Saturday, October 31, 2009

Kristin Lavransdatter and the Anachronistic Feminist

In his introduction to my edition of Sigrid Undset's Kristin Lavransdatter, Brad Leithauser brings up an interesting point:
In the annals of literary "fallen women," Kristin Lavransdatter, that twentieth-century/fourteenth-century literary figure, occupies a curious and fascinating place. After they fell, a number of Kristin's nineteenth-century counterparts were whisked offstage, often to meet a premature end. In the latter part of the twentieth century, many of Kristin's successors were sexual adventuresses whose exploits were pure and liberated triumphs. Writing in the first quarter of the twentieth century, Undset chose a middle path for her heroine. Kristin never doubts that she has covertly sinned, and the pain of her deceptions remains a lifelong affliction. Even so, her unshakable guilt in no way paralyzes her and she carries on with her life.
I don't read much historical fiction, to be quite honest. When I do read it, one thing that has always bugged me is what I call the "anachronistic feminist." I'm referring to those historical fiction heroines who come across more as time-warped modern women, who act and believe as their author thinks women of that era should have acted and believed. Isabel Allende's Daughter of Fortune, for example, tells the story of a woman who finds personal liberation by disguising herself as a man and having a variety of adventures among the Wild West underclass of California during the Gold Rush. Sarah Dunant's The Birth of Venus centers on an heiress in the Italian Renaissance who sympathizes with persecuted gay men, unapologetically has an extramarital affair, and then gets even more hot sex as a nun. In Dora Levy Mossanen's Harem, set in fourteenth-century Persia, a liberated courtesan tells her daughter that virginity is a social construct created by men to control women.

Don't get me wrong: these are all great books and I do recommend them. But I also think that, despite their authors' talent, they all illustrate the tension inherent to writing historical fiction, particularly aimed at a female audience. You want to create a protagonist the modern reader can identify with, but problem is, the past is often a wholly foreign place with values and customs that we, looking back from our vantage point, find objectionable. According to what I've read about the antebellum South in non-fiction texts (i.e. Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass, an American Slave, Eugene D. Genovese's Roll, Jordan, Roll), wealthy Southern women were known to be even bigger die-hard supporters of slavery than their men were; yet, at the same time, they were also heavily subordinated. Zora Neale Hurston's Their Eyes Were Watching God, despite its focus on twentieth-century African-Americans, touches on some of the very real problems associated with this "plantation pedestal" role. Even in the 1910s-30s, the respectable wife as a submissive, genteel, socially isolated symbol of her husband's status remained the primary model for Southern women. (Hurston's heroine Janie, of course, chafes under these restrictions and eventually rebels.)

So a truly honest novel about a Southern belle in the pre-Civil War era would have to be about a vicious racist who sees her severely restricted role as a sign of her superiority over black women and poor white women. But how can the modern reader be expected to sympathize with and root for a protagonist like that? The author, by writing a such a protagonist, might even be seen as apologizing for her beliefs and behavior. And yet, at the same time, most authors writing historical fiction want their portrayals of the past to be believable.

(I also think there's also a didactic element of the "anachronistic feminist." These women triumph and achieve personal enlightenment despite seemingly insurmountable obstacles that women today usually do not have to deal with. If they can do it, so can you!)

So it was with that in mind that I opened to the first book of Sigrid Undset's Kristin Lavransdatter trilogy, The Wreath, originally published in 1920 and eventually winning its author the Nobel Prize in Literature. I found myself agreeing with Leithauser's analysis: for all the overwrought "soap opera" elements of the plot, there is also an underlying component of temptation and its incurring dangers. I interpreted the title as a reference to the wreath worn by the beautiful "elf maiden" who, for nefarious purposes unknown, attempts to lure seven-year-old Kristin away from the encampment and into the woods. In fact, the titles of the three books - The Wreath, The Wife, and The Cross - seem to indicate a progression from sin, transgression, and overall earthiness to medieval Christian holiness, and also mirror the transition of Norway out of paganism. The elf maiden marks the beginning of Kristin's encounters with the perils of seduction. Fru Aashild, whose previous actions had led her to be condemned as a witch and rendered an outcast for years, becomes the next questionable influence in Kristin's life with her nonconformist words on pleasure and peril.
And sometimes she spoke of her youth, when she lived in the south of the country and frequented the courts of King Magnus and King Eirik and their queens. . .

"It seems strange to me that you're always so happy, when you've been used to - " she [Kristin] broke off, blushing.

Fru Aashild looked down at the child, smiling.

"You mean now that I'm separated from all those things? . . . I've had my glory days, Kristin, but I'm not foolish enough to complain because I have to be content with sour, watered-down mild now that I've drunk up all my wine and ale. Good days can last a long time if one tends to things with care and caution; all sensible people know that. That's why I think sensible people have to be satisfied with the good days - for the grandest of days are costly indeed. They call a man a fool who fritters away his father's inheritance in order to enjoy himself in his youth. . . But I call a true idiot and fool only if he regrets his actions afterwards, and he is twice the fool and the greatest buffoon of all if he expects the see his drinking companions again once the inheritance is gone."
Kristin sees a resemblance between Fru Aashild and the elf woman even though they don't look at all alike. But both characters foreshadow the appearance of Ereland Nikulaussøn, the reckless knight whose dashing, rogueish ways threaten to destroy Kristin's future. Kristin knows her physical relationship with a man not her husband is morally wrong in her world, and is also socially hazardous due to the possibility of unmarried pregnancy. The theme here is what Dante's Inferno called "losing the straight way" and finding oneself adrift in the "dark wood." In the Second Circle of Dante's Hell are the sinners of love, who allowed the winds of lust to blow them astray and are now condemned to be blown around in a torrent for all eternity.
When I understood those injured souls, I bent my
face downward, and I held it down so long that the
poet [Virgil] said: "What are you pondering?"

When I replied, I began: "Alas, how many sweet
thoughts, how much yearning led them to the
grievous past!"

Then I turned back to them and spoke, and I began:
"Francesca, your sufferings make me sad and piteous to
tears.

But tell me: in the time of your sweet sighs, by
what and how did Love grant you to know your
dangerous desires?"

And she to me: "There is no greater pain than to
remember the happy time in wretchedness; and this
your teacher knows."
(This is the Robert M. Durling translation. And clearly, Dante and Fru Aashild are at odds here, which is probably why Fru Aashild is such an outsider.) In Canto 5, where this passage comes from, Dante depicts Love/lust as an active agent who ruthlessly acts on passive humans. But, interestingly, his use of the adjective "noble" in the same canto also reflects the ideas, of both his and Kristin's time (they are roughly contemporaneous) of courtly love and the superiority of love for its own sake rather than for status and property (a neo-Platonic notion - see Socrates's and Plato's thoughts on the superiority of homosexual over heterosexual desire, as the latter is believed to exist solely for reproduction). The conflict here, however, is expressed through the souls' punishment of uncontrollable, unceasing motion: true peace is found only with God, and Francesca's sin is that she substituted for God another flawed human being as the ultimate endpoint of her love.

Kristin does the same thing. As a result, she is not at peace: her and Ereland's transgression haunts and harries her even as she continues to do it.

I came to see The Wreath as depicting a world suspended between opposing poles: paganism and Christianity, desire and respectability, guilt and innocence, loyalty and self-assertion. Undset recreates a world of pre-Raphaelite pastoralism where dwarves and elves still lurk in the dark wood and men are both unruly criminals/rapists and chivalrous heroes exhibiting courtly restraint (though not always). There is a very defined moral code (the "straight way") in this time and place, based ostensibly on Christian ideals but also reflective of the old pagan warnings to look out for beautiful danger. We would tell Kristin there's nothing wrong with consensual pre-marital sex, but we live in the twenty-first century. Kristin does not.

I found The Wreath rather dull until Kristin left for the convent and things started to pick up. It starts out as very much a "day in the life" kind of book, where the focus is more on history and setting than plot. But what I ended up liking is that, unlike other historical novels I've read, Kristin is believable as a heroine of her era. She doesn't jump from medieval morality to modern feminist liberation. She exists in her own time.

The writing is also quite good, although I'm not seeing how it's particularly Modernist. Maybe someone can fill me in?



Other posts by Kristin Lavransdatter read-along participants:

Claire at kiss a cloud
Dawn at She is Too Fond of Books
Emily at Evening All Afternoon
Frances at Nonsuch Book
Gavin at Page247
Jill at Rhapsody in Books
Lena at Save Ophelia
Lu at Regular Rumination
Richard at Caravana de Recuerdos
Softdrink at Fizzy Thoughts
Tuulenhaiven at What We Have Here is a Failure to Communicate
Tuesday at Tuesday in Silhouette (and Part 2)
Valerie at Life is a Patchwork Quilt

Vampire Playlist

Since today is Halloween and I love vampires and music so much, I recommend the following music for all your vampire novel-reading needs.



















And of course:

Thursday, October 29, 2009

"The Woman with the Wasted Face"

Just in time for Halloween, I have a post up on the Slaves of Golconda. Our book selection for this month was Susan Hill's Woman in Black. I chose to focus on the self-referential aspects of the work - that it is a ghost story that knows it's a ghost story. It is very creepy and very atmospheric and just perfect for the season.

Wednesday, October 28, 2009

Wordless Wednesday (Halloween Edition)




Happy Halloween! (Click here for more Wordless Wednesday.)

Tuesday, October 27, 2009

Teaser Tuesday

• Grab your current read.
• Let the book fall open to a random page.
• Share with us two "teaser" sentences from somewhere on that page.
• You also need to share the title of the book that you’re getting your “teaser” from. That way people can have some great book recommendations if they like the teaser you’ve given!
Please avoid spoilers!

Elegy for a Fabulous World by Alta Ifland
Page 67 - There were many things one could buy from these vendors, who bore an uncanny resemblance to Serioja and cried out the names of their products while plodding through the crowds: ice-cream cones, lollipops - which we called Kojak candies after the famous Hollywood detective - and various souvenirs such as combs, huge pens in gaudy colors, and shell-encrusted artifacts. But none of these gave us as much pleasure as the peanuts reserved for the special stores of the nomenklatura, acquired by Serioja after hours of emotional balancing on the rope he manufactured with such artistic deceit each time he needed to conquer another store clerk.

Sunday, October 25, 2009

Sunday Salon and Read-a-Thon Wrap-Up












The Sunday Salon.com

It is now 1:00 p.m. on October 25, 2009, exactly 12 hours since my last Read-a-Thon update. You will recall that I was tired despite my four cups of coffee at 8:30. Alas, within a half-hour of writing that post, I was in bed. Has my body acclimated to caffeine that much?

And so, having begun an hour late at 9:00 a.m. on Saturday, October 24, 2009 and finished around 1:00 a.m. on Sunday, October 25, 2009, and having read on and off for a total of 16 hours, I achieved the following:

84 pages of Alex de Tocqueville's Democracy in America
+
115 pages of Thomas Nash (The Terrors of the Night and half of The Unfortunate Traveller)
+
42 pages of Sylvia Plath
+
69 pages of Thomas Mann ("The Blood of the Walsungs" and "Tristan")
+

10 pages of T.S. Eliot (approximately)
______________________________
320 pages total


And here are all of my posts:

START
Update #1 (Plath and Nashe)

Update #2 (Tocqueville)
Update #3 (Tocqueville)
Mini-Challenge: Collection Obsession
Update #4 (Mann)
Update #5 (Mann)
Mid-Event Survey
Musical Mini-Challenge
Update #6 (Nashe)


I know 320 pages doesn't sound like much, but Thomas Nashe is hard. But I still got a lot done for my very first Read-a-Thon, and hopefully next time I'll do better.

I would like to thank EVERYONE who commented and cheered me on. I didn't realize how much support was out there! I would especially like to recognize Softdrink and Rhapsodyinbooks for their constant efforts to encourage me and help me move along.

In other news, I will be getting posts out this week on both Kristin Lavransdatter and The Woman in Black. Also, the Musical Mini-Challenge got me thinking: I need to post a vampire playlist! The perfect soundtrack to all your favorite vampire books!

24-Hour Read-a-Thon: 1:00 a.m. (Update #6)

I had four cups of coffee at 8:30 p.m. and I'm TIRED!

On the upside, I did get through the first 60 of 120 pages of Thomas Nashe's The Unfortunate Traveller. As far as crazy Renaissance English goes, it's not nearly as bad as "The Terrors of the Night," although it does have its moments of incomprehension. I think what also helps is how funny it is. It is a picaresque concerning the misadventures of one Jack Wilton, a rogue, knave, cavalier, expert gambler, woer of women, fountain of wit. He remorselessly sends men to ruin with his trickery, including one particularly hated army captain, whom Jack convinces to go over to the French lines as a spy and assassin, in hopes that the French will either kill him or he would be flogged and sent back to the English in disgrace.
This confession could not choose but move them all to laughter, in that he made it as light a matter to kill their King and come back, as to go to Islington and eat a mess of cream and come home again; nay, and besides he protested that he had no other intention, as if that were not enough to hang him.
I got as far as the part where Wilton's love-sick traveling companion challenges the Court of Florence to defend the beauty of his Florentine-born lady back in England. Then the narrative started to drag with drawn-out description of battle armor.

Unfortunately, the coffee has also made it difficult for me to concentrate, so for the time being I will go back to poetry, this time Wallace Stevens and T.S. Eliot.

Saturday, October 24, 2009

24-Hour Read-a-Thon: A Musical Mini-Challenge

I just found this mini-challenge on Fizzy Thoughts. I LOVE music so it's just perfect for me!

I know a lot of readers are also fans of music. So for this mini-challenge we’re going to give our eyes a break and focus on our ears. I’d like you to post a song that reminds you of the read-a-thon, or that you love to read to, or that makes you think of a particular book. You can either embed a video of the song, or post the lyrics. And don’t forget to include a sentence or two as to why you’re sharing that particular song! Easy-peasie, right? Originally, I was thinking of making you run a marathon, but I thought this might go over a bit better.

Ooooh, tough one. I can think of several.

Apocalyptica's "I'm Not Jesus" makes me think of Suzane Adam's Laundry, even though the lyrics don't fit exactly. (Lyrics)



Flowing Tears's "For Tonight" is a song of disillusionment that recalls a lot of the post-WWI Lost Generations authors (i.e. Hemingway, Fitzgerald, Eliot). (Lyrics)



Tristania's "Beyond the Veil" reminds me of the whole vampire genre. (Lyrics)



Metallica's "One" is pretty obvious. It's based on Johnny Got His Gun, and clips of the movie were even used in the video. (Lyrics)

Read-a-Thon: Mid-Event Survey

It's been 12 hours since we started! (Actually, we started at 8:00 a.m., so this post is a bit late.) This brings us to the mid-event survey.

What are you reading right now?

I haven't started it yet, but more Thomas Nashe.

How many books have you read so far?

Two short stories by Thomas Mann, one essay by Nashe, some poetry by Sylvia Plath, and 84 pages of Alex de Tocqueville's Democracy in America, plus the introduction.

What book are you most looking forward to for the second half of the Read-a-thon?

No book in particular. I'm just excited to be getting this much reading done!

Did you have to make any special arrangements to free up your whole day?

Nope. I usually spend most of my weekend reading. On weekdays I'm just too tired when I come home from work.

Have you had many interruptions? How did you deal with those?

The only interruptions I've had were those caused by myself. I should've gotten coffee yesterday!

What surprises you most about the Read-a-Thon, so far?

How much support I got. Every time I went to check my email there was a comment!

Do you have any suggestions for how to improve the Read-a-Thon next year?

Nope.

What would you do differently, as a Reader or a Cheerleader, if you were to do this again next year?

I would concentrate more and not get distracted so easily.

Are you getting tired yet?

HA! I just had FOUR cups of coffee! I should be up for HOURS!

Do you have any tips for other Readers or Cheerleaders, something you think is working well for you that others may not have discovered?

No. If anything, I could probably learn more from others.

24-Hour Read-a-Thon: 9:00 p.m. (Updated #5)

I just finished Thomas Mann's "Tristan." After the incest of "The Blood of the Walsungs" it was quite the welcome relief. My reading was interrupted by a quick run to the grocery store. I was out of coffee.

Despite their differences, however, both "Tristan and "The Blood of the Walsungs" had echoes of "Death in Venice" (although the latter was written decades later). "Walsungs" had the twisted sexuality, but "Tristan," though quite chaste, centered on a relationship with philosophical overtones similar to those of the one-sided relationship between Aschenbach and Tadzio. To Herr Spinelli, "Herr Klöterjahn's wife" (whose name is not revealed until the end) represents a Platonic ideal of art and beauty. She is a Gothic vision of deathly loveliness too fragile for the debasement of ordinary life. She is Ophelia floating down the creek surrounded by flowers. The "love" between her and Spinelli is consummated through the music of the piano, which she plays with unearthly grace.

If it all sounds contrived and artificial, that's because it is. Spinelli hates Herr Klöterjahn because he is a businessman, "a peasant with gourmand tastes," and he hates the Klöterjahn infant son for being lusty and healthy like his father. To Spinelli, the death of Herr Klöterjahn's wife is a tragedy, yes, but a highly stylized one. He imagines her family as ancient nobility, doomed to decay into ethereal art before softly passing away.

In other words, Spinelli, like Aschenbach, is one nutty writer.

The parody of "Tristan" was far more evident to me than the supposed parody of "The Blood of the Walsungs." Some things only exist in fiction. Unfortunately, Spinelli just doesn't understand that.

24-Hour Read-a-Thon: 6:30 p.m. (Update #4)

After the pedophilia in "Death in Venice," I really wasn't too surprised by the incest in "The Blood of the Walsungs." Oh that Thomas Mann. . .

"The Blood of the Walsungs" centers on a pair of twins from a wealthy German family named Sieglinde and Siegmund. The twins are incapable of appreciating anything other than their own outward perfection. They claim to appreciate artistic effort but fail to be impressed by the finished product. Their days are filled with laziness and self-indulgence. The outside world holds no interest for them, however, as it often fails to meet their standards of order and cleanliness. This is exemplified by the image of the twins gliding through a busy, bustling city, on their way to the opera, shut away in a silk-lined carriage.

This self-imposed isolation has darker implications: there is an underlying theme of persecution, one which I initially saw as imaginary - like, "they only hate us because we're so much better than them." But no, apparently the twins and their family are supposed to be Jewish. I didn't figure that out until I looked "The Blood of the Walsungs" up on the Internet several minutes ago. Now I'm just confused. Thomas Mann was not an anti-Semite. His wife was Jewish and he vehemently opposed the Third Reich. So . . . WTF???

Actually, it seems that "The Blood of the Walsungs" was meant to be a parody. My online research was pretty brief, but apparently Jews and incest (and not to mention money) were often linked in the early 20th-century German imagination. The strained interaction between Sieglinde's fiance and her overly-refined (to a ridiculous extent) family represents failed assimilation, while the relationship between Sieglinde and her brother represents some statement on endogamy. So . . . I guess the outside world hates them because they're Jewish and links them to incest, and so they isolate themselves from the world, become suspicious of it and hostile to it, and subsequently turn to . . . incest. Okayyyy. . .

Oh that Thomas Mannn. . .

(I'll be reading "Tristan" next.)

24-Hour Read-a-Thon: Collection Obsession

My first-ever mini-challenge. From Wendy at Caribousmom: "Most obsessive readers are also collectors. Besides books, what do YOU collect?"

Antique shot glasses!




These aren't from my collection but I don't have a digital camera to take a picture of mine.

Aren't they cute? Some look like little doll-sized wine glasses, others like little mugs, and others just like little cups. I don't collect anything with words or pictures on it. Just clear glass, often in pretty colors. I find them at antique fairs (you really have to search) and store them in a little cabinet on one of my bookcases.

24-Hour Read-a-Thon: 5:00 p.m. (Update #3)

I've gotten 84 pages into Tocqueville's Democracy in America in the three hours since my last update. Of course, I didn't spend that entire time reading. I also ran to the store and made spaghetti.

Plus, the book got really boring and I kept getting distracted.

It started out quite interesting. According to Tocqueville, America is unique in that it has definite beginning and we can easily trace its origins. Not so with the nations of Europe. Tocqueville focuses on the Puritans, particularly their seemingly contradictory blend of religious fervor and love of liberty. In reality, he says, their strong intellectual background allowed them to put into place revolutionary forms of democratic government, which in Europe at the time were found only in theory. Furthermore, they left England not because they had to but because they wanted to. They came with a drive and an ambition, knowing that they had to create their own civilization for themselves, and they launched that task with faith-fueled vigor.

Of the colony of Virginia, Tocqueville has little to say beyond that it was founded largely by single, lower-class male adventurers who lacked the civilizing effect of women and learning. Unlike New England, it did have something of a landed aristocracy, albeit one that lacked the power of its English counterpart. This was partially due to slavery - no tenant farmers meant no patronage.

In his introduction, Tocqueville asserted that one of the difficulties facing Europe's transition to democracy was the hatred of the common people toward the nobility. Whereas before they existed in an ignorant contentment, knowledge of injustice has made them angry. In the United States, by contrast, not only do inheritance laws that divide property equally preclude the formation of permanent wealth (America was still very Jeffersonian at this time), but the aristocracy that did exist at the time of independence avoided the people's antagonism by providing much of the rhetoric and writing supporting the Revolution.

All very fascinating stuff, but then Tocqueville lost me. He started going on and on about the minute workings of the American municipal system. I can see his point about the autonomy of the American town that has no equivalent in Europe and how it empowers the individual citizen, but then he went on and on. . . It got so dull I couldn't concentrate and kept getting up. So for now I'll abandon Tocqueville and move onto some Thomas Mann and more poetry.

Read-a-Thon: 2:00 p.m. (Update #2)

The introduction to Alex de Tocqueville's Democracy in America was a breath of fresh air after the convoluted Renaissance English of Thomas Nashe.

According to Tocqueville, all of Western history has been progressing steadily towards greater social and political equality. Once that spark was ignited, all advances in the arts, literature, science, and politics have further impelled its momentum. It is the great wave of history, frightening in its force and unpredictability. Though disheartened by what he perceives to be intellectual confusion around him in Europe, as no one seems to know what to make of democracy's ongoing march, Tocqueville trusts God's plan and is assured of its outcome. He foresees a society with less drama but with more contentment. Less highs and lows and more happy mediums. But for now, Europe is in painful flux and everything is up in the air. "Positioned as we are in the middle of a rapid stream, we stare fixedly at a few ruins we can still see on the shore as the current drags us away backwards to the abyss." A new age, he concludes, desperately needs "a new political science," since the old ways of thought no longer fit.

Tocqueville does not want to praise the new United States as the perfect society or perfect government. The purpose of Democracy in America is to explore how American democracy functions, its cultural effects, and what Europeans can learn from it.

Read-a-Thon: 12:30 p.m. (Update #1)

I began late (9:00 instead of 8:00) and have been reading sporadically ever since. Still, in these three and a half hours, I was able to get through 42 pages of Sylvia Plath's poetry and Thomas Nashe's "The Terrors of the Night, or A Discourse of Apparitions."

Plath's poetry, despite its density, is remarkably easy to understand - at least, her poems from 1956 are, which is as far as I've gotten so far. The pretense of appearances stood out most to me as a theme: for example, "Street Song" and "Tale of a Tub." But, not surprisingly, most of the poems I read seemed concerned with some form of darkness or another. The very first one, "Conversation Among the Ruins," though quite well done, was interesting in its use of clichéd Gothic imagery to express a very real state of depression. Read on its own, it would probably look like the ramblings of some melodramatic Goth/emo kid who's read too much Poe and Rice, and yet it's real. Does that make any sense? She's using tropes already available in the cultural imagination to express very honest feelings. She's also rather obsessed with rooks. What is a rook?

Another observation: in "A Dialogue Between Ghost and Priest" the Ghost speaks in verse whereas the Priest speaks in prose. In English Renaissance plays, the dialogue of the noble, exalted main characters is in the former, while the words of the fools, clowns, and other comic relief are rendered in the latter. This particular poem ends with the Ghost getting the last word, but Plath is clearly implying more within the poem's very structure.

Speaking of the English Renaissance and the various forms of "melancholy" (in the 17th-century sense of the word), it was quite the coincidence that Thomas Nashe's "The Terrors of the Night" seemed to go hand-in-hand at times with the poetry of Plath. Nashe, the Renaissance English version of Mark Twain (sarcastic, irreverent writer of essays and pamphlets), believed that night and day are spiritual opposites. While the Devil stalks his prey subtly under the sunlight, come nightfall, he does away with all disguises and all-out assaults the helpless dreamer. Awake, we focus our thoughts on particular goals and ideas; asleep, the noxious vapors of our spleens ascend to our brains, put our thoughts all into turmoil, dredge up secret fears and guilt, distort them, and conjure up all manner of horrors. But the fear of death or downfall is actually far worse than the very event itself, Nashe asserts, and it is one of humanity's great paradoxes that we invest so much time in charlatans purporting to tell the future so that we may live in perpetual apprehension of it. (Of course, many a royal "prophet" was involved with the conspiracies he prophesized about, just so he could prophesize about them and be lauded for his great powers.) We all too often believe that bad must follow good and vice versa. He who sees a comedy at the theater today decides he must see a tragedy tomorrow, as some sort of illogical sense of balance.

Nashe's 17th-century English was a delight to read, full of words like "cavaliering" and "knave" and phrases like "got a maid with child" (which has forced many a future "fortune-teller," all of whom are inherenlty corrupt, to flee to Ireland or the Low Countries, although he claims to have traveled to so many exotic places he's nearly forgotten the English language). But it was also highly convoluted in some places. A good 1/4 of the essay was subsequently gibberish to me, especially since he digressed so much. (Mark Twain, by contrast, abandoned "Conversations with Satan" after going too far off onto a tangent about cigars.) But Nashe's other works seem interesting, so hopefully I will get to another one during the Read-a-Thon. I'm not sure though - "The Terrors of the Night" took a long to time read.

24-Hour Read-a-Thon START

It is 8:42 a.m. I should have begun 42 minutes ago. I even woke up at 6 but I kept hitting the snooze button and didn't get out of bed until 8:10. Then I had to take the dogs out, give them their food, and refill their water bowls. Then I started my coffee. Our coffee maker was due for replacement a long time ago and literally takes a half-hour to make four cups. So now I am still waiting for it to finish.

I think I'll start out with some poetry, just to get myself into the mood. Maybe Sylvia Plath is too dark, but out of all the poets I've selected she's the one I'm least familiar with, so I don't think I'll get bored.

Once I get my coffee and a little something to eat, I'm off! Don't know how things will progress, but we'll see.

My complete Read-a-Thon list is here.

Thursday, October 22, 2009

24-Hour Read-a-Thon Stack

Dewey's 24-Hour Read-a-Thon is named for Dewey, a much-loved book blogger who hosted the first one in 2007. Unfortunately, Dewey died in late 2008, but the Read-a-Thon continues every April and October. Beginning this Saturday, October 24, 2009, at 8:00 a.m., book bloggers everywhere will read and blog about reading for 24 hours straight. There will also mini-challenges hosted by Cheerleaders, whose are also responsible for encouraging Readers.

Having never participated in a Read-a-Thon before, I don't really plan on doing much other than read. (The website has all kinds of suggestions and stuff about spreadsheets, prizes, and charity. Apparently some people are really into this.) But who knows - once I get into the swing of things maybe I'll see a mini-challenge that looks like fun. Or maybe I'll get bored. I'll probably just let things unfold as they go, since I don't really have any particular goals in mind.

Quick, light fare is recommended but I've decided to focus on short stories, poetry, and essays. Below is my list of books which I'll be reading and writing about on Saturday, along with their opening sentences, an idea I got from Claire:

T.S. Eliot - The Complete Poems and Plays 1909-1950

Let us go then, you and I,

Thomas Mann - Death in Venice and Seven Other Stories


It was seven minutes to twelve.


Thomas Nashe - The Unfortunate Traveller and Other Works


Faith, I am very sorry, sir.

Sylvia Plath - The Collected Poems

Through the portico of my elegant house you stalk

Wallace Stevens - The Palm at the End of the Mind: Selected Poems and a Play

Look at the terrible mirror in the sky

Alexis de Tocqueville - Democracy in America and Two Essays on America

Of all the novel things which attracted my attention during my stay in the United States, none struck me more forcibly than the equality of social conditions.

I think that should hold me over. I'll probably focus on the essays and short stories, with the poetry as filler.

I'm not sure if I'll be able to read for 24 hours straight, but I will certainly try.

Wednesday, October 21, 2009

Garden of the Gods

. . . [A]lthough the commonplace aids of modern travel such as railways, steamers, telegraph, automobiles, airplanes, etc., were renounced, we penetrated into heroic and the magical. It was shortly after the World War, and the beliefs of the conquered nations were in an extraordinary state of unreality. There was a readiness to believe in things beyond reality even though only a few barriers were actually overcome and few advances made into the realm of a future psychiatry.

This post contains spoilers.

Hermann Hesse's The Journey to the East (first published in 1932 as Die Morgenlandfahrt) is a short, meandering tale that is equal parts mystic and mundane. Narrator H.H. is lonely, unhappy man who used to be a choirmaster but who has since sold his beloved violin and abandoned music. He claims to have once been a member of "the League," a religious/philosophical sect whose members have included such luminaries as Mozart, Plato, Don Quixote, and Paul Klee. Some time ago, shortly following the Great War, H.H. and a small group of League members undertook a journey through time and space, attempting to reach "the East" in hopes of attaining spiritual enlightenment. Instead, the whole lofty enterprise collapsed into mindless squabbling following the mysterious departure of the much-loved servant Leo. A disillusioned H.H. left the Journey and the League shortly thereafter, and now struggles to recall the events that transpired during his time in the League and set them to paper.

Whether the League actually exists or not is left up for debate. The Journey to the East is describes as both a literal, geographic journey and a metaphysical exploration of the collective human experience of art, literature, music, science, philosophy, and the intellect. H.H. tells us that
this expedition to the East was not only mine and now; this procession of believers and disciples had always and incessantly been moving towards the East, towards the Home of Light. Throughout the centuries it had been on the way, towards light and wonder, and each member, each group, indeed our whole host and great pilgrimage, was only a wave in the eternal stream of human beings, of the eternal strivings of the human spirit towards the East, towards Home.
Though the prose is simple and straightforward, H.H.'s brief descriptions of his time on the Journey, particularly the Bremgarten episode, are reminiscent of the hallucinatory fantasy sequences that characterize the climactic party and the Magic Theatre in Steppenwolf (1927). In Steppenwolf, Henry Haller's proto-psychedelic experiences come at the culmination of his evolution from bourgeoisie conformity to liberation and self-realization. H.H., in Journey to the East, similarly recalls that the "first principle of our great period" was to "never rely on and let myself be disconcerted by reason" and to "always know that faith is stronger than so-called reality." Taken together with Steppenwolf, Hesse seems to equate intellectual and psychological growth with looking "beyond the veil," so to speak - of breaking through the physical world to some higher plane.

In Journey to the East, however, the Bremgarten episode occurs not only at the beginning of the story but as H.H.'s memory of a past event. H.H.'s abandonment of the League is depicted not so much as literal resignation from an organization but as the loss of some inner faculty related to imagination and creativity. He recalls a conversation had with one of his leaders regarding a comrade who had deserted the Journey. Many great people have undergone a similar experience, the leader tells him; once upon a time, when they were young, "the light shone for them; they saw the light and followed the star; but then came reason and the mockery of the world; then came faint-heartedness and apparent failure; then came weariness and disillusionment. . ." Don't concern yourself with that young man, the leader concludes, he will repent what he has lost, search for us, and never find us. The main conflict Hesse brings to our attention appears to be the disconnect between art and the intellect on the one hand, and the conventional, immediate, and here-and-now on the other.

Still, an open, seeking mind comes with a price. H.H. is disenchanted and adrift, certainly, yet he also seems diminished and "not all there." In fact, I didn't even think he had much of a personality beyond his feelings of loss and desire to write about the League. We get no description of his past before the League, or where he currently lives or what he has done since he left the League. H.H. is a cipher: who is he other than a wayward disciple of some vaguely-described secret society?

Back at the Bremgarten, H.H. had asked Leo why the artists present seemed only "half-alive" while their creations were so vivid. (The Greek poet Longus, for example, spends the entire party writing in a book while dragons and colorful snakes fly from his letters and whirl about the room.) It is, Leo responds, because the artist, like the mother for her child, gives all their strength and passion to their offspring, and watches the offspring grow, from an idea existing only in the mind to a physical creation that awes the world. "He who wishes to live long must serve, but he who wishes to rule does not live long." Leo, far more than H.H., is an animated, fully-realized character who reveals both innocent joy and humble wisdom. Leo has been the focal point of H.H.'s obsession with the long-lost League: it was his disappearance that precipitated H.H.'s decline and it is he who H.H. now seeks to contact. They are like Haller and Hermine, like Emil and Demian: two separate beings who are compliment one another and are united in their opposing qualities.

Years later, in the novel's present day, H.H. finds the League again and discovers that, far from a simple servant, Leo is the League's President! And while H.H. flails about desperately seeking purpose, Leo has achieved true greatness and piece of mind. Only in the very last pages does H.H. - Hermann Hesse's surrogate? - arrive at the true meaning of his downfall: as he decreases, so does Leo increase. Such is the way of creation. H.H. suddenly feels inexpressibly weary and wishes to find somewhere to sleep.

Wordless Wednesday


An adaptation of Casper David Friedrich's The Abbey in the Oakwood. Perfect for Halloween! (Click here for more Wordless Wednesday.)

Tuesday, October 20, 2009

Teaser Tuesday

• Grab your current read.
• Let the book fall open to a random page.
• Share with us two "teaser" sentences from somewhere on that page.
• You also need to share the title of the book that you’re getting your “teaser” from. That way people can have some great book recommendations if they like the teaser you’ve given!
Please avoid spoilers!

The Journey to the East by Hermann Hesse
Page 225 - It is possible that the practitioners and psychologists who attribute all human action to egotistic desires are right; I cannot indeed see that a man who serves a cause all his life, who neglects his pleasures and well-being, and sacrifices himself for anything at all, really acts in the same way as a man who traffics in slaves or deals in munitions and squanders the proceeds on a life of pleasure. But no doubt I should immediately get to the worst of it
and be beaten in an argument with such a psychologist, for psychologists are, of course, people who always win.

Sunday, October 18, 2009

The Whole World's a Stage








I just finished up with the very first session of Padfoot and Prong's Good Books Club, an online bookclub which will be held on the third Sunday of each month in a chatroom. I had never used a chatroom before so I wasn't sure how that was going to work out, but it was actually very easy. In addition to Padfoot and Prongs themselves, there was also Tara SG of 25 Hour Books and Lula O. of Strictly Letters. This month's selection was Kurt Vonnegut's Mother Night, and let me start off with my edition's really freaky cover:

The scribbling is part of the design, BTW. I nearly jumped back when I first saw it at the library! I asked if anyone else had this edition but most seemed to have one with a guy riding a dog. Interpretations, anyone?

There is a lot going on with this book, but what we discussed most was the dissonant art of pretending. Of claiming to be one thing but acting like just the opposite. Of refusing to accept responsibility for your own actions because you knew they were wrong even while you were doing them. BUT, you did them, so what you actually thought of your actions is irrelevant to the big picture because you still contributed to the Nazi Hate Machine. Oh what a tangled web we weave. . .

Howard Campbell was an American living in Germany during World War II. He accepted a job as a spy for the American military: he would use his background as a playwright and actor to spew out Nazi propaganda over the radio. (Nazism, in many respects, may be thought of as one big theatrical show: the parades, the violent hate, the melodramatic us-versus-them, the caricaturing of the Jews, the "master race," the plans for world domination - the whole absurd, over-the-top, tragic shebang.) But in reality, his speeches were embedded with codes - in the pauses, cleared throats, and so forth - that would convey important information to the Allies. Of course, only one individual, an intelligence agent named Frank Wirtanen, actually knows of Campbell's secret mission. To the rest of the world, Campbell is either a traitor and war criminal or a glorious hero for the neo-Nazi/white supremacist cause. But which is he really?

We all agreed that he was a coward, for one. Selfish, definitely, in his notion of a separate "nation of two" consisting of himself and his wife Helga, apart from the world and apathetic to it, even as it falls apart into utter chaos and bloodshed. He's a perpetual victim who refuses to accept that his actions are as much a part of him as his own self-image is. One picture that seemed to arise from our discussion was that of a man trapped in a web: Howard Campbell is a pretender and a liar, and so is everyone else around him. He has nowhere to run, because even his only friend plans to betray him and, on top of that, it turns out his wife isn't his wife. Sheeeesh. Even one of his Israeli guards, a Holocaust survivor, confesses to having escaped by hiding his Jewish background and becoming a fanatical SS officer. Can the authentic person in the room please stand up?

One interpretation was that Campbell's two-faced act reflects the response of ordinary Germans to the rise of Nazism. (I brought up Jenna Blum's Those Who Save Us.) That it was basically a survival mechanism. But it was also agreed that Campbell got himself into the whole hot mess in the first place, as he certainly could have left Germany when things started to get bad, but he didn't. He is a highly passive individual: he lets circumstances and other people dictate who he is, even when he knows that the person he's posing as - the person others want him to be - is evil. He actually "wrote" (or rather, Vonnegut did) the following poem which I think sums up quite a bit:

I saw a huge steam roller,
It blotted out the sun.
The people all lay down, lay down;
They did not try to run.
My love and I, we looked amazed
Upon the gory mystery.
"Lie down, lie down!" the people cried,
"The great machine is history!"
My love and I, we ran away,
The engine did not find us.
We ran up to a mountain top,
Left history far behind us.
Perhaps we should have stayed and died,
But somehow we don't think so.
We went to see where history'd been,
And my, the dead did stink so.


We each had to describe our favorite passage or moment in the book. A popular one was what Vonnegut, as Campbell's "editor," stated as being the moral of the story: "We are what we pretend to be, so we must be careful about what we pretend to be." Another was the metaphor, used at the end, of the totalitarian mind as a series of gears that keeps turning, even though some of its teeth are missing. Those missing teeth represent the ability of the human mind to make important connections or recognize certain facts. Like, how playing great classical music over the loudspeakers at Auschwitz in between calls for the corpse-carriers is really ironic and seriously fucked up.

In his great novel Unforgiving Years (written post-WWII and also dealing with the subject of totalitarianism - in this case, Soviet communism), Victor Serge describes civilization as "a form of schizophrenia." We all agreed that schizophrenia was definitely a very strong presence in Mother Night. All the characters were sick. They weren't real people - only a series of façades, actors taking their roles way too seriously. When Campbell commits suicide, the curtains fall and the play finally ends. I must be executed by myself, Campbell sheepishly admits, for crimes against myself.

Unfortunately, we didn't get around to the neo-Nazis Campbell unwittingly befriends in New York, in addition to their ally, the Black Fuehrer of Harlem, who spent time in prison for spying for the Japanese because he wanted to side with "the colored people." Even though the session ran for an hour and a half, we still lacked the time to cover everything. Mother Night has just so much going on. We ended by reflecting on what a deep guy Kurt Vonnegut was. "Ocean," someone said succinctly.

A bit of a side note: I read a book awhile back called Landscape in Concrete by Jakov Lind. Lind was an Austrian Jew who survived World War II by pretending to be a Dutchman and working for the German Institute for Metallurgical Research of the Imperial Air Ministry of Traffic. Posing as a Nazi is really an unconscious act, Lind later said, one merely "nods and obeys, one adapts." Landscape in Concrete deals with very similar themes as Mother Night, as well as Joseph Heller's Catch-22. It concerns the misadventures of one Gauthier Bachman, a big dumb German soldier, who merely wants to obey and serve the Fatherland. Along the way, however, all he ends up doing is allowing himself to be manipulated into behaving in ways contrary to his nature and allowing others to turn him into a monster. I definitely recommend it. It's a great read.


Sunday Salon

The Sunday Salon.com

This is going to be a brief one. 7:00 p.m. EST tonight is the first meeting of Padfoot and Prong's Good Books Club. We are going to be discussing Kurt Vonnegut's Mother Night.

I have finished Susan Hill's The Woman in Black for Slaves of Golconda and will be starting that post shortly. I'm also just about done with the first book of the Kristin Lavransatter trilogy, which I'm doing as part of a readalong. Currently, I am in the middle of Hermann Hesse's The Journey to the East, which I got for my birthday.

Saturday, October 17, 2009

For Maximum Creepy, Just Add Coyotes



I just finished reading Susan Hill's The Woman in Black for the Slaves of Golconda, where I've just become a contributor. I'll be writing of post for Slaves within the next few days but for now I'd just like to comment on Hill's use of atmosphere. The Woman in Black is centered on a bleak old house in the wild, desolate English swamps. Ruins of an ancient monastery and crumbling graveyard are also located on the property. It's so reminiscent of "The Fall of the House of Usher" that I literally expected the house to, well, fall. But one thing that struck me as I was reading this book was the eerie sounds the protagonist often heard at night, alone in an isolated house alleged to be haunted. A child's scream, a disembodied whistle, the clip-clop of a ghostly horse.

Last night, while in laying in bed by an open window, I was awakened by a chorus of mad pipers. Crazed howlings spiraled out from the dark woods, winding higher and higher and reaching a piercing, fevered pitch.

I love coyotes, but they can be so creepy!

Wolves are such a cliché in fantasy and mythology. (So are felines, to a lesser extent, particularly lions.) Many have waxed poetic about the primal cry of the wolf, and werewolves are second only to vampires and zombies as pop culture's monster of choice. But what about coyotes? I know Patricia Briggs has an urban fantasy series about a werecoyote, but other than that, coyotes are so underrepresented! It really makes no sense - wolves are borderline endangered, whereas coyotes are found everywhere imaginable, from cities (Chicago has a large population) to suburbs to snowy mountains to the tropics. Millions from Alaska down to Central America are familiar with their yips, yaps, and howls and their haunting resonance through the night. So why, I wonder, are they so absent from fiction? They have so much potential!

Think of how much scarier The Woman in Black, or "The Fall of the House of Usher" or any other horror classic would be with coyote noises!

(This coyote is supposed to be expressing happiness but doesn't he just sound like he's in pain?)



Thursday, October 15, 2009

Too Much of a Good Thing

I just read this post on Lakeside Musings and this one awhile back on chaotic compendiums. Many libraries practice what is called "book weeding" but I think it's a great idea for home collections as well.

One of my favorite non-book blogs is called Unclutterer, which I discovered relatively recently and have already found to be very inspiring. What's great about Unclutterer is that it's all about restraint and responsibility but it's also not extreme or countercultural. It's not about asceticism or anti-consumerism. The goal of Unclutterer is to help people clear out all those excess possessions in life that must be constantly straightened and put away, kept track of, worried about, searched for, tripped over, and so forth. One of the first things I did was clear off my desk at work. I put all my pens, paperclips, Post-Its, reference books, etc into a drawer, so all I have out is my monitor, keyboard, dictation machine, a little picture, and a little shelf system for folders I'm working on. Law offices can be hectic places and there are times when my desk is just full of STUFF. But the less I have to begin with, the easier it is for me. Sometimes just looking at visual clutter can raise stress levels.

Personally, I think some of Unclutterer's advice about books and book storage goes a little too far for a bookworm like me. For example, they're all about Amazon Kindle and other digital options, but for most of us, part of the reading experience is being able to hold a physical book. Unclutterer also recommends not buying any book that is in the public domain and can be found in its entirety online. Again, that may be a great idea for some people, but not for me. To be fair, however, a lot of audiophiles balked at Unclutterer's suggestion that we rip our CDs to our computers and then get rid of the CD itself. Part of the of the music-listening experience, they argued, was possessing the actual, physical CD or record, along with the liner notes. I thought it was a great idea (I seriously had way too many CDs) but I totally understand their position. Uncluttering is all about what works for you.

With that in mind, here are my suggestions for keeping your book volume under control. I mean, they're pretty obvious, but I just felt inspired to write something.

1. Don't use the bookstore as a library. Buy only those books that you strongly believe you will refer back to for favorite quotes and passages and will one day re-read.

2. Try to avoid the "book" section of your local drugstore. There's absolutely nothing wrong with "low-brow" stuff, of course (I LOVE Star Trek books), but, let's face it, fluff is not filling and gets stale very quickly. Before you know it, you'll have bookshelves full of cheap paperbacks.

3. BUT, on the other hand, don't buy books that you only think you should own because you want to impress people or just because they look cool. Some books, for example, have a badass reputation. They've been banned for decades and frequently challenged. They were, and maybe still are, controversial. I read William S. Burroughs's Naked Lunch in high school. To my teenaged mine, this was SHOCKING! OMG, my parents would be HORRIFIED. So I went and bought several more Burroughs books. And, uh, had no idea what he was talking about, except that it was, um . . . rather grotesque. Last year, I dumped them off (except Naked Lunch, which I do actually like) at the local booksale.

4. DONATE. Libraries and community booksales are great places. My favorite coffee place has a few shelves where people leave books for other patrons to enjoy. I've deposited a few there myself. There's also the PaperBackSwap.com, which I've never tried but have heard great things about. I've also heard of charities that collect books for prison libraries and other organizations that send books to our troops overseas. I'm sure there are other worthy places out there too.

5. MONEY! You can sell used books on Amazon, Ebay, and other like places. Consignment stores are another option for books in good condition, especially hardcovers.

6. Lastly, don't feel guilty about getting rid of a book you never read and maybe never liked. There's surely someone out there who will feel differently.

What do you think? What are your thoughts or suggestions on book selection and book weeding?

Tuesday, October 13, 2009

Teaser Tuesday

• Grab your current read.
• Let the book fall open to a random page.
• Share with us two "teaser" sentences from somewhere on that page.
• You also need to share the title of the book that you’re getting your “teaser” from. That way people can have some great book recommendations if they like the teaser you’ve given!
Please avoid spoilers!

A Man and His Dog (Death in Venice and Seven Other Stories) by Thomas Mann
Page 225 - But the homeward way, which it took us an hour to cover, was scarcely a triumphal procession. The bridegroom soon lost his bouquet, while everyone we met either laughed or else jeered at his appearance - and we met a good many people, for our route lay the length of the market town at the foot of the hill.

Kristin Lavransdatter
(Book 1: "The Wreath") by Sigrid Undset

Page 177 - "Then I don't understand what you meant, Kristin, when you said that he had neither seduced you nor promised you anything. He has lured you away from the counsel of your kinsmen."

Monday, October 12, 2009

Community and Contingency

For my thoughts on the first essay of Louis Menand's American Studies, "Henry James and the Case of the Epileptic Patient," click here.

"The Principles of Oliver Wendell Holmes"

Oliver Wendell Holmes (1841-1935), Supreme Court Justice from 1902 to 1932, was a man of many sides on whom no label seems to stick. He has been called "a progressive, a liberal, a civil libertarian, a democrat, an aristocrat, a reactionary, a Social Darwinist, a fascist." But, according to Louis Menand, such labels assume that Holmes was concerned about the real-world consequences of his ideas. Actually, Holmes's 1881 book The Common Law posits, basically, that common law decides the outcome of a case first and then attempts to justify said outcome by resorting to abstract legal principles. Nineteenth century legal thought believed in formalism: that a general legal principle can be deduced by looking at a sequence of related cases. Holmes disagreed.

Holmes, in his approach to law, has been called "a formalist, a positivist, a utilitarian, a realist, a historicist, and a pragmatist (not to mention a nihilist)." Problem is, says Menand, supporters of each term tend to spend more time arguing why the others are wrong than trying to defend their own beliefs. Furthermore, such labels ultimately reduce the law to a bare essential, which was precisely what Holmes tried not to do. Once a case is introduced, it brings with it a whole matrix of "discursive imperatives." The final decision must be in sync with past decisions rendered upon similar cases. The decision must be beneficial to society as a whole. Preexisting legal doctrine must be bent to fit changing social norms. Bad must be punished and good rewarded. Costs must be redistributed to the party who can best afford them (Menand uses the example of car crash victims and insurance companies). Naturally, of course, judges want their decisions to be agreeable with their own politics, although they prefer not to admit this. And finally, binding the whole vortex together is what Menand calls "the meta-imperative": the desire to phrase everything so that it appears that no single one of these imperatives was decisive in determining the outcome at the obvious expense of the others.

So what decides cases? What apparently extralegal mechanism is the true force behind the scenes, which formal legal language merely supports after the fact? In Common Law, Holmes sought to articulate what exactly this force was.

In a nutshell: it's culture.

Holmes preferred the word "experience," which he saw as everything - values, prejudices, sentiments, and so forth - that evolves out of the individual human's lifelong reaction to their environment. Experience, he theorized, cannot be reduced to propositions; though the "pleasure of life is in general ideas," such general ideas cannot be utilized to solve specific problems. They must be deduced. First people decide, then they deduce. To train lawyers in "black letter law" - that is, to train them using only the abstract legal arguments upon which cases are ostensibly decided - is to train impotent, useless lawyers. The reality is, according to Holmes, that pretty much anything can go into a judge's decision. And if the general consensus is that the judge arrived at the right decision, then experience is therefore perfectly legitimate legal material to work with. In other words, the law is not based on some neo-Platonic, higher-level objective authority. As the instrument by which society regulates moral conduct and enforces social rules, the law is firmly rooted in the here-and-now.

Now since individuals rooted in the same culture must necessarily have sufficiently similar experiences (so Holmes thought), a second feature of common law is "the reasonable man," a "statistical fiction" who represents the average of all individual experiences. "The reasonable man" is what one expects a sound, prudent member of their society to look like. He is particularly well-known as the protagonist of modern liability theory. Society acts as an external regulator of each citizen's activities and seeks to prevent careless members from disrupting its smooth functioning. In a negligence case, the defendant's intentions or state of mind are irrelevant. (It's all rather Borg-like.) "A man may have as bad a heart as he chooses," Holmes explained in Common Law, "if his conduct is within the rules." What matters is that the defendant did somehow cause damage or injury, and this is where we return to experience, which is the basis for deciding whether a particular act or omission constitutes negligence. A reasonable man's experience tells him what the probability of injury is in any given situation (i.e. target practice in a populated area); added to this is the weight of the costs of avoiding injury against the social benefit of the hazardous practice in question (like working with explosives or toxic chemicals). Eventually, Holmes believed, formal legal doctrine in such cases will become archaic, as science and practicality take precedence over abstract concepts.

Unfortunately, what Holmes failed to factor in is how widely experience varies once you consider age, gender, location, sub-culture, culture of origin, and other such variables. One of Holmes's most famous screw-ups was the case of Baltimore & Ohio Railroad v. Goodman (1927). A motorist had died at a railroad crossing because his view of the track was obstructed. Holmes at the time was an 86-year-old man who had never driven and had been born decades before the invention of the car. In his mind, the motorist should have stopped the car, gotten out, and looked up and down the track before crossing it. Of course, such actions are not customary when driving and would likely disrupt traffic. But Holmes's experience didn't teach him this.

Still, the "imprecision factor" was an important third element of Holmes's theory of common law, which simply says that experience is amorphous and we should never treat a prediction as a certainty. You can start out with a seemingly concrete principle which appears to be of great help in deciding a large number of cases. As you expand outwards, however, you find that this principle actually rests on a shifting foundation of politics, sentiments, beliefs, intuitions, and so forth, and is therefore emptied of predictive force once you step back far enough. Menand uses the example sic utere tuo ut alienum nom laedas, which is generally interpreted to mean that a citizen can use their property any way they want to, as long as said use does not injure another citizen's property. But, said Holmes in Common Law, this also means that an arsonist who uses his matches to burn down a mom-and-pop candy store will be held liable for damage, whereas a competitor who opens a candy store across the street and forces Mom and Pop out of business and homeless into the night will face no legal consequences. The moral is that we cannot universalize our principles.

Menand goes on to explore how Oliver Wendell Holmes applied his theories to several famous free speech cases during World War I. However, I was more interested in the common law theory itself. I work a legal secretary in a general practice law firm that handles motor vehicle accidents, personal injury, and negligence cases, so this was all quite eye-opening to me. I have no intention of becoming a lawyer myself (I have neither the personality or the diehard work ethic), but I do find the law to be an interesting profession: abstract and research-based, yet grounded in practical concerns and real action. I wonder if how much influence Holmes ended up having on the practice of tort law. I'll have to ask someone when I get back to work on Wednesday. (Today is Columbus Day and I got tomorrow off for my birthday, so I have a four-day weekend. My birthday is actually Wednesday, however, and we will be having cake at the office.)
Related Posts with Thumbnails