow. If you work through draft after draft and no longer find the inspiration, and don’t see it going anywhere, Williams recommends letting it go.

Like the Judy Hopps character in the movie Zootopia (I have young children, these are my references now), I’m constitutionally incapable of giving up. When it comes to my writing or reading life, there may be bitterness, but there’s no end. In fact, if you plan to publish an entire shitty book, send it to me, because while I will never publicly pan another writer’s work, I will read every word of it. My friends say they don’t have time to read bad writing, which, okay, friends, show me your iPhone Weekly Usage Report. I just feel like I really need to know fully why a piece of writing is shitty, and I can only know the answer(s) to that when I finish. This rationale also accounts for the reason why every time I’m bitten by a mosquito, it takes a year to heal. I scratch and I pick and it bleeds and I peel and it bleeds and heals slightly, until I itch and pick and peel all over again. Bad habit for the skin, but good for the writing.

Allison Williams is much wiser than I am, so please buy and read her book and take her advice. But, if you’re a stubborn asshole and have a propensity for being slightly dumb about a lot of stuff (like Lamott, and me!), here’s another way: if you go through a handful or two of drafts and it’s still shitty, or maybe the draft has upgraded to “not quite right,” and you still work on it, and you don’t throw your hands up and say, “this is unworkable” or “my powers are gone forever” or “back to mahjong!”, then you are a writer.

I’m not suggesting you keep working on a project that you have come to hate, or makes you hate yourself or humankind. If it’s no longer important to you, that shitty fifth draft, press pause. Regardless, you’re still in it. You made it. You’ve made shit. It’s that simple.

But if you’re like me, unable to give up on our shit, how does one practically do this? Keep working through scores of drafts and feeling like there’s little-to-no progress, or somehow a reversal of progress, and not lose heart?

I don’t know to what extent I’ve learned to consistently write well, but I’ve learned how not to stop writing. I’ve been rejected by publishers and editors and even more by myself (every essay, daily!), and have yet to lose heart.

So, some tips for not losing heart:

*Get someone who loves you and doesn’t know how to critique writing to read your work. Try your mother, or hell, try my mother. She’s lovely and thinks all writers are brilliant. She always says, “I don’t know how you do it, you’re so witty and wonderful.” She offers very little else by way of advice, and while her words may just be one biased woman’s opinion, when I’m at a particular shitty-fifth-draft low, they’re all I need.

*Take a break to be a writer who is also a person. It might be a good time to become a semi-expert or dumb novice at something else. I sometimes enroll in undergraduate courses at the university where I teach, mainly because they’re free, but also to remind myself I can accomplish other things, like earning As in introductory liberal arts courses. Based on the classes I’ve taken over the years, I’m a novice actor, Buddhist, philosopher, and dancer. Learning other things feeds the writing and helps you forget the shit when you need to.

*Revisit old drafts, former projects. Like looking at pictures of yourself when you were thinner, or heavier, or unavoidably, younger, this will provide perspective. You are not static. Even if the draft has not gotten better, even if your work did not feel productive, even if it’s still shitty, there has been movement. If you’ve scratched and picked and bled and healed, you have literally made more of yourself. Even if the “more” is, you know, infected.

*Embrace the joy. It also makes sense to accommodate the not-shit, some would say the sublime, or even the present lucky and beautiful moment of being alive. It’s easy to get cynical in the writing world, but if you feel good about how things are going, then accept that, too. I said earlier I never got into sci-fi, but that’s not true. I’ve read nearly every Vonnegut novel, and in the documentary Kurt Vonnegut: Unstuck in Time, this line in its stark simplicity asked me to remember what it’s so easy for writers to forget: “When things are going sweetly and peacefully, please pause a moment and then say out loud, ‘If this isn’t nice, what is?’”

The niceness, the peace. Cousins to the zest, the joy. Just say it, trust it. You’re typing, you’re trying. You’re a writer.

Dammit, Ray Bradbury, you were right.

Now, I don’t know how useful this advice will be for a novice, or an early-mid career writer like me, and that’s because I only made it through three drafts of this essay before deadline. So in all likelihood, it’s still pretty shitty. But if I know myself, I’ll revise and scratch and pick and make it bleed post-publication. I’ll keep working at it so I can know—and only slightly hate myself because you can’t know this based on the current draft you’re reading—that, shit, I’m actually good. Or if not good, then at least a real writer.


*


Brooke Champagne was born and raised in New Orleans, LA and now writes and teaches in Tuscaloosa at the University of Alabama. She was awarded the inaugural William Bradley Prize for the Essay for her piece 'Exercises,' which was published in The Normal School and listed as Notable in Best American Essays 2019, and was a finalist for the 2019 Lamar York Prize in Nonfiction for her essay “Bugginess,” published in The Chattahoochee Review. Her writing has appeared in many print and online journals, most recently in Under the Sun, Barrelhouse, and Miracle Monocle. She is seeking publication for her first collection of personal essays entitled Nola Face.

Wednesday, December 8, 2021

Advent 2021, Dec 8, Scott Russell Morris: Triple Street Haunting

 After Virginia Woolf's "Street Haunting"


*

Scott Russell Morris is a writer and enthusiast. He's a native of Southern California but can navigate the streets of Utah better. He owns a home in Texas and lives in South Korea, where he is an Assistant Professor of Writing and Rhetoric at the University of Utah Asia Campus. With his wife, Kirsten, he has two children. No one has ever asked him who watches the kids while he is at work. He is the creator and editor of Magpie Zines, which will soon publish its first issue. You can find his work at www.skoticus.com

Tuesday, December 7, 2021

Advent 2021, Dec 7 Justin St. Germain: Marijuana in Oregon

After Walter Benjamin's "Hashish in Marseille"

Walter Benjamin took hashish for the first time at three-thirty in the morning on December 18, 1927, probably in Berlin—he was a setting savant, but his notes don’t specify a location, although they do go into luxuriant detail about rooms. 

Nor do his notes explain why Benjamin—a critic, philosopher, and essayist, among other things, although none of those exactly fits—would suddenly start doing drugs at the age of thirty-five. The book in which his notes were published, On Hashish, offers some possible explanations. He was inspired by Les Paradis artificiels, Charles Baudelaire’s pioneering account of opium and hashish intoxication, and after reading it told a friend, “It will be necessary to repeat this attempt independently of this book.” His translator writes that he wanted to broaden the concept of experience, more or less the same reason everyone does drugs. His experiments were also material, a kind of research. Benjamin was planning to write a book about hashish, a project that never materialized; instead his drug writings would be published as individual essays and stories, and parts would appear verbatim in his (also incomplete) opus, The Arcades Project

But Benjamin waited eight years after reading Baudelaire to get around to getting high, and when he did, it wasn’t his idea. Doctor friends of his had connections at German pharmaceutical companies, which meant access to a whole cornucopia of psychoactive compounds. They set up a series of drug experiments they called protocols, and convinced Benjamin to join them. In most ways, he wasn’t so different from your average teenager presented with free drugs for the first time. How many would say no? Lots, probably, but I’m not one of them, and neither was Walter Benjamin.

As his first high unfolded, Benjamin recorded his experience in twenty-five numbered items. He hallucinates the room stretching and filling with phantoms, a desk transforming into a fruit stand; he becomes “fixated on the intellectual sphere,” experiences “boundless goodwill” and “extraordinary mental vacillation,” sees “the gates to a world of grotesquerie” opening. His friends become strangers, and he wants to laugh. But his notes remain calm, analytical, clinical, observant. The world’s smartest stoner. 

His last note: “One traverses the same paths of thought as before. Only they seem strewn with roses.”

*

The first time I got high was late on a Friday night in the summer of 1995 in Tombstone, Arizona. I was thirteen, with my friend Frank—not his real name, obviously, this is going on the internet—at his older brother’s studio apartment on the west side of town, out by T Hill and the cemetery. Frank's brother was known around town exclusively by an iambic mammalian nickname. Let's call him Wombat. He'd bought us a pint of Cuervo at Circle K, and we’d just finished drinking it straight, chased with Sunny Delight. It wasn’t my first experience with alcohol, but it was the first time I’d gotten properly drunk. 

Soon Wombat’s girlfriend—I don’t recall her name for reasons that will soon become apparent, but let’s say Cindy—arrived with a dime bag, broke out a pipe, and asked if we wanted to get stoned. The tequila was taking over, and I felt as if I finally understood that song about straight-tequila nights that had recently been so popular in my hometown. Besides, a few things worth celebrating had occurred that summer: the county had dropped some charges against me after a year of juvie nightmares; my third stepdad, who’d been ritually abusing my mom for the last three years, had finally moved out of our trailer; and mine and Frank’s classmate Charlie, our third amigo, had just escaped to Tucson. It was because his mom died, and we missed him, but still, he’d made it out. High school was starting soon, a new beginning, a chance to become a cooler version of myself who drank tequila and smoked weed. When Cindy and Wombat proffered the pipe, I thought, what the hell.

Our situation was less formal; Tombstone wasn’t big on protocols. We smoked in Wombat’s bathroom. After her first hit, Cindy grabbed my face and put her mouth against mine, inflating me with secondhand smoke. It was the first time I’d ever kissed a woman without some middle-school premise, a spun bottle or a dare, and I don’t know if it was the weed or the tequila or the notion of sex, but I felt like I’d finally escaped myself and was seeing my world clearly for the first time. (Benjamin called this phenomenon “profane illumination.”) I didn’t have much time to meditate on the experience. Soon Wombat head-butted me and I passed out. He wasn’t mad or jealous. It was just a thing he did.

Needless to say, I didn’t take notes. But I remembered the bliss of detachment, and wanted to get high again. I did most days for the next year.

*

Benjamin took hash again a month later, with his friend, protocol wingman, and fellow philosopher Ernst Bloch, who wasn’t there the first time. This time they both took notes. They were written in various hands and sometimes repeat one another, so the authorship and methods of their taking aren’t clear. This would become a pattern of the protocols, a rotating cast of participants leaving notes in various forms—handwritten, typed, dictated—with no regard for authorship. Fragmentary, allusive, digressive, collaborative essays.

Benjamin wrote a sober account the following afternoon. Both the notes and the account describe a much different hashish experience from the first. He describes a “Satanic phase,” the red room he’s in velvety and aflame, the conviction that great historical events could be occurring in the next room, coronations and executions. He laments the “basically depressive nature” of the trance, which he attributes to taking a higher dose. It is no longer, as it was the first time, a friendly, sociable lingering in a room. Rather, it is like being enclosed in a dense spider’s web. It sounds like he was having a bad trip, which makes sense. He was eating the hash, not smoking it, and ingesting high doses of cannabis can be unpredictable, as anyone who’s taken too many edibles can attest.

At one point, Bloch reaches toward his knee, and Benjamin feels it as “a highly repugnant violation of my aura.” Certain words and phrases recur, including my personal favorite, when the philosophers describe their high as “an ambiguous wink from nirvana.” (Capitalize the last word and they sound just like me and Frank seventy years later.) The account, which Benjamin seems to have thought of as an essay, engages with the experience theoretically, not descriptively; in it he’s a critic, not a pilgrim, and his writing assumes the density characteristic of his criticism. He meditates on the “colportage phenomenon of space,” references Kafka and Greek myth, employs and tortures critical metaphors. 

The essay is less interesting, at least to me, than the notes from the experience, which are raw, bizarre, self-aware, sometimes lapsing into the second person, as if he’s speaking to his sober self or a future reader: I intentionally say something flowery—you must be suspicious. He compares this high to the last, as Calvin to Shakespeare: this is a Calvinist intoxication. His descriptive metaphors are vivid and surreal: he’s on a ship at sea; the room is a stage lit by tiny, hidden levers; his friend descending the stairs becomes a spider lady, a skirt of webs around her feet.

The whole room is woven in hashish.

I keep bumping against the ceiling, which is exceedingly thin.

Near the end of his notes, he has a breakthrough. He sees a zone surrounding the intoxication, a zone he recognizes as death. Dying has an imperative character.

The essay he wrote afterwards hardly mentions death, and blames the depressive nature of the experience on a higher dose. He doesn’t seem to consider the possibility that his perceptions on hashish were real or true, revelations rather than hallucinations. Are we not surrounded by death?

*

I think of my first stoned year as one long protocol. Weed was everywhere in Tombstone, practically free so close to the border, and that was the year meth arrived, or at least the year I first saw it. Normal weed, dusted weed, the occasional grandma’s pill, little baggies of peanut butter crank; I swallowed, smoked, or snorted whatever was in front of me. It culminated in a surprise drug test courtesy of my mom’s short-lived doctor boyfriend and threats of military school. 

But I didn’t really quit until I saw death. Near the end of my freshman year, a friend—who in a rare exception for that reckless year was driving sober—rolled his parents’ Blazer with six of us inside. I walked away physically intact, but an old friend died in front of me, and the rest of us were transformed. I couldn’t get high after that. I couldn’t handle the visions.

It’s not like I went sober. I just switched to a worse and more accepted drug, alcohol, the marrow of my hometown; Tombstone has a dozen bars and no grocery store except the Circle K, which does most of its business in beer and liquor. I spent large parts of my teenage years getting wasted at boonie parties, huddled around tire fires, staring back across the black expanse of the San Pedro valley toward town, watching for cops.

But save for a handful of times in college and the years after, I didn’t do illegal drugs anymore. Not even during the four years I lived in San Francisco, where at the time high-grade marijuana was practically, if not technically, legal—you could call a guy and have it delivered via bicycle—and where I got stoned exactly twice. I thought the last time might be the last time. I was applying for real jobs, and needed to be able to pass drug tests. Besides, I thought I’d outgrown drugs.

From San Francisco, I moved across the country to a strange place where I knew nobody, and where I was ostensibly a professional for the first time in my life. Then I did it two more times. In none of my new settings did I get high. I thought I was reformed, responsible, adult. It didn’t occur to me that I hadn’t changed, only my context: nobody was offering me drugs anymore.

*

Nine months into his hash experiments, Benjamin did a protocol alone. It was seven in the evening on a Saturday night in Marseille, a city foreign to him. In his notes he says a passage of Herman Hesse’s Steppenwolf prompted his “last impetus to taking hashish.” (He doesn’t say which passage.) After taking hashish, he writes and dictates a series of banal notes, waiting for it to kick in. Soon, convinced it will have no or mild effects, he leaves his hotel room to wander the streets.

The rest of his notes were written the next morning, with the “positively splendid” aftereffects still lingering; he warns the reader, presumably himself, that he may not stick to the actual chronology. He reports strolling along the quay, reading the names of boats. He dines at two different cafes, oysters and pate, half a glass of white wine. As the trance intensifies, he sits on a bench by a park, watching pedestrians pass by and experiencing “isolated moments of mania.” Faces strike him as monstrously ugly, and he hallucinates Dante and Petrarch walking past. At one point, he seems close to solving “the riddle of the trance,” and compares it obliquely to a labyrinth, one of his favorite metaphors. 

He would later publish two separate pieces based on the notes from his Marseilles protocol. One was fiction, the short story “Myslovice—Braunschweig—Marseille.” The other was an essay, “Hashish in Marseilles.”

*

I moved to Oregon at the age of thirty-four, the week its governor signed a bill legalizing recreational cannabis. At the time, I knew of Walter Benjamin, and had read a bit: “The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction,” excerpts of The Arcades Project. But I didn’t know he’d written about taking drugs until a few days before marijuana went on sale. 

I was looking for something to teach in my first class, an introductory survey of the essay. I’d never taught the subject and had only written a couple of essays myself, but there I was, charged with delivering their lone required literature credit to thirty undergraduates at nine in the morning, three days a week. While leafing through an anthology, I stumbled upon “Hashish in Marseille.” I read the first few paragraphs, scrapped the Annie Dillard essay I’d been planning to teach—on the subject of Dillard, I agree with The Malcontent—and assigned Benjamin instead.

We discussed it the day after legalization went into effect. It will surprise few who teach that assigning Walter Benjamin to a large group of mostly freshmen the first week of class did not go well. A few red-eyed young men chuckled knowingly at some of his more prosaic observations—his “lionish hunger,” say, or his gratuitous descriptions of ugly faces—but by and large the class didn’t seem to appreciate the stoned philosopher’s musings, and a stark generation gap revealed itself. Getting high and walking around was no big deal. Not in Oregon, not anymore. It’s legal.

*

And here is where our threads intersect. First I should make a couple of confessions. I’m altering the timeline here, just like Benjamin did—his Marseille protocol occurred on September 29, but he dated his essay in July, for reasons that remain unclear, at least to me. He also published his account first in a fictionalized form, at least partly to protect his reputation from puritanical readers. I’m doing the same here. For the record, this whole essay is fiction.

Anyway, shortly after teaching “Hashish in Marseille” for the first and last time, I stumbled into a protocol of my own. At the threshold of my first Oregon fall, I found myself sitting at a table in a stranger’s backyard one evening, dusklight deepening the green: the grass, the garden, the trees, the neighbor’s trees, the other neighbor’s trees. I’d grown up in deserts and had never seen so much fucking green.

It was my old friend’s old friend’s house. I hadn’t seen my friend in some time, and we’d never met each other’s partners—on the West Coast everyone is partners, it’s one of the things I’d missed—or kids, or friends. We drank Oregon wine and Oregon beer and talked about Oregon things, rain and rivers and beer, books, Portland, farmer’s markets, whatever. Somebody mentioned the new marijuana law—probably me—and the man of the house explained that you could grow it now, too. His partner gestured toward the garden and said they had a plant right over there. I was trying to spot it through the tomatoes when someone asked if I wanted to smoke.

I hesitated. The old sense of transgression, imminent consequences, checking for cops. The others declined, in the Oregon fashion, without a trace of disdain. If I didn’t do it, no weed was getting smoked. Sure, I said, why not.

The homeowner left, returned, and showed me the buds in a baggie, saying it was good grown-up shit, nice and mellow. He loaded a small pipe with water in it—plain glass, no skulls or mushrooms, I hesitated to call it a bong but it must have been one, an adult bong, my first, the kind of thing that exists in Oregon. He lit it, took a hit, passed to me. I wondered if they were going to drug test me at my new job. Could they? Fuck it. It’s legal.

I took a modest hit, choked, coughed hard in the bloody way only a bong makes you. Then another. I waved off the third, waiting to see, and just when I thought it didn’t work, I didn’t get high, I remembered in a rush that you don’t notice the change, it just happens.

It wasn’t what I’d remembered. I’d been high a hundred times as a teenager, but that was ’90s border weed, brown and dry and cheap, full of stems and seeds, like smoking dirt. My two experiences with California’s “medical” marijuana had left me unable to move, talk, or think enough to take notes. This was something else, more of a trance, an attunement, the treble turned down. My brain let my body drive, and I noticed my arms prickling in the chill, the twinge in my lower back from sitting in the chair. The feeling was not a presence so much as an absence—my anxiety was gone, and Jesus Christ, how much of it had there been? The proverbial veil lifted; I saw who I was in my waking life, neurotic and obsessed with death, just like my old friend Walter. I had changed without understanding it was happening. This was high me, Oregon me, and I liked him a whole lot better.

When we left, our host slipped me a baggie containing what I would later learn to eyeball as a couple of grams.

*

In the service of multiple interests—decorum, employability, the feasibility of anyone finishing it online—I should wrap this up. Like Benjamin, I’m hoping to complete this later, perhaps even as a book. Then again, it seems like most planned books about drugs don’t get finished.

One potential exit would be to mention a disturbing fact I’ve been hesitant to deploy, lest it read like something our D.A.R.E. officers would’ve told me and Frank in middle school: at least two of the participants in Benjamin’s protocols died of drug overdoses. Benjamin was one of them, although the drugs were just a mechanism in his case, and far the lesser evil. His Satanic hash visions proved prophetic. Soon after the protocols began, Hitler rose to power, and Benjamin found himself in exile, stripped of his German citizenry, arrested by the French and sent to a prison camp. He lingered too long afterward in Paris, home of his arcades, and fled only a day before the Nazis rolled in. 

He went south, headed for Portugal, and crossed the Spanish border to the small town of Portbou, just across the Gulf of Lion from the city he’d once wandered in a hashish trance. When the Spanish authorities told him he’d be deported back to occupied France in the morning, Benjamin did his last drug experiment, ingesting an intentional overdose of morphine. Fanciful legends say his suitcase contained a completed manuscript. It was never found.

But that’s not very Christmasy, so instead I’ll steal a happier ending, the one Benjamin himself came up with after that long stoned night in Marseilles, the wisdom of his trance. “When I recall this state,” he wrote, “I should like to believe that hashish persuades nature to permit us—for less egoistic purposes—that squandering of our own existence that we know in love.”

*

Justin St. Germain is the author of the book-length essay Bookmarked: Truman Capote's In Cold Blood and the memoir Son of a Gun. He lives in Oregon.

Monday, December 6, 2021

Advent 2021, Dec 6, Eric Aldrich: The Brain of Ozzy

After Roland Barthes' "The Brain of Einstein"

Ozzy Osbourne is a mythical subject: paradoxically, the man who withstands the most punishing substance abuse is viewed with admiration rather than pity. Rock stars always have something reified about them, be it their genitals, their hair, or their hands. Thus is the case with Black Sabbath’s front man; Ozzy is commonly signified by his substance tolerance, which among the pantheon of rock and roll, is rivalled only by Keith Richards. Perhaps because of his aesthetic connection to the occult, Ozzy Osbourne’s ability to consume huge doses of drugs and alcohol without dying is infused with a sort of magical character; not a physiological trait, but an act of will; he defies moralizing about drugs through tolerating their prodigious side effects. Mythologically, Ozzy is the party without end, the artist untethered from consequences, free to escape the confines of reality while clap-jumping up and down before thousands of enthusiastic fans.

Ozzy has to some extent perpetuated his myth by mumbling his way through thousands of interviews, recounting his most psychotic, drug-addled behavior again and again. At a meeting with record executives in 1981, the Prince of Darkness (as Ozzy is sometimes called) bit the heads off two doves that his wife/manager, Sharon, had given him to release as a publicity stunt. He was extremely drunk. In 1982, a fan threw a live bat on stage in Des Moines, Iowa and Ozzy bit its head off. In 2019, he released a toy bat with a removable head to commemorate the 37th anniversary of the incident. In 1989, while heavily under the influence, Ozzy tried to strangle Sharon to death, was arrested, and avoided prison because she refused to press charges. One can hear all these stories and more in the 2020 episode of A&E’s “Biography: The Nine Lives of Ozzy Osbourne.” The myth of Ozzy elevates someone so unaffected by consequences that people speak of his substance abuse and violence with awe rather than fear or judgement; his actions, so far outside what almost anyone could get away with, make him the subject of a sort of ritual exoneration in the media, the inarticulate outsider celebrated for his inability to accommodate societal norms.

In 2010, Ozzy Osbourne, who was 61-years-old at the time, became the first rock star to have their genome sequenced. He provided a blood sample to Cofactor Genomics, a company that performed the sequencing; another company, Knome, Inc., analyzed the genetic data. About the project, Ozzy told the Sunday Times of London, “I was curious. Given the swimming pools of booze I’ve guzzled over the years – not to mention all of the cocaine, morphine, sleeping pills, cough syrup, LSD, Rohypnol...you name it – there’s no plausible medical reason why I should still be alive. Maybe my DNA could say why.” Knome Inc. co-founder Nathan Pearson reported the results at a TED event in 2010, explaining, “We found many variants – novel variants – in genes associated with addiction and metabolism that are interesting but not quite definitive.” Weeks later, ABC News ran the headline, “Ozzy Osbourne is a Genetic Mutant.”

The act of having his genome sequenced contributed to Ozzy’s myth in several ways. First, it allowed another opportunity to repeat the legendary amounts of drugs and alcohol the singer consumed. Next, searching for a genetic explanation for Ozzy’s substance tolerance fed into his characterization as superhuman. At the same time, allowing DNA to explain his behavior refused to hold him to the same moral standards as someone’s 61-year-old addict brother who has consumed a comparable quantity of liquor, paint thinner, and crystal meth, likely of far lower quality than Ozzy’s supply, all without access to rock star-quality medical care or substance abuse therapy.

Of course, someone’s addict brother didn’t belt out “Supernaut” at California Jam in one of the most immediately recognizable voices in the last 50 years of popular music. There, in 1974 at the Ontario Motor Speedway, from center stage ensconced with a broad rainbow, Ozzy invited 250,000 fans to, “Clap your hands everyone, let’s get stoned!” Before his 2002 MTV reality family drama, “The Osbournes,” depicted Ozzy as shuffling and geriatric, his anti-Christian, anti-traditional persona in Black Sabbath and his solo career allowed fans to view Ozzy’s self-destructive substance abuse and violence as evidence of authenticity. Through substance abuse, Ozzy fulfills the myth by seeming to embody the character depicted in his music. For example, in the 1970 song, “Fairies Wear Boots,” Ozzy sings, “So I went to the doctor, see what he could give me/ He said, son, son you’ve gone to far/ ‘Cause smokin’ and trippin’ is all that you do/ yeah.” The final line delivered in response to a doctor’s warning – simply, “yeah” – demonstrates the singer’s disregard for establishment views on substance abuse with an oblivious, humorous dismissal.

Today, Ozzy Osbourne is 72-years-old. He has spent the last twenty-years in and out of relative sobriety, living a semi-retired life curated by the ever-busy and controversial Sharon. Black Sabbath finished out their farewell tour in 2017. In 2019, Ozzy fell and broke his neck. He recently underwent surgery to address his injuries. In 2020, the Prince of Darkness was diagnosed with Parkinson’s disease, though he’d been described as having a “Parkinson’s-like” disorder for years, often attributed to his legendary substance abuse. In September 2021, Sharon told the Daily Mail, “The thing I’m most excited about is my hubby getting back on stage. It’s what I pray for.” This means Ozzy is currently incapable of performing. Though he may have held up through intense substance abuse in his younger years, it would be hard to say Ozzy has continued to live with the impunity that endowed him with mythological status. He would have to tour for 16 more years to match country legend/stoner, Willie Nelson. However, by outliving Janis Joplin, Jimmy Hendrix, Jim Morrison, Syd Barrett, Jerry Garcia, Kurt Cobain, Amy Winehouse and many more substance-abusing rockstars, Ozzy has come to embody the myth that someone can endure unmitigated self-destruction if only they are oblivious enough to the consequences of their actions.


*


Eric Aldrich's recent work has appeared in Terrain.org, Euphony, Full Stop, and Weber: The Contemporary West. His favorite Black Sabbath tune is "A National Acrobat;" from Ozzy's solo work, Eric particularly enjoys "Over the Mountain."