The Patron Saint of Liars, by Ann Patchett

I picked up The Patron Saint of Liars, by Ann Patchett, at the library, as I’d enjoyed Bel Canto and not previously read any of her other stuff. I was a bit disappointed, truthfully. I know it’s a debut novel, and I tried to give it the tender consideration that such a thing deserves. Nonetheless, it fell flat for me. The changing viewpoints didn’t flow as well as in her later writing, which was a shame. Granted, there aren’t many writers who achieve excellence with a shifting first person narrative (several, but not all, of Chris Bohjalian‘s works do).

The book didn’t grab me. I kept waiting for the plot to become compelling, and it didn’t. As when I read Three Junes, I found myself treating each section of the book as a short story, strung together by shared characters. Perhaps that’s how Patchett meant the novel to be read, in which case, bravo! I don’t enjoy that narrative structure much; more when the vignettes are shorter, as with The House on Mango Street or The Girls’ Guide to Hunting and Fishing. Still, I mention those books as examples only; I didn’t love either of them, and I much prefer a short story collection with a theme such as Interpreter of Maladies or Strange Pilgrims, both of which are excellent reads.

In a nutshell, the novel is well-written and the prose flows. However, the plot didn’t engage me and the structure is one I find off-putting. So there you have it.

The Patron Saint of Liars, by Ann Patchett

Cloud Atlas, by David Mitchell

I had no idea what to expect from Cloud Atlas before I started reading it, and that’s the way I recommend experiencing the book. It’s a novel with striking similarities to Never Let Me Go, one of which is the pleasure of letting it unfold as it will, with no knowledge going into the reading of it. High praise, indeed, as Kazuo Ishiguro is one of my favorite authors, and I consider Never Let Me Go to be one of, if not the, best of his novels (The Unconsoled being the other main contender for that position). These are the type of book to savor as one goes, that leave the reader mulling the intricacies long after completing the novel. The less one knows about the content, the better, so I shall constrain my comments, and not mention the plot as such at all.

Not mentioning the plot leaves me with the writing itself. The writing itself is lovely; I agree with the critics that David Mitchell has a powerful command of the English language in written form. Each part of the book is lyrical and engaging in itself; taken together, the whole is an intricate puzzle. I had mixed reactions to the structure of the book. In the first half, the shifts are slightly jarring, but the lyrical prose draws you quickly and easily into each new segment. Once you know what to expect, each transition is a bit more smooth than the previous one. Still, I found the ending weak, and some of that was due to the constraint of the structure as established earlier on. Perhaps Mitchell is making a meta-point about history, and how we can only go as far as the foundation we’ve laid for ourselves in the past, that the limitations of the endings — of each segment, and the novel as a whole — bear out. Barring that, I’d say that the structure becomes less clever and more contrived through the second half of the book, and the engaging narratives get somewhat lost in the drive to wrap up. At the risk of giving away plot, the reliance on deaths as the vehicles for the end of narratives, a la Stephen King, contributed to my sense that the weak ending was simply weak, and not meant to be part of a grander commentary on the repetitive and inherently pointless nature of both novels and human history.

All that being said, the ending is not so weak as to diminish the general excellence of the book; it is one of the best I’ve read this year.

Cloud Atlas, by David Mitchell

Die Walküre

This week we saw the Washington National Opera‘s performance of Wagner‘s Die Walküre at the Kennedy Center. Or, I should say, we saw most of the production. Despite our best efforts, Wagner defeated us.

Last year, we saw our first Wagner production, Parsifal performed by the Kirov Opera Company, also at the Kennedy Center. As relative novices to the world of opera fandom, we certainly weren’t representative of the usual Wagner-going crowd. We chose Parsifal in order to see the Kirov company perform, as well as for the music itself. Certainly Parsifal is not, erm, the most engaging story ever told on the stage. At that performance, we wavered early on and nearly left at the first intermission: the combined effect of the sonorous score, the slow and dull plot, and being seated behind an entire row of overly perfumed ladies of a certain age almost got the better of us. We rallied, though, and moved to the handicapped seating area, which was thankfully empty. From there, we stayed for the remaining two acts, enjoyed the music, and, in the end, patted ourselves on the back for our dedication and endurance.

Compared to Parsifal, we imagined that attending Die Walküre would be a cakewalk. Well, not quite a cakewalk, but it had a lot more going for it: a more lively score, a more engaging plot, and Plácido Domingo singing Siegmund. All of these bonuses notwithstanding, the sheer length of the performance and extremely slow pacing combined with our end of the week fatigue to mean that we were ready to call it quits midway through. We chose to leave at the second intermission, having seen the stunning sets, heard the famous Domingo, and taken in the excellent performance by the orchestra. We were simply too tired to stay until the end and then face the metro trip home, and we didn’t want to try to slip out in the dark midway through the third act. As a result, we forewent hearing “Ride of the Valkyries” at the beginning of Act Three. The teaser in Act Two, when Brünnhilde first appears to the twins, will have to serve as our experience of hearing the piece performed live.

At this point, I think we’ll get back on the horse with another Verdi (we saw a touring production of La traviata at the Opernhaus Zürich in 1997) or maybe a Puccini, and slowly build up to facing Wagner again. Or, you know, just rest on our laurels with Parsifal and call it a draw.

Die Walküre

The Omnivore’s Dilemma, by Michael Pollan

I finished reading The Omnivore’s Dilemma, by Michael Pollan, and promptly followed it with a viewing of Delicatessen. Conclusion: I will never eat meat again (and most certainly not in a dystopian Parisian wasteland, thankyouverymuch).

Ok, so, no, it wasn’t that simple. To start, I have made that vow before: I stopped eating meat 16 years ago, planning to never touch it again. Being lactose intolerant didn’t interfere with my grand plan too much: I lived happily on nuts, beans, eggs, and tofu, plus the varied goodness of the rest of the vegetable world. Then, five years ago, I was diagnosed with thyroid disease and stopped eating soy (only one of many life adjustments). I decided then to start eating wild-caught fish and free-range chicken; these two categories of meat balanced my concern for the quality of the animals’ lives, the economics of the meat industry, and my commitment to my own health relatively satisfactorily. Around the same time I discovered I have a shellfish allergy, so the insects of the ocean aren’t an option for me (it likely went undetected all of these years because of my childhood dislike of their appearance and my subsequent vegetarianism).

As I read The Omnivore’s Dilemma, I was acutely aware of the lines I’ve walked in balancing my own competing interests when making food choices. I have never been repulsed by meat itself, although I have been — and continue to be — repulsed by the most common practices of raising and slaughtering animals in the U.S. These practices are what drove me to stop eating cows, pigs, and chickens in 1991, and they have remained substantially the same. Pollan touches only briefly on the industrial practices of raising and slaughtering animals, drawing heavily on the assumption — accurate in my case — that the reader is familiar with them through works such as Fast Food Nation and The Jungle. Pollan also avoids issues related to workers — on farms, driving trucks, in supermarkets, at slaughterhouses, in restaurants — throughout the book, an omission that his somewhat contrived framing — tracing the source of four meals — makes easy. Throughout, his focus is on the individual eater, and the choices the eater as individual has to make, rather than on communal ethics or the collective responsibilities of civil society. I found this emphasis, along with his frequently glib and often smug rhetorical style, rendered the narrative less engaging and, at times, off-putting.

In terms of new information, I found the description of the small farm’s system of combining managed intensive grazing and poultry pasturing to be the most fascinating part of the book. No doubt my heightened interest stems from my family’s connections — historical and contemporary — to food farming, but it was also the only section of the book that wasn’t telling me something I was already familiar with (as was the case with the discussions of industrial agriculture, ‘big organic’ companies, and hunting or gathering). The main value of those sections was to confirm the choices I already make: to eat low on the food chain; to buy local, seasonal, and organic fruits and vegetables; to do without eggs or chickens unless they’ve been allowed to range freely and fed organic seed; to buy milk from a cooperative where the cows are pastured and not treated with antibiotics or growth hormones; and to avoid corn syrup and soy additives whenever possible. Of course, I’m not perfect, and my access to all of these foods isn’t either; I buy organic breakfast cereal imported from Canada, because I like it and because it’s the one with the largest amount of fiber and the smallest amount of sugar that I can find.

The book did highlight one dilemma for which I still haven’t arrived at a solution, that of what to do about the chickens: to eat, or not to eat? Non-industrially farmed meat is still both hard to find and hard to afford in many instances, and I don’t have the standard Midwesterner’s freezer in which to store large amounts of meat (which would lower the cost). Also, truthfully, I don’t think I could ever get used to handling and cooking pork or beef in my own house, and that probably means — in the ethics of looking your dinner in the face that Pollan describes — that I probably shouldn’t be eating it. Really, I have issues preparing any meat at home — we said an inordinate number of graces for the chickens we received through our farm share this winter — and I can’t imagine increasing my current consumption for that reason.

Thus, our introspective household has arrived at an uneasy balance exactly of the type that Pollan explores: every single meal is necessarily a compromise between our ethics regarding farming, labor, local economic, and environmental practices, and our ongoing commitment to our own health.

The Omnivore’s Dilemma, by Michael Pollan

Jasper Johns exhibition

The current exhibition at the East Gallery is a selection of Jasper Johns paintings, among them some of the most well-known of his works (e.g. the paintings with the names of colors painted in colors other than those which they signify). I went a few weeks ago with a friend, and will return at least once more in order to see the accompanying exhibition of prints. I had always liked his work just fine, but the exhibition—organized by theme rather than in a strictly chronological manner—immersed me in his vision in a whole new way.

In this exhibition, and the Joseph Cornell retrospective earlier this year, I was fascinated by the reproduction of certain images and concepts throughout the works. With both Johns and Cornell, I find myself loving the themes, both in terms of content and in the fact of their existence. I suppose it makes them more human to me, linking them to the way that each of us circles around themes and repeats motifs and patterns in our own lives. It’s endearing to find such a clear expression of this aspect of modern life in such compelling works of art.

At least, it was for me: while at the two exhibitions I was surprised to hear other viewers describe the works—and the habit of returning to favorite themes over time—as disturbing or jarring. With Johns, several friends commented that the disconnection of the signifier—e.g. ‘red’—from the color it signifies was jarring and difficult to enjoy. It’s not only the simple disconnection, I suppose, since we’re used to seeing all color words printed in a neutral black; it’s the replacement of the signified color with one that doesn’t match (e.g. ‘red’ painted in blue) that is disconcerting. Or, it was to others: I found it wonderfully energizing. Granted, I’ve spent a bit more time considering postmodern linguistic theory than just about everyone I socialize with out here, so it was a treat for me to see those ideas made real in such a vibrant way.

Until I saw a photo of Johns at work on these paintings, I would have imagined their creation to be nonstop fun (he doesn’t crack a smile, and his stance and self-presentation in early photos are so Germanic he appears Austrian). I, for one, smiled enough for both of us throughout my visit.

Jasper Johns exhibition