Friday, January 22, 2010

E, S, & I


E braves the rain to find a pack of cards. Instead, she returns with a stack of photos. The pictures feature her friend, S, at pivotal moments during her eighth-grade year. There are photos of S as a witch, S dating a jock, S running down the street in a cow suit. E and I decide to have a drawing contest, to see who can better capture S's glamour. This is the picture we choose to replicate:



(Let's take a moment to appreciate the photo. S is obviously at some sort of school dance (note the rods of curls, the floral pattern dress, the similarly-bare arms in the background). Of course, the where of this portrait isn't nearly intriguing as the what the hell? I have two theories as to what, exactly, is prompting her reaction. Either someone at the dance has just whipped out their penis (judging by S's face, her first phallic glimpse--like most girls'--is a mixture of surprise, awe, and disgust); or, she's trying to pluck a nipple-pinching crab from her brassiere.)

E and I get to work. I do a blue-ink scratch-up, while E sticks to pencil. Here's what she comes up with:


I learned about the power of ambiguity while at the University (10 Gs well spent, right?), and the picture is ripe with it. Is S about to be eaten by these monsters, or sexually abused? Do they normally go shirtless (and if so, are they construction workers on day off)? Is S surprised, scared, or excited?

I asked E, but she won't say. Guess that party's private.


Thursday, January 21, 2010

Reality Hunger: A Review

1

This review of David Shield's upcoming Reality Huner: A Manifesto will be written in the same style as his book. It will be numbered, fragmented, and will steal shamelessly. It will also (I hope) create a sum greater than it's parts. At least, that's what Reality Hunger manages to do.

2

Many (most?) of the passages in this review are taken from other sources. What a great man quotes, he fills with his own voice and humor, and the whole cyclopaedia of his table talk is presently believed to be his own. So says David Shields. Possibly. Reality Hunger is a buffet of collaged prose, some of it Shields, much of it not. Shields has included some attributions in the back of his book, but he will personally hunt you down if you read them. Let it all blend. It works better that way. Reality-based art doesn't need to apologize.

3

The generic line between fact and fiction is fuzzier than most people find it convenient to admit. Shields prefers that gray area. He makes the case for invention in non-fiction (memory is already an inventive machine; anything processed by memory is a fiction) and cites a tradition of autobiography in “fictitious” works. It's difficult to separate what happened from what seemed to happen. Shields isn't worried that you might fib in non-fiction: he's worried that you may not fib well enough.

4

Statistic: There are 220 words in the English language to describe a sexually promiscuous female, while their male counterparts have only 22. We call one a stud; the other, a slut. Shields presents a similar incongruity in expectations towards fiction and non-. Why do we allow fiction to borrow from fact when we condemn non-fiction from taking artistic liberties? Good nonfiction has to be as carefully shaped as good fiction, and I'm not bothered at all by this artifice.

5

Shields writes about reality TV, hip-hop, and James Frey. Don't be fooled. He's still the star of this show.

6

Part of the fun of Reality Hunger is trying to sift out what belongs to Shields and what doesn't. I think you figure it out (more or less) about halfway through. Toward the end of the book is section “DS,” or, “David Shields.” Most authors introduce themselves and then wander away from ego. Reality Hunger is like hearing choice lines from a lecture echoed in some distant hall. By the time you find the auditorium, you're breathless, you're captivated, and seeing the man behind the podium is eerily rewarding.

7

What does it mean to write about yourself? To what degree can solipsism gain access to the world? It's refreshing to read someone so shamelessly self-involved, so obsessed with his present moment. I have the feeling reading this book that Shields is staring so piercingly into his own mind that I don't see him at all. I see everyone else. I see myself.

8

In Alone, one of the book's last sections, things come together. The discourses, the various inquiries, the unattributed quotes merge into an underlying truth (maybe truth is the wrong term; it's more like a well-deserved punch to the face). We write/read/watch/obsess over the self because it's all we know how to do, and it's something we all we have in common. Personal lyricism is the outcry of prisoner to prisoner from the cell solitary life. In the end, one only experiences oneself.

9

Reality Hunger's other merits: providing a substantial reading list; quoting stand-up comedy; denouncing Oprah; giving the finger to copyright; championing the lyrical essay as today's most important and engaging art form.

10

Reality Hunger is not a book. It looks like a book—it has pages, a front and back cover, blurbs, etc.—but it's not. Reality Hunger is a documentary. A calendar for a 582-day year. A book of proverbs. A spiderweb. A mess of paper scraps and glue. It's a guidebook to reading, writing, watching, stealing, remembering, imagining, and dying. You will experience a shutdown of mental faculties while reading this book, a nearly full-scale wipe of beliefs of conventions. The blank screen. Then, the motor starts whirring and things come back into focus, not quite the same as they were before.

11

If you write, read, watch, think, or otherwise exist, you owe to yourself to read this book.




(For another opinion, check out Mr. Seth Rasmussen's review.)




Wednesday, January 13, 2010

Emailing Creepy Folks on Craigslist: The Gift that Keeps On Giving

As some of you might have inferred by reading my blog (or by simply knowing me), I have a tendency to email strange people, most especially strange people from Craigslist. It's a source of incredible entertainment, to be sure; if you haven't tried it, I definitely recommend seeing what happens when you email such posters as "M4M: I SEEN YOUR BOY AT MICKIE D's" or "I NEED A MAN TO MARRY - NOW." (If you want to try it out but can't get past the fact that you might be corresponding with a psychopath, you can always use a free temporary email from GuerillaMail.com.) While the initial responses are always delightful, there's also the long-term benefits of emailing such scuzz, such as this little beauty, which arrived in my inbox at 1:37 a.m. this morning:

"I Slept with Sixteen Different Girls this Week

I have the morals of a SEWER
RAT .. yes I'm a mean, dirty, unethical son-of-a-bitch.

Why? Because I manipulate innocent women into having sex with me
within hours of meeting them .. at clubs, at the gym, online, on
Craigslist, dating sites like PlentyofFish ... or just walking down the street .. WHEREVER!

It's almost as if I slip them some sort of 'worship-me-like-a-god' drug that makes girls drop
everything - and everyone - to serve my every need ...

But there is no such drug. In fact, it's all science. And it's a system as easy as step 1, step 2, step 3 ...
that you can use starting NOW to suck any girl you meet into your bed in a matter of hours.

Look, I'm talking about some really dirty mind-control tricks ..

this isn't ethical, nice, or moral ... this is simply about GETTING LAID. Can you handle that?

HEY! Stop being jealous of your friends who have girlfriends and get laid every night ...

Isn't it time to just say 'enough already!' and learn how to pick up girls?"

While I'm tempted to steal this and turn it into a poem, I suppose I'm more interested in the fact that someone, somewhere, wrote this delightfully crude email, and moreover, that they probably making money doing it. Well god damn. Where do I sign up?

Truth is, I don't know where to sign up, because if I could, I would. I've tried explaining this to friends, and while they usually respond by sucking air through their teeth, changing the subject, or simply looking at their shoes, I stick by my convictions. This dude is probably sitting in his flannel pajama bottoms right now, (can't you see him? there's a bit of mustard crusted to his swollen, uncovered belly), writing these emails in all of three minutes, firing them out, and then letting the insecurities of the internet public get him paid.

At least, that's what I'm inferring from the automated messages that you inevitably end up with when you do any sort of scandalous emailing on the List. Most often, they're not bro-tastic messages like this one, but grammatically-challenged emails penned, supposedly, by real women. And while I'm sure that there are some real women, i.e. prostitutes, sending out some of these messages, for the most part I'm inclined to believe that some dude in Alaska (or wherever) has built a website and posted a bunch of photos of scantily clad 19-year-olds (which he pulled at random from the web). At that point, your clientele's loneliness has done the work: all that's left to do is charge the poor fuckers with the promise of meeting Cindy or Veronica or Miracle, eventually.

Perhaps that's terrible. Maybe this system is feeding on people's weaknesses, and leads only to more hurt, to further estrangement. Perhaps, perhaps.

Personally, I think it's a kick-ass entrepreneurial idea. I've been swimming after that sailed boat for like, 9 months. I usually reply to these emails by asking how much money is to be made doing this sort of work, or how they got started doing it. They don't ever write back. Or maybe they do. Maybe the email that showed up at 1:37 this morning was a long-delayed response to one of my inquiries. Perhaps the writer, that mustard-spattered guru, sensed my desperation through his computer. Maybe he sensed my loneliness. Maybe he was trying to tell me something.

Or maybe he just doesn't give a fuck. He has the morals of a sewer rat, after all.



Tuesday, January 5, 2010

"It falls to the Atom to Observe Itself;" a response to my friend, Seth

It falls to trees to observe themselves,
to me, to count my fingers,
to inhabit, daily, the flickering candle-flame of "i."
It's why TV medics scream "Stay with me!"
why I slapped my grandmother
when her back broke against the rocks:
To forget oneself is to crumble away at the base of the neck,
a surrender of atoms,
each eternal eye turned in.



(If you all enjoyed this poem, check out Mr. Seth Rasmussen's response here.)

Wednesday, December 23, 2009

The Great Pill Debate of 2009

The following story was published in Bricolage's Signature Series. Bricolage is a literary magazine run by the University of Washington.

My Mom and I have one thing in common: We both take a lot of pills. Vicodin, Percocet, Methadone, Oxycotin--these are names familiar to us both, brands that invoke the same questions in each of our minds: How many? How strong? How much? But instead of being a point of connection between the two of us (we share the same preferences, after all), these magical, multi-colored tablets will forever push us apart. I know this because my mom watches Oprah.

"Today this dad wanted to be the cool dad," my mom tells me. We're in the kitchen, which is where she usually recounts that day's episode. The way she says cool dad makes me think of a balding man wearing slacks and sunglasses. "So he starts giving his son some of his pain medication. At first he let's him take them for headaches, but before you know it, he starts letting his son throw parties. All because he wants to be the cool dad."

Mom sits at the kitchen table in her blue bathrobe. Her eyes are bloodshot and far away, and though she can't take a shower or put on a full outfit, she still insists on doing her hair; gel-stiff curls of brown and gray frame her face. As she tells me about Oprah, her mind abuzz with opiates, I try to envision what she must have imagined when she heard all this: Perhaps a rowdy, sixteen-year old boy waving a scepter, throwing blue, green, and orange pills in the air like confetti, which his friends nibble from the floor. All the while, the pathetic man who wanted nothing more than to be a cool dad watches nervously through the window, biting his nails to nubs as they steal first his alcohol, his keys, and finally, the car.

"And you know what happened?" mom asked, finishing the story. "That poor girl, their neighbor, got set on fire." She finishes and leans back, wearing the incredulous face she expects me to mirror.

I'm not so impressed. "Don't you think that girl would have been set on fire without the pills?" I ask.

Mom blinks a few times, considering this. "No," she says finally. "I think it was because of the pills."

Now I'm in a tough situation. I'm forced to either agree with my mom or express my true opinion. Normally, I would take the most nuetral route, but this is a sensitive issue between us, a long-running contest: She's just reopened the Great Pill Debate of 2005. The Debate has roots reaching back to 2003, when mom was a relatively healthy person with a herniated disk between vertebrae L4 and L5. She was prescribed a bottle of fat white pills for the pain, Vicodin, and I snuck one or two. They were fun, but mostly underwhelming for their mammoth size; this was before I knew Vicodin was loaded with Tylenol and contained very little actual narcotic. Fast forward to 2005, when mom has the artificial disk installed that will, years later, begin to force apart her spine. Now mom is dabbling in Oxycotin, which are smaller, but infinitely better. They weigh almost nothing, though one 10 mg tablet is enough to make me itch all over, talk-non stop, and have dreams when I'm not really sleeping. I am immediately a fan for life.

Followers of the debate should note that, at this time, I was a senior in high school, and despite my near-perfect grades, I was threatened with expulsion on a weekly basis. For the most part, it was the truancy they didn't like. To combat the classroom boredom, irritation, and restlessness from which I suffered, I used mom's pills. As far as I was concerned, I needed them to get through my day as much as she did.

Then, one rainy winter morning, the pills were gone. I went into the cupboard and that small orange bottle simply wasn't there. I took out everything else--old antibiotics, mystery pills with five-syllable names, even over-the-counter containers of Ibuprofen--but the Oxycotin was nowhere to be found. Late for school already, I had to choose something on the fly. I took the brand with the X in the name (it sounded the most narcotic), and pocketed a handful of pills before leaving to school.

The pills were called Flexoril, and I took them for almost a month before discovering they were muscle relaxants. No major accidents occurred: I fell asleep during class, dozed at friend's houses, and twice, I woke up at a green light with cars honking behind me. The episode ended when, after barely making it home and stumbling to bed one night, I left the remaining pills in my jeans and deposited them in the laundry basket the next morning. Checking for chapstick, pens, and other pocket-based laundry offenders, my mom found the pills, and everything was on the table.

The Great Pill Debate of 2005 lasted only two hours. We sat facing each other at our oak kitchen table, each of us with our own glass of iced water, like lawyers. Mom brought notes; I brought rage. Her main points of argument were that I was just like my father, I didn't love her, and I had a problem with substance abuse. She told me that I had taken too many withdrawals from the bank of trust, and that my account was overdrawn. My defense revolved around a single, two-part argument: I did not have a problem, and everything was fine (though I did point out that her bank-of-trust metaphor was absolute bullshit, and that she could go fuck herself).

And that was that.

Had there been any coverage on the debate, my mom might have made the following press release. "After much deliberation, we've concluded that prescription painkillers are beneficial for people sick in the body. People sick in the head, like my son, cannot be trusted with narcotics." This might not seem like new thinking now, but at the time, it was revolutionary: Pills were not good or bad; people were good or bad. Pills simply illuminated that difference.

The second conclusion, which none but the closest followers of the debate were privy too, was that I was personally unfit to deal in the realm of narcotics, that I would ultimately skew the discussion and make any reasonable conversation on the subject impossible. It was decided that I should move in with my father immediately.

The Great Pill Debate of 2005 was settled. That is, until the case was reopened this year, when mom, facing a third back surgery (the artificial disk between L4 and L5 now steadily pushing apart the surrounding vertebrae), asked if I could live with her for three months to help out. Major duties would include house-cleaning, cooking, assisting her to and from the bathroom, up and down the stairs, and lastly, picking up and doling out her medication. With this agreement came the silent understanding that the debate was once again in question: My ban from narcotics had been lifted.

This morning's conversation of Oprah was her way of reopening the floor.

I have the overwhelming desire to tell her I still use narcotics, that although I rarely buy them, I still enjoy the occasional pill that finds its way into my possession. I want to tell her that I've been okay for four years now, that I'm going to stay okay, even if it means I won't be perfect. I want to tell her that if she would let me chew up one 20 mg Oxycotin for ever 100 mg she takes, we might even spend some quality time together: I'd be feeling good enough to watch Oprah.

But I know I can't say that, and maybe she knows I want to. Maybe that's why she told me the story of the cool dad and the girl being lit on fire: It's a story that can't be argued against. Parents should not give their children prescription pills.

Mom is waiting for me to say something nasty about the father, that he was an idiot, that if he had any brains, he would know how to have a good time with his son without having house parties and nearly burning the neighborhood to a crisp. "I guess it wouldn't have happened without the pills," I say finally. "Some people just don't know when to stop."

And that's it: I have admitted my own defeat. I take mom's plate and put it in the sink. I scrape away the egg yolk that has hardened to the ceramic since we started talking. When I finish, I open the cupboard and take out her bottle of Oxycotin, tapping two 20 mg tablets into my palm. I set them on the tablecloth next to her glass of water.

The Giant Woodpecker Living Beneath my House

It's been going on for weeks. Every morning I wake up thinking that the builders have finally returned to finish the house. It sounds just like hammering, like they're finally nailing down the shingles that keep blowing off, or securing the handrails that come loose when leaned on too heavily. So I lay in bed with my eyes closed, imagining that when I come downstairs I'll see three men--trustworthy in stained plaid shirts and three-day scruff--taking a much-needed break. I'll ask them if they would like some coffee. "Hell yes we'd like some coffee," they'll say, and I'll put on a pot and ask how the morning's task is coming along.
Of course, no one has come to finish the house. There's no money left for anything: I can't even afford to have the giant woodpecker taken care of. My sister tells me that I should do it myself, that I could flush it out with a hose, or scare it off by banging a couple pans together. But I'm not that kind of guy (plus, I wouldn't want to ruin my pans; they're the nicest things I own). So I put up with it. I'm at work for the better part of the day, anyway.
When I come home each night, the giant woodpecker is still at it. I figure that maybe he's only trying to keep warm, too. I imagine that smaller creatures, like dust mites and germs, are perhaps driven mad by the sound of my chattering teeth, or the fleshy grate of my palms rubbed together. I rationalize like this as I eat my Cup of Noodles, as I watch grainy NBA games, and finally, as I read the business section of yesterday's paper. But when I crawl into bed, I can't rationalize it any longer. It's my basement after all, unfinished as it may be, and it's not exactly fair for some giant woodpecker to move in without my permission. I lay with my hands clenched, swearing to myself that after just two more of those house-shaking knocks, I'm going to pound my fist on the wall until that giant woodpecker cools it. I could take a quiet tap-tapping--even a soft rap-rapping--but this heavy pounding is just too much. I decide that tonight, I'm going to do something about it.
I take deep breaths until my anger evaporates, until my heart beats in sync with the pecking. When I walk downstairs, I'm calm. I'm collected. I pull the string on the basement's single light bulb, and the room flickers to life. I focus my gaze on the pupil of the woodpecker, which is larger than my entire head. His eyes are empty and flat, but I can feel his stare: It's colder than the wind howling through the unfinished siding. I ask if he'd like some coffee, and he tells me that hell yes, he'd like some coffee. I ask how the pecking is coming along, and he says fine, fine, it's coming along just fine. Then I ask him when he's going to be leaving. He doesn't respond, so I follow up quickly: It's not that I mind, but how do I explain to guests that there's a giant woodpecker living beneath my house? He's quiet, considering this, and then he asks me how I would feel, instead, if I had to explain the unfinished house hanging above my head? That's why he keeps pecking, he says. He's too embarrassed to stop. I almost ask him why he doesn't leave, but that's a stupid question. I read the business section of the paper, I'm not a moron. So I nod, and I take a few steps back up the stairs. I turn to look at the woodpecker a last time before turning off the light, and again I see the enormous eye with my tiny, convex reflection frozen in its center.

Tuesday, October 13, 2009

Yesterday, while I was jogging, it began to rain and I realized the reason I’ve been so angry is because I am not real.

I’m jealous of people
who grew up
in log cabins, or
foreign countries,
of people interested
in tree frogs.
I’m jealous of people
who get blowjobs
in the car,
only because
it would be nice
knowing someone
that well.
I’m jealous of people
who date ugly girls.
I imagine it is like owning
a handful of diamonds,
like visiting palaces
of refracted light.
If I were an ugly girl
for just one day,
the first thing I’d do
is masturbate.
Sometimes, I think that’s
about as real
as it gets.