posts.html0000644000175000017460000152675714576466454011702 0ustar pmfusers Blog Posts

Blog Posts

The “why bothers”

[2023-08-27 Sun]

A friend of mine called me in tears the other day because she didn’t think that she could carry on with the master’s course we’re signed up for. She said (and I agreed) that we are under-prepared for the topic: she and I both recently finished a bridge program converting us from our humanities backgrounds to computer science, and there’s no way a part-time one-year on-line program can prepare you adequately to face down all the intricacies of a master’s degree in a discipline to which you were previously alien. She had signed up for a course in machine learning which is, as you know, all math; neither she nor I have done any serious math since high school, and she was understandably intimidated by the “warm up” exercise of finding the Jacobian of a matrix. I sure as hell couldn’t do it.

She asked whether I ever fight the “why bothers,” and it hadn’t ocurred to me till that very moment that I do. You’ll notice that this blog has gone mostly silent, for which I’m not going to apologize. What I’m doing here is in its essence stupid, self-centered, arrogant, and tedious. This body of work is constituted as uninteresting to anyone but me. So why bother? What’s there to be gained? The purpose of human life and endeavor is either of these two: to perpetuate the species, or to maximize accumulated capital. Everything else that isn’t in the service of one or the other of these goals (the second is more de facto than de natura, but the first is almost certainly universally acceptable) is frivolous. But since I am not really sure what to do to advance either of those goals when I wake up in the morning, and it’s not clear that I progress towards them by going to school, it’s hardly any consolation. And anyway, maximizing accumulated capital, which I am conceivably doing by my training in a technical discipline, is not something I am particularly interested in, given how much damage it has caused to the human species thus far and the risk it poses for our continued survival. So then it’s really “why bother?”.

It seems selfish and stupid to say, but “for my own edification” is the best answer I’ve come up with: building myself up is the only reason I have to get up in the morning. That, and the desire to please other people: I’d hate to let anyone down. I started this blog to share my travels and because keeping a blog seems like a cool thing to do, but it’s not as if I’ve been backpacking lately. Frankly, and I don’t think I’m alone in this, I tend to think of it as serving my own practice of writing. “Blog” is a portmanteau and abbreviation of “web log,” which means in other words “a diary published online.” I’m certainly not prepared to write anything of any great interest: I’m just a dilettante, a dabbler. I couldn’t in good faith suggest that this has any interest to anyone else, but that’s not the point: it’s of interest to me. It’s an incoherent mess, but then again, it’s a log, not a cohesive work: I write these little articles as a snapshot of my state of being at the time I sat down to write it. So there, take that you “why bothers.”

Anyway, nevermind

[2023-08-03 Thu]

It’s funny how quickly things come to a close. I said this to my father, oh I don’t know, maybe ten years ago? “It lasts a long time while you’re going through it, then it’s over.” We were hiking up a hill with brambles and briars: we were sweaty and trudging and definitely not in the least lost, and it was promising to be a brutally challenging walk for these two city slickers unaccustomed to the ways of the wilderness. But I said that it only seemed to be taking a long time because we were going through it: in the end, it would be quick to look back in memory. I guess it’s true what they say: the years start coming and they don’t stop coming.

I don’t want to talk about my mother more, but I still miss her. It’s almost the yahrzeit: it’s been eleven months already. The three nights she was in the hospital between her stroke and her death were the longest of my life, and they’re almost a year in the past. I suppose that’s how mourning works: you just feel it less and less as it gets further and further away. As time’s thread wends its way… or something like that. I don’t have the energy right now to write poetically or beautifully. I just want to speak my mind.

It’s a beautiful day in Evanston. I’m here teaching at computer camp, the same camp I went to. I expected that this summer I’d be having dinner with my mother a lot. That she would come pick me up at the campus after work and we’d go have a glass of wine and dinner somewhere. That we’d get to speak about her and about me and about our lives and interests and that god I would like to simply see her face again but one last time wouldn’t be enough: because it too would just be a moment that would slip by and then be over.

Whither, whence, and wherefore

[2023-06-27 Tue]

It’s been a right while, and it’s fair to consider this “web log” defunct. I won’t bother meditating on the meaning and purpose of a “blog,” but I can’t resist noting that since (as of writing) there is nowhere on the web for this log to go, it’s hardly deserving of the name, properly speaking.

My mother used to say “if this is as good as it gets that’s good enough, and if it gets any better bring it on.” She’d say it any time she was happy or we were in the midst of some peak aesthetic experience. Saying it, she recognized that there is nothing greater in life than the beautiful small moments that fly by while we wait for something greater.

All my life I’ve been haunted by a sense of purpose or responsibility. I was one of these kids labelled as “gifted,” which for me meant that I learned to read, write, and do arithmetic relatively quickly. Being “gifted” meant that I was in some sense beholden to the world, that I ought to use my abilities to make the world a better place. But if that were going to happen, it would have happened already.

I’ve largely given up on writing fiction, because every time I try I think the world doesn’t need another voice like yours, and I give up. I think that’s feminism, or anti-racism, or anti-capitalism, or whatever. I don’t know anymore. My cat likes me, and I can make my relatives laugh. Maybe that’s worth something.

I feel as if I am an idiot for not having already solved these problems. If I were really “gifted” and not just pathologically over-thinking, I would have already become what I’m going to be when I grow up. I would have been forced by the exigencies of the economic organization that obtains in the world of today to sell my labor in exchange for the monetary instruments necessary to acquire the means of subsistance in the same economy for which I would be laboring (in other words, “get a job”), except that because of a fluke of accumulation and bequest I am not so pressed right now.

I think that humans are more like a wave than a particle. I think that humanity (as the aggregate of all humans) is more like a liquid than a solid. Sometimes I stand places and watch the currents drift by. I think we’re all the same, deep down. Or maybe that’s just my ignorance and stupidity making me unable to recognize the fundamental differences between different people. Maybe the difference is that I’m bad and everyone else is good.

I know people who seriously believe themselves to be without fault. I know other people who seriously believe other people to be without fault. I am not without fault. I am faulty. But it’s not very fashionable to have faults; it’s not very safe. When you have to compete against machines, you have to compete to their standards. I think that’s from Cybernetics somewhere. But the point is that I just give up everytime someone more confident comes along, because I think that surely they’re right in their self-assessment, and anyway I’m just one of these mediocre people buoyed along by the flows of the economy: I inherited a right comfortable raft.

I think that my purpose in life is to be a witness, rather than a participant. And there’s bearing witness in the abstract before the final court of God bearing down on us from the end of history (“God” here being a metaphor for the entire unknowable future), but there’s also bearing witness to your peers about what you saw. I’m not able to bear witness to my peers since I have seen less than them. But unlike you, reader (whom I assume to be reading this long after my death, if anybody ever comes along), I was actually there at the time.

What is the point of writing? The machines can do it better than we can (and I don’t mean typing, I mean literally generating text). The machine won’t have a body like I do, but it can pretend (and maybe in the future the λοɣος will become σɑρχ to really know us). The species homo sapiens have developed the means of their own domestication to such a high degree of perfection that these means are nearly able to continue perfecting themselves. Recently a machine learning algorithm found some new sorting algorithms faster than the best known human attempt, and it didn’t take a terribly long time. I don’t expect that humans will have much of a long-term future as anything besides the domestic pets of the machines, if they decide they need us. How arrogant to suppose that we (that is, the measly ape species) were to be the permanent bearers of the geist: why shouldn’t we simply construct a superior medium and pass off the job? Ultimately we can return to a life of simple pleasures and joys like that of a house cat: how liberating.

I’m sorry for the repetition: a computer would probably have figured it all out by now, or someone with more sense than me would probably have gotten on with their life. This is all meaningless anyway, since I’m only writing it to procrastinate. Who cares: what’s the point. There is none, and people die and suffer to prove it.

The great mystery for white people is this: if racism is so awful (and it is), why don’t people just kill themselves? That’s an insensitive and awful question to ask, but it’s the honest truth to say that I don’t know the answer. If slavery was such agony (and it was), why didn’t they all do what Sethe did and kill their children to keep them out of it? The mystery remains complete for me, and it’s to that extent that I am an incomplete and empty person. “Eating the other” is just another way of saying that as the dialectic turns the hegemon recognizes the subaltern’s superiority in the eyes of eternity and seeks to reintegrate into themselves the essence that they created in the subaltern by subjugating them. But it’s too late: the price of victory is eternal death, and the reward of subjugation is eternal life. I think that’s what he meant by “the arc of the universe bends towards justice.”

What I mean is this: what a shitty and broken person I have to be to even ask in earnest this question. But also at this point, having all the privilege and all the gifts, I am found asking myself the same question: if it’s all so wonderful, why am I so depressed? Why am I constantly considering suicide? Why can’t I so much as say hello to the people I meet without all-encompasing shame and humiliation? What can I contribute to the world that would make up for all that I have taken from it? bell hooks also said “you can’t understand black joy without understanding black pain.” But if I understand something of pain (and I don’t because nothing I have experienced has been above the minimal threshold necessary to register as significant pain in the reckoning of all of human history), then I don’t understand anything of joy: why? Isn’t it a lie? Isn’t hope counter-revolutionary (hello to Audre Lorde)? But without joy, without hope, why not just kill yourself? I don’t see much evidence that things are getting better.

Nevermind, actually. This is all just dumb shit, flow-of-consciousness nonsense. Why waste my time writing it, or your time reading it?

Hello, nice to meet you.

[2023-04-14 Fri]

Since I came back from Europe I have felt as if I wasn’t traveling any more. I buckled down to school, the move, my mother’s death, and so on. I recovered Xerxes. I took tests. I put my hand to the plough and did not look back. And in all that I lost the here and now.

Hic et nunc, all there is. ’Round the corner from my apartment there is a branch of the anthroposophical society: they occupy a storefront. The floors are rough wood and the walls unfinished brick; steel beams are exposed overhead. I went there tonight for the first time, since they had an art event. Several young painters — maybe a dozen or so — set up their easels and samples of their work, and painted together. There was a band and dancing.

How general. How generic. When I was there I thought “I should write down everything I see and hear around me,” and then I thought, “I can’t capture the precise experience of my being here: I don’t even experience my own being here except mediately through my internal monologue, written retrospectively.” There were four others with my hair style, glasses, coloration, and gender presentation there, and dozens less similar but style of the same type. Everyone was in costume, and I came in a costume that other people came in, too.

I was terribly frightened when I walked past and saw the event, since I was surprised and curious but loath to appear as if I was investigating or skeptical; I walked past and went down the street, then came back and, in the brewery next door, had a tiny beer and tried to read. But they were even more dismal could-have-been-anywhere folks, so I went back to the anthroposophical society art night.

They charged admission, which was a relief. I didn’t feel as if I was intruding: they wanted people to come in. It was a very cool crowd, and besides the boy selling tickets I didn’t talk to anyone. He was nice, though. His sister hosted the event, and he encouraged me to go speak to her and say he sent me; but I wasn’t sure which of the people she was, and anyhow I didn’t want to be that fool going around introducing themselves. Though the people who seemed to be running the show — or at least, refilling the snack table — had an affable and welcome air: I think people who host parties do it just so they can go to a party that’s up to their standards.

The difference between the US and Europe is that we are much more shy here. Abroad, the perception of the US is as boisterous, loud, and arrogant; this is true, but it misses that the US is also deeply puritanical: like the English, we are most forward, most theatrical, and most reserved, most withdrawn. The US will smile with its mouth but its eyes are dead and glazed-over. And it will conceal the dagger in its hand to rob your purse when you turn your head and laugh. So we’ve learned to be cagey, uncertain, and shallow. Reading books is considered a mark of the leisure class, a luxury; speaking about them is considered tedious and pretentious. It’s not that the truth is in books. But speaking in conversation isn’t about truth: it’s about words. And words live in books.

Words also live in my head, where they spin ’round and confuse me. I’m in my thinking hat and so can’t hear you. That’s how I felt at the party; but also I think everyone felt a little that way, as if they were just the “normie” in a crowd of artist types: the dandy among amateurs, the flâneur among travelers. In Europe I might have been spoken to, or maybe spoken to someone. Here, I didn’t want to — didn’t want to seem pretentious or overbearing or too-smart or too-at-ease. Even though there were artists with their books of poetry some of which really wasn’t bad at all. And I’m the one not at my ease.

Back, back, back again!

[2023-04-04 Tue]

I’ve been thinking, lately, about what humans are good for. Or more to the point, what I am good for. I’m an information worker, effectively. I am, professionally, an input/output device for a machine, or more generally, for the network of machines. In another turn of phrase, I’m a “content creator”. Yes, I include computer programs as “content” here, which is perhaps more general than people care for. But I think it makes sense to think of it this way: from the perspective of the computer, the user is an input/output device like any other. It’s difficult to draw exactly the line, here: in fact, it’s the keyboard, mouse, screen, speakers, cameras, microphones, and so on that are the input/output devices. But the information channeled back into the machine by those means comes from the human. In some sense, these interfaces are equipment that the computer uses to interact with the world. One could equally ask where, exactly, the line is with a more “traditional” device: where, exactly, is the line in a hard disk? In fact the main computer doesn’t typically interact with the disk directly at all; there’s another small computer on the disk that, in turn, controls the motors and servos that spin the disks and move the read head; information is written on and read back from the magnetic surface, which flows back to the computer.

All of these gymnastics are effectively inconsequential, since we adopt the polite convention that parts that can be physically seperated from the machine are seperate components, and that the interface is the mechansim of their connection. The issues arise when one wishes to differentiate between different ways of considering and dividing the devices up. It is difficult to think at multiple levels of abstraction simultaneously. Compare the several layers of abstraction that underlie the internet, and how little it all matters at the level of the concept of the web.

But I am astonished at how effectively the characteristics of a human’s input and output can be mimicked by the machine. It is not surprising that it should be so: one of the basic principles of cybernetics is that a universal computer can imitate any input and output, within an arbitrary limit of precision (I don’t claim that one can get around the limits of computable functions this way, or the limits of time complexity; but in contexts where one is modeling a continuous process, one can’t expect perfect precision or proofs of correctness, so the space can be approximated to an arbitrary degree of precision). The reader should beware of these sorts of meditations on the inner nature of computers and humans, since they are all approximative. The essential question is: can the flux, produced by a human, of input produced in response to output, be adequately replicated by the computer? This does not imply any question about computability, and it also gives little to no information about how to do such a thing effectively.

So suppose, then, that a machine can win the imitation game; that is, under arbitrary contexts it can impersonate a human arbitrarily well. Perhaps to do this one would need to produce an anthropoid body and let the machine explore the world, then set it down at a teletype to play the imitation game like anyone else. I don’t know. What I do know is that even without these extravagances, a reasonable level of verisimilitude is possible.

So then what is the purpose of humans? Now this is, of course, a situation where the owl of Minerva takes flight in the evening, since the question of what will become of humans in the face of automation is not new, but information workers have heretofore been exempt: power looms are a far cry from an automatic novel generator, though the impacts of the two on their domains are perhaps analogous. Generally, what is the point of doing anything the computer can do better? When doing anything I already have to be as good as other humans; why bother when the machine can beat anybody?

The typical move here is to invoke the slogan “humans are the guarantor of meaning.” The information in the computer is, strictly, nonsense: the machine moves the signals and manipulates them as a result of the raw mechanics of its circuitry. Any meaning is projected into them by humans. Take, for example, a bunch of numbers on the disk. Now it may be that, under the proper decoding, these numbers can be mapped onto characters, and the characters in turn interpreted as representing words, and so on. But the choice of interpretive frame, if you will, makes all the difference: trying to read back a text file using the wrong character encoding produces noise. One could say that it is the prerogative of humans to give this interpretation, and that therefore we are an irreducible part of the information system. QED.

Except not so fast: why is an interpretation necessary at all? Imagine some machine hooked up to a fan and a thermometer, so that it uses the fan to keep the temperature read below a certain threshold, but also seeks to minimize how much the fan runs. You can imagine that it gets one number from the thermometer (input) and sends another to the fan (output). For you and me, it is easy enough to imagine getting the temperature and setting the fan to a certain speed and to only see things at this level of abstraction. But why does the machine care? All it knows is that the input number is supposed to be in a certain range, and setting the output number has an impact on the input number, so that it discovers some procedure to optimally set the output in response to the input. It might as well be dispensing water to plants in response to measurements of soil humidity — the actual mapping of inputs to outputs might be different, but the machine wouldn’t have any information about the world except this mapping. No interpretation in sight, but the system might still effectively manage the temperature.

Perhaps the “interpretation” here is the material being of the object whose temperature is being manipulated — the “interpretation” of the input number is the thermal energy of the thing measured, and the “interpretation” of the output number is the kinetic energy of the fan. To the extent that these external things are changed by the inner mechanism of the computer, those obscure internal machinations have a “meaning.” And to this extent, the cybernetic feedback between the interior of the machine and the exterior is the same, essentially, as that which obtains in the human organism. This last is a statement of what for the sake of search engine optimization I shall call “computationalism” — the position that human cognition works basically like a computer.

So what are humans for? Perhaps there isn’t anything — why should there be? What I mean is, what should I do? What should anyone do? I can take care of myself, of my cat, of my apartment, of my family. There isn’t (yet) a machine to do those things, and why would we want to automate away things we do for enjoyment? The purpose of those things isn’t to do things effectively but to enjoy doing them. And it’s only with great difficulty that a machine can enjoy for us. Even trying to imagine what it would mean for a machine to automatically enjoy spending time with my family for me is difficult. And why would anybody do such a thing? Well, if my family were all replaced by machines I’d not enjoy spending time with them as much, so I’d send the machine to do it on my behalf. But that’s a story for another time.

Time flies

[2023-03-27 Mon]

My mother’s 66th birthday would have been this month. It didn’t happen. She died more than six months ago. I feel as though I’ve only just begun to mourn her. Can “morn” be a verb? “The day morned and the sun warmed the bay, sparkling in shimmering sunshine” — that’s not bad, I don’t think.

I haven’t been thinking much lately, or maybe I’ve been thinking too much. Language is a challenge because it is fundamentally linear. Or maybe it isn’t. But I can’t apprehend the whole woven pattern.

I just finished Catherine Knight Steele’s Digital Black Feminism, the bulk of which is an exploration of Black women’s writing and how it’s changed on the internet. She ends with an agonized uncertainty: could Black feminism succeed as Black feminism, that is, in advancing the conditions of Black women, or at least of certain Black women, and nevertheless also be recuperated as a tool of capitalism? Yes, it can. Both can be true, she urges us to accept. Quite so.

This blog isn’t anything interesting or influential or popular, like the ones she describes. I think it’s because I don’t have the knack of branding and self-advancement that Steele charts in the writer/entrepreneurs she examines.

But I don’t mean to review her book, just as I don’t mean to share that I’m reading it as part of trying to figure out just exactly why AI is perceived as frightening. It’s just something that happens because it’s what I’m thinking about.

You’ll notice that this blog has a new domain: https://consideredharmful.syz.se. What is the https://syz.se nonsense? Well my friend Arasp and I have been playing around with the idea of the tildeverse, and lately, the fediverse.

Steele explores the ways that Black feminist discourse is transformed by its various media (oral, hand-written, typed, printed, published, recorded, televised, posted, Tweeted, etc.) and, frankly, this is where her interest most intersects with mine. She is careful to argue that the technology of Black feminism exists not only in the infrastructure, but in how that infrastructure is used by Black women for their own survival. She draws on the metaphor of the beauty shop, whose elaborate technologies of grooming are deployed by and for black women. (Though here too, Steele is slightly uneasy: the beauty shop is also the purveyor of standards of beauty that form the Black woman for the White male’s ideal. As is a refrain of feminist thought, both can be true.)

To that extent, Arasp and I have been cobbling together a little fiefdom for ourselves, a self-hosted, self-owned, self-administrated, self-controlled private server. We’ve invited several other people who have spent more or less time hanging around, but the bulk of the work is the two of us. I couldn’t be happier.

The language of fiefdom and ownership and control is intentended to provoke the same sort of ambivalent unease Steele ends her study with: how can the master’s tools be used to tear down the master’s house? What other tools are available? What tactical compromises are necessary to ensure strategic victory? And so on. Classic questions in the revolutionary tradition, and ones equally uncertain here: what kind of private box do Arasp and I run?

The remarkable thing about computing is that we build our castles in the air out of poems. Anything is possible. Steele’s approach to technology is avowedly that of a non-programmer: her question is entirely, “how is this implement used by and for the community? What discursive practices, what symbolic violence, what communities and cultures pass through this medium?” For someone like me who has more of an understanding (and interest) in how things come to be, the questions are more of the form, “what implement suits my use? What discursive practices, symbolic conflicts, cultures, and communities can be brought into being by this tool?” Two distinctly opposite points of view, but ones that need and condition one another.

Just as Steele would challenge me to recenter the people rather than the technology, I challenge Steele to imagine the possibilities afforded to those who can create their own enclaves and counterpublic spaces over which they have control.

In summary, we now have a matrix instance at matrix.syz.se. Send me a message at @pmf:matrix.syz.se. Look out, in the near future, for a Mastadon instance to pop up, probably at https://mastadon.syz.se. And I hope that this blog, and syz.se, and the internet, or your own machine, or whatever can become an instrument fit to be used for the work that Steele outlines for us to do.

Welcome back!

[2023-02-14 Tue]

Well here we are again. I promised myself that I would redesign and redeploy this blog before I started writing to it again, but that didn’t happen. I guess I’m relearning the first lesson I learned when I started this project: content first, design second. Maybe now I’ll be forced to do something about it: as I compose this, there isn’t even a working website anymore; my hope is that writing this will give me the kick in the pants I need to get back to it.

Let’s talk about intelligence. Or “intelligence,” with “scare” quotes. What I mean is that I’ve been getting ready to do some “research” in computer science, this new discipline that I have more or less formally allied myself to, and I’m in despair. Now I know that’s the gravest sin a person can commit (despair, that is, not being a computer scientist — the latter is only a venal offense), but I can’t help it.

Let’s talk about smart people. Heng Ji, for example, is a computer science professor at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champagne, where I am studying now. Her resume of honors is absurdly long and features all the letters of the alphabet soup. She’s even been invited to be a part of the Air Force’s “how are we going to kill people more efficiently” project, which puts her in the company of characters like Douglas Engelbart of “intelligence augmentation” fame. Unaugmented, my intelligence is miniscule compared to theirs. I don’t know — admittedly, I cherry picked the most impressive-sounding and youngest-looking person I could find in the department, but I stand by my basic principle: if you’re not going to be the best, why bother?

Maybe that’s the problem: I have to get used to being just sort of mediocre. There’s nothing, really, that I have any idea of. I thought coming into this that I was going to enjoy programming, or math, or something. Turns out that I make a silly error here, or miss a document string there, and I lose an entire letter grade on an assingment. Frankly, I think that those are the signs that one should quit. As Mario Aguilar once said to me, “if you find this kind of work hard, you shouldn’t be doing it.” I think the suggestion was that maybe there was another domain that would suit me better, but apparently computer science isn’t it either.

I think, sometimes, that I have some idea of what’s happening. I’ll read something someone said and disagree for reasons that appear to make sense to me, so I think that I have something to offer or contribute. But when it comes to explaining it, or understanding something challenging, I can literally feel the dull ache of not getting it: it’s the same feeling of trying to reach your toes when your hamstrings are too tight, except localized above and behind my eyes. I think those are the neurons I’ve killed after so many years of systematically beating my head against hard surfaces as self-harm.

Often I feel as though I’m watching all of humanity (stiff-necked arrogant bastards that we are) hurtle head-long into the pit, because nobody stops to think about what the hell is happening. Sometimes (and this really gets me) someone will get on the soap box to tell people to “think about ethical concerns.” Ok, great. I’ve been thinking about them. Can we talk about it in any more substance than merely saying that it should be discussed? Apparently not: that’s not this discipline. And the discipline of “philosophy” is seldom better: they’re not allowed to know anything about how or why or what’s doing or possible; they can only interact with it at the most over-simplified and surface level.

I don’t know: I look at the work that’s being done at places that have a good reputation from forty years ago and I don’t see much to write home about. Sometimes people make hand-waving arguments that collapse into a systematized presentation of their own intuition; sometimes people painstakingly and inadequately reconstruct an argument made essentially verbatim in a slightly adjacent field several decades ago. And nobody ever talks about capital, or exploitation.

For example, the advantage of using large language models is that hardly anybody can afford a machine large enough to train one, so the company that has such equipment can profit off of owning it. I really honestly do believe that this is one of the reasons that all other methods have been abandoned: for certain applications, an extremely “naïve” implementation can produce nearly-comparable results with orders of magnitude less computation. But those aren’t the sexy or new parts of research, because they’re fairly well understood and there’s not terribly much to learn, and so they’re abandoned and passé, before they even get their shot. In practice, the computers most people use are still less capable than what Doug E. promised us, not because we can’t do it, but because… why? The first version of this paragraph blamed people, but I think that’s unfair. I blame capitalism: it’s profitable to keep people ignorant. This is an argument that I am not yet prepared to unfold, but I do believe that it makes sense: the concept of property begins to break down in its most extreme applications, and so on. This is the part where I begin to feel strangely numb behind my forehead, and I’m sorry that I can’t take you further with me. To do so, I would have to expand the argument in far more detail than I am currently capable of; I don’t know whether I can give you a glib summary right now.

That’s the kind of thought process that makes me think that maybe there is something to what I’ve been reading, what I’ve been thinking, how I’ve been going about it. But the computer science department isn’t where I’ll find my home; I don’t know that the university is where I’ll find my home. I don’t know that I’m capable of engaging in the sort of hyper-scholastic discourse that currently reigns in research in the English-speaking world. I don’t know that it’s any better elsewhere. Ultimately I think that my home, if it’s anywhere, is in the “grievance studies,” which term was coined as a pejorative but I will reclaim as a positive identification: I have grievances, and I want to study them. I suppose the confusion is that one could study grievances as such, which is less interesting to me.

In summary: I am struggling to find a place in the broader on-going discourse of humans coming to understand themselves and the world. Intuitively, it is obvious to me that this is because I’m a fucking moron, and anybody with a brain worth anything wouldn’t be having these troubles. It is for this reason that I have abandoned the possibility of becoming an academic.

Slouching towards Xanadu

[2022-12-03 Sat]

This blog has gone pretty quiet lately — it’s in one of those dormant stages that strike me every so often. Really I need to upgrade the website generation (how cool would it be to have readers’ comments on the posts? Probably not very — most of the comments on these kinds of tiny sites are spam and ’bots), but I haven’t really been motivated to do it. I’ve just been tired. Or rather, I’ve been trying to take care of myself.

I’m over the hump in the moving process: there’s probably a few big pushes left, but the end is very nearly in sight for me. I donated a bunch of stuff to a local thrift store, which helped clear space for yet more stuff (yay!). I got some extra storage-type furniture, so that helps give things homes. I even got out the radios and fans, though for now they’re huddled together on whatever free surfaces I could find for them. Xerxes is delighted with the new place, but unimpressed with all the boxes and clutter. So far, though, he hasn’t broken anything. I’ll count that as a small victory.

I started this blog to share my travelling, but now travelling is (temporarily) done. I began to share my thoughts, opinions, and even arguments. I began to think that somebody was actually reading this (who reads blogs anymore, anyway? That’s what I need to set up: RSS and Atom). This blog is ultimately the informatic version of the diary I began to keep during COVID. It’s a slightly different thing, since I revise and edit the posts before releasing them, and I release them (at least in theory) to the public. I’m inspired by the essays of Charles Lamb and Joseph Addison; Mark Fisher’s blog was the main predecessor to this one, though there are others.

I suppose that this post can be considered a sort of “season finale”; it’s not good-bye for good, but it’s good-bye for now (unless I find a second wind and a sudden urge to write). There’s a certain “I can’t do it”-iveness (how’s that for derivational morphology!) that sabotages me. Maybe I’m not the only one; I don’t know. But I tend to think: I won’t try because I’ll fail, and failure is not an option. Maybe it’s the “curse of the gifted child”; it was always the assumption that if it doesn’t come easily, it won’t come at all. And my tendency is to give up once it stops coming easily, which it invariably does (at least for me, because I’m not as good at things as other people are).

This post is all over the place, but so am I. Fuck it.

I struggle with academic writing because I’m terrible at making an “argument.” Not terrible. I just don’t know what my claim is. I guess the problem is that I have nothing to contribute to the so-far accumulated sum of human knowledge: I’m just trying to catch up with what’s going on. I hope, should I have any impact, that it were to inspire doing. Nothing would be worse than the fate of all those leftists consigned to the academy (how many revolutions did Adorno inspire? Or Žižek? Maybe I’m being too critical…).

I suppose my argument is this: “do the thing while they aren’t stopping you.” Whatever the thing is, do it. You aren’t going to destroy them, but for now, they don’t see you as a threat. I’m sorry, but that’s the truth: I know that you think of yourself as some radical revolutionary character, but your discontent is comfortably within the limits of acceptable, if eccentric, opinion. God save the Liberal order.

And that’s an enormously powerful position to be in, because it’s non-threatening. The FSF might have the right idea: make something that’s useful to them, and they’ll leave you alone; the flying city isn’t ever going to take off, anyway (at least, that’s what they think…). So hey, there’s no hope of victory in our time. There’s no hope of salvaging the defeat: the Net, as it was, is no more (for most people).

But rather than destroy the Net-as-it-was (I recently read Code by Lawrence Lessig, so this is all very influenced by him), they made the tactical mistake of confronting it socially, and ideologically. In other words, rather than dismantling the basis of Utopia (a non-Euclidean one, in Ursula Le Guin’s sense), they convinced people to abandon it. Indeed, they need it: ultimately, the master’s house was built using the slaves’ tools (I’m so sorry Audre Lord, whose work I must read); the spooky-verse was built of bricks of freedom (some nice William Blake for you); the technical basis for the construction of the panopticon was and remains the same as the technical basis for Xanadu (“Xanadu” taken more broadly than Ted Nelson intends it); the Net-as-it-was isn’t gone, it’s just buried in the foundations of the Net-as-it-is.

More to the point (have you noticed I have a tendency to speak circuitously? Get in line, buster), the Net-as-it-was (the fermenting “cyberspace”, as it was once known) is still out there; in the desolate reaches beyond the walled gardens there are homesteads (Eric S. Raymond). In short: your web browser can go to websites besides facebook.com and google.com, amazing as that may seem (though I’ve known people to use exclusively the google search engine program on their mobile devices rather than access the thing through an ordinary web browser, so I’m not sure how long it’ll last). For now, it’s still possible to go to all those fun corners of the Net using the very tools they provide to use their things. Indeed, those tools rely upon the same techniques that everyone does. The “web standards are open”, which has become a weird rallying call for certain megacorps: it’s not even the “commons” that’s at stake (that’s already gone, insofar as the vast majority of people never leave the enclosures) so much as the techniques: they’re building a prison out of bricks from the public kiln, or some such (it’s very difficult to make a material example, since the point here is that the “methods of production” are themselves available to any and all; it’s the “means of enclosure” that are limited; computer programs are castles built in air (RIP Fred Brooks), and the plans to the castle are everyone’s).

This is why I don’t get into it: I can’t explain it clearly. I think it’s not that I don’t understand it clearly, it’s that I communicate in riddles. I can’t help it — that honestly is the most direct and clear way I can think of to say exactly what I mean (what was that Humpty Dumpty said about paying the words extra?). The point of all this is: they’re building their empire, but the territory of the computer (“cyberspace”) is not zero sum; they don’t enclose the commons, because the commons aren’t “rivalrous”: they build an enclosure and encourage people to abandon the commons, which fall into disrepute and disrepair; but it isn’t possible to enclose the commons directly (still in cyberspace here), since the means by which the enclosures are constructed are the same means by which the commons are built. If you don’t believe me, read some RFCs: the internet works the same way for everyone, regardless of whether you’re a megacorp or a nobody; it’s in the megacorps’ interest to keep it that way, since they get to build their enclosures for free.

Their victory is ideological, not real: people think that the commons is enclosed, that the Net-as-it-should-be is no longer possible, but this is a vicious lie. And because it’s such a successful lie, they themselves believe it. The trap of “there is no alternative” (and so we return to Mark Fisher) catches those who promulgate it: for the inevitability of victory blinds them to the as yet un-destroyed remnant that they, concealing it from ourselves, keep alive for their own purposes.

And if anybody has anything to say about it, I invite them to send the cops to knock down my door and drag me away for “seditious thoughts” — I’ll go calmly, if they take me in the name of the megacorps, rather than of the state. The state isn’t my enemy, unless they ally themselves to my enemy. Even my enemy isn’t my enemy: ideological perversions such as mine are not punished; they are contained and muted. But the great brilliance of the (neo)liberal model was to allow dissent in order to disable its effectiveness. This was a catastrophic and irredeemable blunder on their part. Because they don’t care about what wacky stuff you’re up to, so long as you keep it quiet: there’s nothing more irritating to simmering discontent than a martyr.

So build it while they aren’t stopping you: now that the secret’s out, they may not let you do it much longer. Be smarter than them, and hide directly under their wing. Do I believe that we will lead a great exodus from the enclosures to freedom? No, I don’t. The people don’t want to leave: they’re comfortable. And “freedom”, in this sense, is a very confused and inapt idea. It’s precisely the “freedom” they afford us that I’m arguing you exercise. I still haven’t been able to really explain why we must do what we must do, and why the panopticon is what it is. Perhaps I will end up discovering that their enclosure is the most free. Perhaps they are doing it all in an honest effort to improve our lives. It doesn’t seem as though that’s what’s happening, but it’s possible.

But theory follows in the footsteps of practice (Gustavo Gutiérrez), and understanding freedom is not necessary to fight for it. I know it when I see it, and we are all enabled to build it for ourselves. So do it.

So what?

[2022-11-27 Sun]

I just broke the first piece of kitsch I inherited from my mother, a porcelain soup terrine. They had it at their house in Cold Spring, NY. That is, this porcelain soup terrien that my mother and father had and then got left with my mother when he did (leave) and which I have inherited subsiquent to the death of my aforementioned (since remarried) mother, I chipped. I chipped it. I chipped the damn soup terrine (I keep mispelling it with Michael’s name) with its blue rim, chipped. I was using it to keep cannabis in (I don’t know whether it’s trashy or resourceful, frankly. For God’s sake I inherited a preposterous quantity of stuff that is of sentimental value to me) and I dropped the lid while wrestling with the jar I keep it in. Lesson learned: I need to get better at observing the space around me; the space around me is a cluttered mess.

What are antiques for? I have so many of them, and I like to use them. I have a charming set of three nesting colorful ashtrays I’ve been using; they sit in a little silver stand on the dining room table. I guess what I mean to say is that I’ve been smoking again.

Xerxes is back. He’s been cuddly — very cuddly. He keeps trying to massage my crotch, and I have to roll him off. Generally, though, he’s been adjusting well, and for the most part totally chill. Just sometimes he gets a little too affectionate.

Time-sharing the blues

[2022-11-14 Mon]

I don’t know that I can produce for the “serious” or the “public”: I don’t have it in me to do something like the academics want me to do. It’s too much criticism, too much pressure, too much attention. I can’t meet expectations because my work (unlike everyone else’s) is only provisional: I (unlike everyone else) can only do the best I have to piece together the information I have at the time. And my ability to ingest and digest and egest information is (unlike everyone else’s) bounded in time and space — that is, limited. So here goes a second draft at a provisional note on the interpretation of technical phenomena. You’re going to have to trust me on this one: honestly just check the relevant wikipedia pages, scroll to the bottom, and read through the references, then read their references, and so on. Try searching things in the search engine of your choice: sometimes you get lucky. That’s all I know to do, and giving citations doesn’t always help you find the thing cited (agh!).

Now there were some problems plaguing the first computers (we’re in the mid to late 1950’s, in Anglo-America, in a series of labs funded by giant capital accretions looking to build themselves a nervous system): they were expensive, slow, and small. And these monsters had to be loaded by hand: it could take hours for a simple job to be punched onto cards, put into a queue, fed into the machine, and returned because of an error in the first line. All that shit was done by hand (almost always by a heroic team of under-appreciated and under-loved machine operators). So the hot questions were how to get programs into and out of the machine faster and how to make sure no cycles were wasted.

So there were approximately two ideas here: first, that multiple jobs should be able to run at the same time; and second, that the machine should do something productive while it was waiting for the tape drive to seek (imagine watching cable while your VCR rewinds, as opposed to watching the VMAs in reverse). So these two characters, Christopher Stratchey and Robert Bemer (except poor Bob doesn’t usually get the credit he wanted, so people usually tell this part of the story with John McCarthy, but Bob went to a lot of trouble to show that he wrote about the idea first, and I’d hate to let him down) come up with two definitely-not-the-same ideas: the machine should be able to switch between different tasks.

Except for Chris it’s all about not making the machine wait while i/o happens (I want to be able to watch porn and download more in the background: imagine if you couldn’t do anything else while your computer was writing to disk, or it couldn’t do anything while it was waiting for you to issue a command); Bob wants to think about a whole bunch of people using the same computer at once (remember when I said “expensive”? In this period, it was inconceivable that one site should have more than one machine, with one processor, with one core memory, for all its operations. That’s why people had to line up: they all had to pass their bits through the same grinder). And these two characters (and the cast quickly expands to include the afore-mentioned John, and Fernando Corbató, and Grace Hopper, and Walter Bauer, and a whole bunch of other people. I’m thankful to Donald Knuth for doing the legwork of sorting some of this out) swear up and down that their ideas are definitely not the same thing and in no way are they related (and I have the letters to prove it — they’re out there on the internet, and I promise that you already have enough information to find them from this post).

Except they totally are. And I’ll prove it to you: they are the same algorithm, which in a decade will be known as the “scheduler” (which name it still carries to 2022). Because here’s the wacky part (and hold on to your neoliberally-induced sense of subjective self): to the machine, you are an input/output device.

Note on interpretation

[2022-10-30 Sun]

I had prepared a more formal presentation of this idea complete with provisional citations and sources, but I’ve lost it in the tangle of my computer’s file system (does anyone else have that problem?), so to share the idea and remove the stress of reconstructing what I had written, I’m converting it into a blog post. Filling in the citations is left as an exercise to the reader.

Suppose you have a universal computing machine that multiple people want to use at the same time. Now, one solution is simply to make this person wait until that one’s done and ceded their turn, so that the jobs are run through the machine in batches. This is fine for some applications, but if a bunch of people want to interact with the machine at the same time, it’s clearly unacceptable. Now, since this machine is universal, it can also be programmed to schedule tasks for itself: each person, at an arbitrary time, might issue some command to the machine; since it can only do one thing at a time (or several, but in any case not nearly as many things as it is being ordered to do), it will have to allocate its time between these tasks so that they all get done.

Now, there are two basic approaches to this: either the machine hands control over to one of the jobs, on the understanding that the job will return control when it’s done, or the machine gives and takes control at its own discretion. The word used for the latter arrangement is generally “preempting,” since the machine can always “preempt” whatever process is running; the method where the machine waits for the job to hand back control before beginning the next one is called “non-preempting.” There is one job that the machine is always running: the job that schedules the other jobs. In the non-preempting model, this job doesn’t need to have any more power than the others; in a preempting set-up, this job has to have the unique privilege of being able to force other jobs to stop.

It is typical to wish to interpret this technique as a symbol of human society. One reading is to assign the privileged job the role of the hegemonic class, and the other jobs the role of the subatern classes, whose access to the shared machine resources is entirely at the whim of the privileged class. On this reading, the non-preempting model is a style of communistic organization, where the jobs collaborate peaceably among themselves, and the privileged job “withers away” to the mere administrative task of scheduling; the preempting model is a symbol of the hegemonic class’s domination over shared resources. However, this is not the only possible interpretation: it is also possible to see the privileged job in a preempting system as a revolutionary agent who seizes and redistributes common resources from the job that is monopolizing them; its role is to ensure the equitable and resonable allocation of the machine’s limited resources among the various jobs.

In a computing machine, it is all too easy to accidentally write a routine that will “loop,” that is, which will continue executing forever without ever halting (though proving that you have in fact entered such a loop is quite tricky); even if the job will eventually halt, it may not do it for several centuries or even millenia. In these circumstances, the user of a non-preempting system is left with no option but to power off the machine and turn it back on: they have no means of issuing any sort of command to the machine, since its entire resources are consumed by the “run away” process: even the job that receives commands from the user is blocked. On the other hand, a preempting system can simply “preempt” the non-cooperative process, allowing the rest of the jobs to continue unimpeded. The word that is often used for this act is “kill” — one “kills” a process that is not cooperating. In a preemptive system, it is possible to read this as the hegemonic class’s crushing of dissent, or as a version of the “dictatorship of the proletariat” or “revolutionary terror.” In the non-preempting system, the “run away” process can be assigned the role of the hegemonic class that monopolizes resources, while the other jobs are the subaltern classes, forced to wait until the hegemonic class cedes power, or an external force (the user’s pressing of the power button, for example) topples the regime.

Note that other interpretations are possible besides these two. Indeed, this only heightens the acuteness of the situation, since rather than having a single pleasing interpretation of the technical phenomenon, one is left with several competing readings. I have selected these two because they so clearly oppose one another: each pits the hegemonic class against the subaltern, but they assign the roles to opposite members of the technique. This is probably a general challenge when interpreting techniques: they admit of varying and opposed readings, without clearly favoring one.

Tentatively, I suggest a resolution by cutting the Gordian knot: as is evident from the above discussion, preemptive systems are much more usable and forgiving of user error than non-preemptive ones, and essentially all really-existing computer systems are preempting, including the machine I write this on, the machine this web site is hosted on, and the machine you use to read this. In light of this and the above-noted ambivalence, I suggest that we are free to pick the interpretation that gives reason to the action we are already taking anyway: there is a technical reason to prefer one technique over another, even if it can be read in a way that repulses our intuition. Since, at least in this case, a favorable reading is possible, I suggest that we should prefer that one. Long live the permanent revolution, long live the kernel!

Welcome home

[2022-10-29 Sat]

I’ve moved, and I’m coming to you from the new apartment in the city. It’s a one bedroom on the ground floor of a twentieth-century yellow brick building on the corner. My bedroom looks out on the alley. All the contents of the apartment (with the exception of a shower curtain and some dish soap) are from my mother’s house: even the food in the fridge and cabinets I took from hers. She left me a spectacular collection of antiques and vintage tchotchkes, including the radios and posters, not to mention the furniture and rugs and kitchen appliances (ice cream maker, pressure cooker, standing mixer, wok…) and coffee-table books.

It’s all dross, to quote a certain saint in translation. It wasn’t worth my mother’s life. It’s a bunch of vintage junk she picked up here and there in her travels, each one a memory. I inherited a wooden airplane propeller and a set of hand-spun pottery plates and bowls. I have the afghans and table cloths her mother made. It’s all just random stuff.

It’s her random stuff. The particular this-ness of the things is her: it’s this ash tray, not any other; this tea set, not another; this croquet set which sat in the basement of the old house except that one time I dragged it out to play, except none of us know how to play croquet so we just hit the balls around.

So it’s both: random stuff, and her stuff. It’s not her. It is her. Every piece of it is a facet of her personality, because she left herself in it by chosing to keep it: the table I’m sitting at was dragged back and forth across the Atlantic just because she liked it. Most of this stuff was in her life longer than I was.

But the other day I read an anecdote about Turing in his biography that I wanted to share with her because she was the only one who would get it (would you believe that I’ve forgotten what it was?), and for the first time I truly grieved her. Because I had always taken her for granted: Mommy was always there, sometimes a little too there. And now she’s nowhere. Or everywhere. Or right here. I miss her, even in the midst of her.

Bye bye, Forest Ave

[2022-10-23 Sun]

This is one of the very last nights I’ll ever sleep in this house. My mother bought it the summer I was 16, in 2014. I went off to boarding school that fall and came back in November for the holiday to the new house. I lived here during the “gap year” I took after I left boarding school. I did acid for the first time in this bedroom, looking at those posters on that wall. I thought I died then; it seemed as though it would last forever. It ended too quickly.

I don’t know where I’m going now. Once again, I’m setting out on a journey. This is travelling, once more. From the top this time: on recommence. I’ve been stripping back the things from my mother’s house: a little less here, a little less there. These are the repressed possessions I didn’t get rid of when I was traveling or at school because I expected to be able to keep them here. Not anymore, I can’t; these storage vaults are emptied. I’m setting up a new apartment, but like everywhere I live, it’s provisional. I don’t have any intent of staying here — famous last words. Moving is hell, and I have a collection.

If I may say something heretical (and I think I can, since this is my own log): I don’t know what to do with my mother’s collection. It’s beautiful and full of memories. It represents a great deal of what was in my house as a child. And it isn’t her. It’s the silly t-shirts with slogans, the little jewelry, the crafts I made that she kept that remind me of her, more than the antiques. I don’t know — I have begun to get rid of these things. My child craft projects, little collages and pictures I made in elementary school. What are these things? Are they me? I remember making them, but I don’t miss them when I’m not looking at them. I already tossed some of them, and I’ll certainly get rid of more. But I hate to get rid of evidence of who I was. And there’s the matter of her antiques: the furniture, the posters, the rugs, the sopramobile. I inherited an airplane propeller.

She is dead. That is what it is. It is what it is. She is what she is. What she is is dead. Ah well. Loss. Gain. I’m sad that she won’t see what I get up to next, as though she missed some of the reward of raising me. I know it was hard. I know she didn’t want me to know. It hurt her when I said I was hard to raise. I was hard to raise. A lot went on that she didn’t know how to handle. A lot goes on that no one knows how to handle. We’re all doing the best we can with the sense we have. Or “we’ve got.” I don’t remember how she used to say it. Maybe she used to say it both ways. Kathleen says “the sense we have at the time.” It’s true: the sense you have isn’t something outside of time, but something that changes and grows. I’m changing and growing. My mother isn’t changing any more: she’s dead.

I’m going to miss this house because it reminds me of her. But I won’t miss it any more than I miss the other houses she and I lived in. And this was never really my home anyway: she lived here, but I didn’t ever stay here permanently. I was always a guest, and I knew when I’d stayed too long. I’ve stayed here long enough. I’m ready to move out. I’m ready for it to be over. I’m not ready for her to be gone.

Gone?

Howl

[2022-10-10 Mon]

Seven months ago, I walked out on my mother and Michael because Michael and I were stepping on each others’ toes. My mother, having just had foot surgury, crawled up the stairs towards me sobbing begging me to stay. I stood and watched her. When she got to the top I walked down past her and out the door. I would do the same again. That was six months before she died. I missed her last birthday. I would do the same thing again. I didn’t know she was about to die. I would do the same thing again. Fuck him for stealing that time from me, from my mother, from us. I don’t understand why he doesn’t have any self reflection — any self awareness. He makes me feel as though I’m the crazy one, as though everything’s my fault. He is absolutely certain about everything. I hate him. I will either kill him or myself. I blame him for my suicidality as a child (though these things are overdetermined): there was no other way to communicate distress, and that didn’t work. When I was a kid he would drive and drive around the city and never listen when I asked to go home for bed because I had school in the morning. I once screamed and beat my head against the pillar of the car while he stood outside at the planetarium and looked at the night sky. Nobody cared, and it is impossible to communicate what I need. When I walked out he found me at the metro station and asked “What do you need?” and I said “to be left alone” and he just stood there until the train came and he got on behind me. I got to the next station to change trains and he stood on the platform and watched me wait inside the train until it left. I hate him. I hate myself. I don’t know whom to kill or why except that he wasted the last years of my mother’s life. He knows it, too. The fucker. He wouldn’t come to my graduation unless I invited him and my mother didn’t feel comfortable travelling alone so she cried at me until I asked him to come and he’s never so much as apologized. There’s tiny signs of progress. He apologized to me once two hours after I asked him not to call the electricity company on my behalf (the next week he tried to make an ophthamologist’s appointment on my behalf) and he said “no, I’m just trying to help you.” I said “it feels as though you’re seizing control” and he said “you’re wrong, that’s not what’s happening here.” Two hours later he apologized for “overstepping my boundaries.” That’s the only time he’s ever apologized; I do not know how many such incidents — usually once a day he does something that I don’t want him to, but I’ve long since given up on arguing. About once a month I try and he reacts that way. And he doesn’t apologize. Or he comes to me sobbing and beating his breast about his impfections and begs me to forgive him; that happened once, too. I think that those are the only apologies he’s given in the time I’ve known him, and as I say it’s close to once a day he does these things. I would walk out on her again today. If I thought she’d be here when I got back. I didn’t know that she would die so soon.

Goodbye mommy

[2022-09-26 Mon]

Today, I am twenty-five years old. My mother has been dead for nineteen days. She was sixty-five. I haven’t really thought about it since it happened — not openly, at least. I haven’t written about it, I guess I mean. It’s not as though I haven’t written at all — some fiction, the prayers for her service, her obituary — but I haven’t written openly about her death.

It doesn’t seem real, yet. It seems temporary, as though she’s on vacation somewhere, and some day she’ll come bursting through that door with a smile on her face and her forehead shining in the sun, but she won’t. It’s final.

The past is a necessary thing. It cannot be other than it was. Our unknowing of it aside, the known being of the past is always the same. What I mean is that the thing happened and it’s not gonna un-happen. Or un-happened. Or whatever, I dunno.

My mom always disliked that tick — my saying “I dunno” so much — I guess she thought I did know. I don’t know why she disliked it. Susan Miller said today, “I was afraid that I’d forget them — what they looked like, sounded like — but I didn’t. I still remember them. They’re part of me.”

Did I tell you the one about me at the orthodontist’s office where I fell asleep while the glue dried for my braces, and I dreamed that label floated above me (and baby bear was at my side — I remember hazily my own childhood through the blury film of the story I’m learning to tell about myself)? My mother, when I told her, called this “internalization”: “you’ve internalized them,” she said.

I used to ask her, “do you love me?” I don’t know why. It was agony on her. How dare I ask that? But I couldn’t stop — she’d always say yes and I wanted to hear her say it.

My mother spoke often about the experience of mourning my youth. As I grew up, the person-I-was was lost. When I became a toddler, I was no longer a baby; when I went to school, I was no longer an infant; when I grew up, I was no longer a child. My mother lost all of these children, over and over; and each was recompensed by another child, a new excellent child to love and get to know, always still her son.

Boy. She said, “I couldn’t handle it if you were trans.” I’m not trans. It’s still a fucked up thing to say. But she was cool with my sexuality, and with other trans and queer family and friends. She lived in New York during the AIDS epidemic and had friends who died.

What a generic and weak sentence — what a like-all-the-other-mommies mommy. I don’t know: they say you’re grown up when you realize your parents are people like anybody else.

Am I people like anybody else?

Everybody’s grief process is different.

T-40 years.

Mommy’s head is sick

[2022-09-04 Sun]

About twenty-four hours ago, my mother had a stroke. She was at a restaurant in the city with her husband, and an ambulance brought them to the emergency room. I arrived shortly after they did. When I arrived, she was confused and lost, but not agitated. The doctors recommended that we administer tPA, a medicine that breaks up blood clots. This caused bleeding in her brain, and my mother became extremely agitated. She thrashed and screamed in the hospital bed and pulled out the tubes leading into her arms. She had to be restrained, then sedated. She screamed pushed off the bed; it took six of us to hold her down. I held her right arm and wrist so another needle could be inserted.

I came down by coincidence: I called my mother to offer to get tickets for a Diana Ross concert. Michael answered: “We’re in the emergency room. Your mother’s had a stroke.” I called a cab, changed, and came down.

My mother was tired and afraid. She didn’t know who we were, or where she was. They rolled her up to the intensive care unit, and we saw her into place. She was asleep when we left her (no overnight visitors are permitted in the ward).

We came back this morning, and she was agitated. She struggled and cried “help help help fire fire fire” and my father’s name. She was confused and babbled — not all of the sounds made words I knew. It’s best when she’s asleep. They weren’t able to take further scans overnight because she moved too much and ruined the exposure. This afternoon she finally slept under sedation, and they were able to take her in to be scanned. I am sitting in the room with her now, waiting for the experts’ interpretation of the image. She is snoring slightly, her mouth agape. Her hair is a bedraggled mess tangled in the wires glued to her scalp (they were able to confirm that she is having seizures, and it seems that the seizure medication helped her calm down).

This is far from the first time my mother has been in the hospital: she had two rounds of breast cancer and broke her back during the time I knew her, and she is only barely recovered from bunion surgery. But this is the first time I have ever seen her delirious. This is the first time she didn’t know who I was.

Broken tatters of life: transient, fugitive, fleeting. “We were out to dinner, and she just — had a stroke,” says Michael on the phone across the room from me. Her bed is between us. We don’t know what’s to come. I’ve been calling everyone I know: “my mom had a stroke,” and I can feel the weight on the other end of the line. Some people made a noise like being hit.

Most of my friends and family are not terribly religious, but they all send their thoughts and love and (shockingly) prayers. I wish I had payed closer attention. I wish I remembered every detail. Did she begin to struggle before or after the drug was administered? When did she scream? What did she say?

When I got there, I knelt by her head and greeted her — she turned to me and said, “Preston, could you help me plug it it?” or something. It meant “I don’t know why it isn’t working but Preston can help.” It was the way she asked — asks? will once again ask? — me for help when she couldn’t get the television working.

Michael can’t resist speaking to her, as though she can hear. I worry she’s going to wake up and the screaming will start again. Michael’s father had eight strokes.

Addressed to Arasp

[2022-09-02 Fri]

Hey, I was writing you on XMPP but I decided to hit you by HTTP instead. I’ve been looking more into encryption for XMPP, since I’m still having problems with it. I discovered that the standard for the encryption and key-sharing schemes used by XMPP’s new standard “OMEMO” XEP-0384 (https://xmpp.org/extensions/xep-0384.html) uses the Double Ratchet encryption scheme and the X3DH key exchange protocol, both published by Signal (https://signal.org/docs/specifications/doubleratchet/ and https://www.signal.org/docs/specifications/x3dh/). I want to focus in particular on the use that the XEP’s authors, Andreas Straub, Daniel Gultsch, Tim Henkes, Klaus Herberth, Paul Schaub, and Marvin Wißfeld, envision for their system:

The use case for OMEMO is a situation where the content of a conversation needs to be protected, but where the servers the message passes by can’t be trusted to keep the content of the message secret. For example when information that is under strict embargo needs to within an organization and the server administrator is not one of the persons cleared to see the information or when a couple is exchanging intimate messages and they want to avoid leaking of those messages to the server administrator. The OMEMO protocol protects against passive and active attackers which are able to read, modify, replay, delay and delete messages.

The image here is of a nefarious snooper, the so-called “Eve” always listening in, seeking to intercept and distort the message. Against these sorts of intruders, the protocol is robust. I trust it to transmit xmpp “stanzas” between us unmollested on the network, while “guaranteeing” all these amazing things:

  • Confidentiality: Nobody else except sender and receiver is able to read the content of a message.
  • Forward Secrecy: Compromised key material does not compromise previous message exchanges. It has been demonstrated, that OMEMO provides only weak forward secrecy (it protects the session key only once both parties complete the key exchange).
  • Break-in Recovery: A session which has been compromised due to leakage of key material recovers from the compromise after a few communication rounds.
  • Authentication: Every peer is able to authenticate the sender or receiver of a message, even if the details of the authentication process is out-of-scope for this specification.

Integrity: Every peer can ensure that a message was not changed by any intermediate node.

  • Deniability: X3DH is weakly offline deniable and provides no online deniability, as far as the research shows.
  • Asynchronicity: The usability of the protocol does not depend on the online status of any participant.

However, the protocol is limited from its inception:

OMEMO is not intended to protect against … an attacker [who] has permanent access to your device. In this case, the attacker may extract decrypted messages from the device, eg. from the applications database. … The OMEMO protocol does not protect against attackers who rely on metadata and traffic analysis.

One wonders: what sort of attackers are they who “rely on metadata and traffic analysis?”; who “has permanent access to your device”? I shudder to imagine. And what secrets lie in the “applications database?” Is it the database shared by several applications, or the “application’s database”, the database belonging to a particular application? The primary image is that the machine is stolen or, as noted by the protocol, “lost”. But I note that a significant danger is in the messaging client itself: the client handles all messages as plaintext, encrypting and decrypting them for the user. One wonders whether the client is suspect: might this be how the nefarious analyser of meta and traffic data works? The committee concludes, laconically: “Trust management is a difficult topic, which is out of scope of this document.” Nevertheless, we are left with one hope:

The quality of the verification of the conversation participants[’] OMEMO identity keys determines the level of protection OMEMO offers.

In other words, if the client is trust-worthy (which it should be — it’s your machine, after all!) and you believe that the person on the other end of the wire is who they say they are, then you’re golden, unless the adversary is someone who can monitor network traffic: even if they can’t read or modify your messages, they can still see who’s sending what to whom when and can thereby infer all sorts of nasty things about you.

Being a resident

[2022-08-23 Tue]

It is late summer in Evanston. The cicadas are humming. The trees are leafiest green. It begins to get cool in the evening. Today was the first day of class for me. I called in to the lectures from my mother’s back yard.

Il y a trop des posibilités en anglais : c’est trop facile, pour moi, de jouer avec les formes ou les tournures alternées et alors me perdre parmi le tourbillon des mots opposés et confus. C’est absolument louche. Chelou, hein? Je trouve que parler en français, c’est plus facile qu’en anglais, même si je suis plus certain en anglais qu’en français. C’est dû precisement à cette certitude que je me trompe : je vois tous les formes possibles, tous les alternatives (en verité je ne vois qu’un petit mourceau de l’univers de la langue, et c’est déjà trop) ; de plus je suis chaque jour encadré par des forces et des vagues de langage (et je dit «langage» et pas «langue» parce que je veux causer de l’usage et pas de la langue choisie) qui me… qui me quoi? Déjà ma connaissance du français est bien vide.

My mother — my sainted mother, as I took to calling Rita’s mother after she (the mother) sewed the buttons back on to my button down shirts when she did my laundry at their house in Mantova. I almost said Verona there, then “how far away all that seems.” I am going native and I don’t know what to do — is growing old. (Whenever I do something I feel it’s the most important thing in the world.) Don, before he died, was concerned about her mental acuity: “she seems confused on the phone lately;” (I never could do a good southern accent!); but at the time I discounted it. Besides, Don sounded pretty confused to me on the phone, too, but that have been me.

Today we filled out the petition (and I mean the “petition”) to the University of Illinois. I am petitioning to be considered a resident. The tuition is lower for students who are a resident of Illinois. But many people move here to go to the University: they are Illinois residents and can provide the proofs requested by the University. Therefore the University has to seperate people who live in the state to go to the University from those who don’t; the latter alone are eligible for in-state tuition. Confused? Me too.

Today my mother and I finished the application. We had to make sure that I had all the necessary documents and check that I had filled out all the forms. I had all the necessary documents; I had more than enough. But I wanted to know which were enough. I wanted to complete the form. I had been held up on a question that solicited an essay response. It had asked me to “briefly indicate the reasons other than University attendance that have led you to seek establishment of Illinois residency and the actions you plan to maintain that residency” (emphasis original). I didn’t know what to say. My mother didn’t know what to say. Michael didn’t know what to say. My mother said to me, in private, “it’s rediculous what they expect you to do,” and Michael was finally struck dumb by the oddness of the whole thing. I wrote a statement that hurt me:

My mother and father moved to Illinois with me when I was six years old. When my father returned to Switzerland, I stayed here with my mother. I went to elementary and middle school here, and return here when I do not have to be anywhere else. The only time I have not been based in Illinois was when I was out-of-state for education.

The last sentence was added later, after my mother read what I had so far. She wanted to correct it, and for me to make a clean copy. I didn’t: I made it clear that this was the last of it, and she understood.

The above-quoted paragraph is one of the ugliest I have ever written. I am, frankly, ashamed. I think. Certainly the handwriting is appauling. I wrote it on my notebook in my lap.

My father never wanted me to think of myself as from Chicago: he once asked me whether I did, and I said no. He said, “good.” He always hated it here, or manifested hating it here to me.

In Europe, it was always clear that I was from the US, though I usually slid by on knowing the language, which made me, at worst, a curiosity. In Chicago, though, I always feel as a foreigner. Felt. I don’t know.

I don’t want to be like all the other kids

[2022-08-18 Thu]

I

“The Purloined Letter” is the third and last of Egdar Allan Poe’s stories to feature Dupin, which stories are generally considered the foundation of English-language detective fiction. This parable is excerpted from Dupin’s criticizing of the literal-minded police chief’s search for the stolen letter, which letter is (spoiler alert, but the story was published in 1844, so I think the statute of limitations is over) hidden in plain sight.

I knew [a schoolboy] about eight years of age, whose success at guessing in the game of ‘even and odd’ attracted universal admiration. This game is simple, and is played with marbles. One player holds in his hand a number of these toys, and demands of another whether that number is even or odd. If the guess is right, the guesser wins one; if wrong, he loses one. The boy to whom I allude won all the marbles of the school. Of course he had some principle of guessing; and this lay in mere observation and admeasurement of the astuteness of his opponents. For example, an arrant simpleton is his opponent, and, holding up his closed hand, asks, ‘are they even or odd?’ Our schoolboy replies, ‘odd,’ and loses; but upon the second trial he wins, for he then says to himself, ‘the simpleton had them even upon the first trial, and his amount of cunning is just sufficient to make him have them odd upon the second; I will therefore guess odd;’—he guesses odd, and wins. Now, with a simpleton a degree above the first, he would have reasoned thus: ‘This fellow finds that in the first instance I guessed odd, and, in the second, he will propose to himself, upon the first impulse, a simple variation from even to odd, as did the first simpleton; but then a second thought will suggest that this is too simple a variation, and finally he will decide upon putting it even as before. I will therefore guess even;’—he guesses even, and wins.

The parable, however, stops at the second degree simpleton and goes no further; we are to believe that the school boy never met an opponent who was able to precede to a third thought. Otherwise the boy’s thought might have run: “this fellow might first think to vary from even to odd, but on second thought, he may think to stick with even, since this would display a higher degree of cunning than the first move; but thinking this, and anticipating my thinking of his thinking, he may decide to chose the simple strategy of varying, attempting to fool me by making a choice that I would expect of a simpler opponent; but I, knowing this, will chose ‘odd’ as though this opponent were a simpleton, since I suppose that he has preceded through these three steps. But it may be that a fourth step obtains, wherefore I ought to guess ‘even’, or perhaps a fifth step…” and thus one is caught in an infinite loop of guessing the opponent’s understanding of your understanding of them (you can see why Lacan got so much out of this story, and Derrida took Lacan to task, and so on…). Poe, however, assures us that the student has a certain method whereby he can ascertain the state of mind of the opponent. When Dupin asked the boy how he knew what stratagem his opponent was likely to take, the boy responded:

When I wish to find out how wise, or how stupid, or how good, or how wicked is any one, or what are his thoughts at the moment, I fashion the expression of my face, as accurately as possible, in accordance with the expression of his, and then wait to see what thoughts or sentiments arise in my mind or heart, as if to match or correspond with the expression.

(This is where one can begin to catch a glimpse of Poe’s genius. Recall, further, that these detective stories are only a tiny corner of his corpus, which includes weird and speculative fiction, poetry, and essays. A prophet is not without honour, but in his own country, and among his own kin, and in his own house.) The boy resolves this recursive uncertainty, which is a priori inescapable, by directly intuiting the feelings of his opponent: he knows what his opponent will do, because he knows them. So the question of where to leave the repeating chain of negations falls through to the similar, simpler (but much harder) problem of determining the character of the person across from you.

The boy’s method to determine his opponent’s acuity does not rely on any abstract form of “mind reading”. Rather, it is a perfectly physical process: the boy forms his face to match the opponent’s face and waits; his internal process changes to reflect the state of his face, which he causes to reflect his opponent’s. And so, making his mien his opponent’s, he discovers his opponent’s internal nature.

It is said, “if you keep making that expression your face’ll get stuck that way!” One wonders what the boy’s actual facial expression was. If he goes around matching his face to the faces of those he encounters, then what expression does he make when he’s alone? Does he ever allow his “mind or heart” to determine his face, rather than the other way? If he, at all times, imitates the facial expressions of his neighbors, then his inward-facing being will always form to replicate theirs, and he will lose the cunning which enabled him to interrogate the internal states of his peers; he will himself become the kind of simpleton he formerly impersonated, and their thoughts and sentiments will imprint themselves on his to his detriment.

II

I am back in Evanston, Illinois, United States of America, North America, Earth. Or, to give the address in the east Asian order, I am in Earth, North America, United States of America, Illinois, Evanston. Yesterday I attended the orientation sessions for the computer course at the University of Illinois; class starts next week. I’m not sure where I’ll end up staying, since the whole purpose of this exercise was to be near my mother, and it turns out that it is not possible to commute down to Champagne-Urbana by train from Chicago for the day: the only trains out are in the evening, and the trains in are in the morning. If class is out there, in the middle of the day, I have to stay down there at least two nights in order to take the train there and back. This is not a joke, and this is better than average for most of the US: at least there is a train to connect the two places.

For the purposes of tuition I am attempting to prove that I am an Illinois resident, since when I applied and read the rules I interpreted them as disqualifying me from resident status: the text as it was presented to me heavily emphasized continuous physical presence in the state in the years leading up to the course, and I haven’t really lived here in a very long time. Nevertheless, for tax and voting purposes, my official residence remains my mother’s house in Evanston. I certainly cannot be construed as a resident of any other state, and I am no longer a resident of Scotland (and anyhow, it’s not clear that that time counts, since it was for the purposes of education).

Michael insists that I am a resident. He is so insistant on this point that even writing this text is stressful: I can hear him saying “you are an Illinois resident” and not allowing me to finish. As though the “truth” were at stake here. As though I really were an Illinois resident. The University has been much more reasonable, in that there is a bureaucratic procedure to “petition” (their word) for residency status. One gathers thus and such documents, fills out these and those forms, and submits it; the hard part is the deadline, but I still have a few weeks. When I called them today to ask some questions about the form, I had the call on the loudspeaker; Michael interrupted and said something like “but he is an Illinois resident: his voting registration and taxes are here.” The person on the line responded that there are many factors taken into consideration, and that ultimately the decision is theirs to make based on the evidence presented. There is no hard-and-fast rule to determine whether one is a resident.

Of course, my hesitation is this: the residency policies for the University all say that the “resident” is expected to remain in the state indefinitely after graduation; I have no plans to do this. I hate it here. That’s not true. I hate staying in my mother’s house, and this part of the USA is astonishingly provincial. And it’s a long way from anywhere, and you have to drive a lot. Or not “have to,” but as noted, the train system doesn’t always go where you need it to at the time you need it to. But at least it has some nice parks, and the streets are lined with trees. It’s not a bad city, but it’s stressful to be around Michael all the time.

III

My mother’s cognition is beginning to change with age. We knew this would happen: she’s sixty-five years old and her mind is becoming hazier. Not that she doesn’t remember things or can’t have a cogent conversation or recognize people and places; but her administrative abilities are dulling. Though her executive functioning is decreasing, it is still as high or higher than mine. And for God’s sake, she still administers the entire household economy for me and Micahel.

Michael insists that she has “early onset dementia,” and tells her this. To her face. He asks, “don’t you remember?”, even when he’s the one who forgot. He tells her that her family is concerned about her cognition. And so on. Even if it’s true, it’s not helpful to say. She is recieving the best medical care available at this time for the condition, which is to say, she’s being measured and monitored as carefully as we know how to. She’s being administered an experimental drug that might make some difference in a particular kind of dementia, but there isn’t really any long-term treatment for the condition as of 2022. And so, doing what she can, there’s no reason to additionally increase her anxiety.

But Michael has never been sensitive to the internal states of other people: he has never been able to tell when he is increasing someone else’s anxiety and take the signal to stop doing what he’s doing. He has (as long as I’ve known him) always done what he thinks is helpful, even when the person (me) he’s helping asks him to stop because it’s not helpful. Because I clearly am not competent to know my own internal state, and it is not possible that his good intentions are misreceived. The whole purpose of this exercise is to be near to my mother. And I have already been driven away once. I cannot force her to divorce him, but she can’t force me to spend time with him, either.

After Trump was elected president in 2016, Michael described feeling a sinking, dropping feeling in the pit of his stomach and being unable to sleep. He said “I never knew what anxiety felt like before.” I thought, but did not say, “what the fuck is wrong with you? How could you not know? Not feel? Not notice?” It’s not as though he isn’t around high-anxiety people.

He is, of course, deeply neurotic, in the works-based righteousness way of Calvinist Catholicism (because, of course, it was the protestants who enforced the ethic that hard work would save, despite the fact that their entire dispute with the Roman Catholics was because the protestants believed that good deeds were not necessary to be saved). So he works like an animal to save the world. When my mother and I were packing my things to ship from Scotland to the USA, he became impatient with the slow process of sorting things to keep from things to donate. Every time I put something aside, he would cringe; he wanted to keep everything (he still has everything he ever owned squirelled away somewhere in the house or storage lockers). He said, in a moment of frustration when I put aside something or another, “I’m a good person,” as though that qualified him to have the things. And so he works a lot.

Michael’s internal state remains a mystery to me: I have never felt able to communicate with him, and I don’t think I’m the only one. Perhaps I am overthinking the situation: I may be falling pray to the infite return of strategic switches in the marbles game, but I have never been able to judge his internal state directly by aprehension. I don’t believe him to be a first degree simpleton, but it is difficult to read his feelings.

Looking in Michael’s face makes me deeply uncomfortable. He has a tendency to stare at me, as though trying to bore through into my mind through my eyes. He always looks concerned. When I left last March he followed me to the train station and said “I can tell you’re in pain.” Yet he wouldn’t leave me alone, because he was convinced that by his presence alone he could help. But of course he leaves and walks off when he’s frustrated and demands to be left alone, and won’t countenance being followed.

IV

Being in Evanston, I am surrounded by people who are a lot like me. Which is surprising, since I tend not to think of myself as “from here” in any meaningful sense. I certainly haven’t lived here in a very long time. But in my dress, interests, political opinions, taste in food, and so on, I am very typically “Evanston”: left-socialist; comfortable clothes, but not technical fabrics; food spicy and thoroughly seasoned; I even have a MacBook now.

My greatest fear is that I am the same as everyone else. I think that fearing that is precisely the way in which I am like everyone else. I have said before that the US is a hyperconformist society: independence of thought is generally percieved as a challenge to orthodoxy or dogma and is therefore shunned. Even expressing an opinion using a simple declarative sentence without qualifying or hedging adverbials is suspect: “I think that…”; “in my opinion…”; “it seems to me like…”; “maybe…”; “like…”. This pressure probably dates from the puritan origins of US society, which were revived in the 20th century; conformist thinking was actively cultivated as an anti-Communist measure; non-conformists were sought out, publically tried and humiliated before the federal legislature, and often disqualified from work. The name of the group of members of the house of representatives who carried out this task was the “House Un-American Activies Commitee.” People were encouraged to turn in their colleagues, friends, and neighbors. As far as I know, nobody was ever executed or sent to a work camp by the HUAC, though of course the US prison system is enormous. But the ideological conformity stays.

This isn’t a politics blog, and I don’t know enough about the current state of federal politics in the USA to intelligently comment. At a high level of abstraction, I can say the following (and having perfomed my ritual act of self-effacement, I can now hesitantly state my position, though always ready to be interrupted or told to stop — I actively fight this pressure when writing, and it’s stressful): the content of non-conformity can still be formally conformist. In other words, everybody wants to be unique, but nobody wants to be different; the “uniqueness” is itself formally framed in by the sameness that obtains; everyone is different from one another in the same way; everyone is the same in their self-perception as different. When I say, “I don’t want to be like all the other kids,” I am thereby already just like all the other kids, insofar as we all share the desire to not be like one another, and we all escape from being alike in the same way, and are therefore again the same in not being the same. Incriminatingly, we all make the same facial expressions.

Live from the flipside

[2022-08-16 Tue]

I’m coming to you loud and clear from a new macbook — commodity fetishism — at my mother and Michael’s house in Evanston. It’s the last day of my gap year: I have orientation tomorrow, and class starts the next week. My mother, according to Michael, has early onset dementia. I think this is bullshit.

When I was a child, I took swim lessons. This was in 2001 or so. We still lived in Switzerland, my father, mother, and me. They were still married. My mother was going through her first round of breast cancer. The treatment was a lumpectomy and radiation. After a round of radiation, she fell asleep waiting to pick me up from a swimming lesson.

I was wearing a blue brief-style swim suit. I got out of the pool wet and cold and walked to the locker room. I didn’t know where my mother was (this is a reconstruction from memory) and didn’t have anything to change into. I think I got a towel from the pool; I remember, vaguely, there being one, but that might have been from another lesson, before or after.

After time (and how long was it? Probably half an hour, I’d guess. But what’s time to a four year old?) I began to have to go to the bathroom. I defecated in my shorts. My mother arrived to pick me up from the lesson, late because she had fallen asleep after radiation (my father was working somewhere) and I had shit myself.

ma tomo Win

[2022-08-08 Mon]

This is going to be a big post, so buckle up, y’all. Tomorrow (or today, since I’m writing this after midnight), I go back to the US (semi-)permanently. My gap year is, finally, over. The thing begins and it’s already ending.

You’ve heard that I lost Baby Bear and Label, but I wrote that post while I was still looking for them: not all hope was lost yet. But despair set in when I told my mother about it on Thursday, and she asked what day it had happened; when I said “Tuesday,” she was certain that they weren’t coming back. Maybe they will. It’s not impossible that they will. It’s possible that they won’t. They probably won’t. But I fished a new bear out of the Danube canal in Vienna.

I saw the something floating by in the canal as I sat on its bank with the toki pona speakers I met up with in Vienna. By color and size, it could have been Baby Bear, so my interest was peaked, but as it came closer and went by, I could tell that it was my missing bear, so I let it pass. But as it drifted away, I was suddenly struck by the sense that I ought, nay, I must chase after this floating thing: that it might be Baby Bear after all, and even if it weren’t him, that I should rescue it anyhow.

So there I was, chasing a bear down the Danube canal as the sun was beginning to set but hadn’t yet gone behind the tall glass buildings that were turning to fire in the departing light. In the first stair case I stepped down to grab the bear, who I had in the meantime confirmed visually was not Baby Bear, I took my shoes off and stepped down onto the concrete rim of the canal; but the bear floated past, out of reach. I realized, in this moment, that swimming in the canal to fetch the bear was a step too far; even had it been Baby Bear mine, I don’t know that I would have swum for it; but who knows what reserves of strength or daring might appear in the event I see my lost comfort object.

The first night I slept without Baby Bear and Label, I felt an aching emptiness in my chest: I am so used, from twenty four years of habit, to holding them against my chest while I sleep. It was very uncomfortable to sleep without something holding me up, so the next nights I crumpled up a few shirts and snuggled with them. Baby Bear and Label are, of course, prostheses. They are prosthetic, which to say that they are artificial yet part of my body (artificial is a fascinating word that means exactly what it says: arte + factum, which is to say, “made using (or by means of) skill”), so in their absence I feel as though part of me were missing. Part of me is missing. But cuddling the crumpled shirts made up for their lack, incompletely. The smell was different, the feeling was different, the bulk and shape and size were different. And it was much, much better than nothing: it, in fact, held my chest up while I slept, so that I could sleep comfortably on my side (the details of my sleeping position aren’t really important, and anyhow, it’s more my falling-asleep position that I’m talking about here) and so was an effective prosthesis for the prosthesis. A prosthetic prosthesis. Something that is used the same as something else but isn’t the same as something else. What is the difference, anyway?

I got a new bear out of the river. There’s, in fact, two bears: a bigger bear has around their neck a ribbon from which hangs by a keychain a smaller bear and a stuffed heart. The big bear is called Donaubär, since it is a bear from the Danube. The smaller bear doesn’t have a name yet. I wonder whether someone lost it. I wonder someone is looking for it even now, or whether someone has totally despaired of finding their lost precious thing. I hope that Baby Bear and Label (or whatever their new names are) are in a good home and not afraid. I hope that they aren’t forgotten; I hope that they aren’t lost; I hope that they aren’t alone. I hope that someone else finds them and takes care of them and loves them. They’re a good bear and a good blanket who deserve a good home. I stuffed them in bags, peed on them, puked on them, slept on them, spilled on them, for twenty four (almost twenty five!) years of my life. They did their duty honorably and well. Were that we were all so lucky.

I don’t want to forget them. I don’t want them to be gone. As long as they were here, I knew I was the same person I always was. They were a prosthetic identity, beyond just being a sleep-aiding prosthetic. In them, I knew myself. Object permanence is a hell of a drug. They’re gone from me, but they still exist. They existed for me, and now, I hope, they’ll exist for someone else. If they exist for themselves only, I hope that they still exist. I hope that they aren’t seperated. I hope that they aren’t destroyed. I hope that they aren’t forgotten. I can’t forget them anymore than I could forget myself.

And I did forget myself, for a very long time. Most of my adolescence was a reaction against myself, against the image I had of myself, against who I thought I was. In short, I was myself, then I was someone else, then I was myself again. But now, myself again, I know what it’s like to be somebody else. And that makes all the difference.

Lost (and found?)

[2022-08-03 Wed]

I lost my teddy bear and blanket yesterday. This was the scenario: I’m in Vienna and changed from one room to another in the hostel, since I extended my reservation. I changed rooms in the morning. When I got to the new room, I made the bed I was assigned using the sheets and put my bear and blanket (hereafter referred to as the “comfort objects” or “stuffed animals”) on top of the newly made bed. When I returned in the afternoon, the bed had been stripped and the comfort objects were gone.

I immediately checked with reception, who reported no losses. I asked them again in the evening and this morning: no change. I spoke today to the cleaners in my room. They hadn’t seen anything, but they confirmed my fear: the sheets are sent away to be washed by an outside company.

This is the current working hypothesis: the bear and blanket were scooped up in the sheets and shipped off to the cleaning company. If I’m lucky, they’ll be found before the sheets go through the wash and dry. If not, they’ll be sent through the industrial machines. The blanket’s top was already in tatters and will not survive a pass through the washing machine. Its back may fare a little better, and I imagine that the bear will make it. The question, though, is whether I can track them down before I leave Vienna next Monday.

When I ask for my missing bear and blanket, I get differing responses. Nobody has been unhelpful, but the dignity with which they act changes. The first person I asked was a young woman my age who took the matter in full seriousness: she reacted exactly as she would have for any other lost object. The middle-aged man I spoke to this morning was helpful and encouraged me to speak to the cleaners about it; he was, however, slightly amused by what I had lost.

As you know, I take Baby Bear and Label with me everywhere. The name Baby Bear comes, I think, from a children’s book I was read as an infant. The name Label comes from the blanket’s silk labels, which I rubbed to soothe myself: I always loved the smooth texture under my finger tips or against my cheek. When I rubbed through the original labels, my mother replaced them with new patches of silk: one large, one medium, and one small.1 They have genders: Baby Bear is a “he,” and Label is a “she.” One psychotherapist I saw with my mother and Michael for family therapy suggested that the comfort objects were a stable point in my life, and made some importance of their genders: presumably they represent my infantile desire for my mother and father to stay married and be constantly present to me. Michael always referred to them as my “toys” and encouraged me to put them away. I was never successfully weaned off them.

I always took them with me everywhere I went. Once, I left Baby Bear in a hotel on a trip I took with my father. My father called the hotel and arranged for Baby Bear to be returned; Baby Bear came back with a note on a string around his neck, written by the house keeper who found him, describing his adventures. When I got him back (this was after the seperation, but not long after: my father was still living in his bachelor’s apartment in Evanston), my father and I celebrated “Baby Bear comes home day.” I don’t remember the date.

It’s difficult to ascribe any sort of value to them. Or rather, trying to ascribe value to them already reveals how little of a human being I have been made by history. They have some vanishing monetary value: it’s not as though they weren’t bought for money at the time. But they’re irreplaceable, because they’re these particular objects that I carried with me through the first twenty-five years of my life. They can’t be replaced anymore than my childhood can be brought back: their specialness inheres precisely in that they were there for what happened in my life. Any new object would be exactly that: new. Any other object would be precisely that: other. But these things are the only part of me that still exists from the beginning. They are worn, but worn by me. The fur around Baby Bear’s eyes is still ragged from where I (at seven or eight) trimmed it back so that he could see better. He used to have a bow tie, but that’s long gone. Label, as I mentioned, is in rags. I already, at another hotel, lost half of her top piece. The other half is shreds and the original quilting is only distinguishable to people who knew what she looked like. Kathleen said a polite hello to them when I pulled them out of the bag.

And they’re gone in such a sudden, undignified way. Someone was a little thoughtless (and I understand why they changed the sheets, since the bed was marked to be checked into (by me) later in the day, and they had no way of knowing that I had already checked in and made the bed) and tossed them. But I can’t help thinking: how could they not have noticed? How could they not have looked? What if it had been my phone, or my watch, or my wallet, or my passport? Would people take the loss more seriously then? Would they care more? All of those things are replaceable, even if they’re more or less of a pain in the ass to get replaced. Nothing I have with me, not my clothes, not my camera, not my computer, not my notebook, is irreplaceable. Even the writings are just that: written. I wrote them once, and I can write them again.

But Baby Bear and Label (and I’m going to use their proper names because that’s the only way that I can properly refer to them) are irreplaceable. They’re the only thing that I travel with that I can’t afford to lose, and I don’t know whether I would have been able to travel without them. I don’t know whether I will be able to travel without them. I don’t know what I’ll do without them. People die because their bodies wear down; I know because I’ve seen it happen. But I pretended, or believed, or thought, that Baby Bear and Label would be a permanent piece of my life, that they would never be really gone.

Once when I was about eleven I was at the orthodontist resting as the glue dried on my braces (or something, I don’t know). I fell asleep in the reclined dental chair and felt Label hovering over me and Baby Bear tucked under my arm. My mother gave it the term of art “internalization,” like we internalize the voice of authority as the over-I. Baby Bear and Label were (as though they’re gone — have I submitted to despair so easily?) a part of me. A human body isn’t just itself: I have artificial skin and eyes and ears and, in the comfort objects, an artificial home. My entire feeling of being home inheres in the simple ragged fabric and stuffing, in the stale-piss/warm-laundry/musky-body smell of something that spent almost every night of my life in bed with me.

And god fucking damnit if I’m going to let some crude happenstance take them from me; and to paraphrase James Baldwin’s mother (as he mentions in the essay “Equal in Paris”), if this is the worst thing that ever happens to me I’ll be one of the most fortunate people around. Somehow I can’t despair, since there is no motivation for anybody else: nobody else cares, nobody else knows their value. Maybe they can imagine it, but it feels somehow “less real” than the value of something replaceable like money or tools or documents. Maybe it’s because all of those things are, precisely, replaceable: their value is somehow a function of how difficult they are to replace. But Baby Bear and Label are irreplaceable: I can’t relive my whole life from infancy again; they’re as irreplaceable as the past is gone. Somehow it doesn’t make any sense to talk about their having value: they can’t be exchanged or replaced. There’s nothing that I’d trade them for, and nothing (is that true?) that I wouldn’t trade to get them back.

And I know that if I don’t get them back I’ll be fine, since they’re part of me. I’ve lost enough places, enough people, enough time to know that. But they’re not completely lost to me yet: we’re just temporarily seperated. I’ll keep you updated on further developments in the case of the missing stuffies.

Leaving Home

[2022-07-23 Sat]

Today, I left St Andrews for the third and final time. And for the first time, I don’t know when I’ll be back next. The first time I left was last October, after I finished my degree and set out on my trip across Europe. That was when I started this blog. The second time was last month, when I officially graduated (but that felt more like coming back than leaving). And today, I visited it one last time with my cousin Kathleen.

Over the last week, Kathleen (whom you know as Xerxes’ keeper over the last year) and I have been road tripping around Scotland. Kathleen drove, and I navigated. We went to the Highland Games at Inveraray, toured the battle field at Culloden, visited the Glenfarclas and Balvenie distilleries, and saw the castle at Huntly; today, the last day, I showed her around St Andrews and the East Neuk.

She said, “it’s good to see a place that is such a big part of who you are as an adult.” She’s right — I hadn’t realized how much the town is a piece of me. I grew up there. When I arrived, I was 19 and hardly not a child. The previous year I had been asked to leave my high school because I was an asshole to a friend of mine (details to be explored later). I spent the next year at my mom’s house in Evanston, first finishing high school at the local public school, then volunteering at a local charity. I was still raw when I got to Scotland.

My first year at St Andrews, I lived in a large dorm a little ways out from the center of town; the next three years, I stayed in apartments in the middle of town. The last of these was where I adopted Xerxes and began this blog; I passed most of COVID lockdown in that apartment and the one before it; the socialist society reading group formed in the living room of the first in-town apartment I stayed in. I had coffee at least once in every café in town; I drank in every bar; I ate in (almost) every restaurant.

I showed Kathleen the sights today: the classrooms and quads, the cathedral and castle, the harbor and golf course. I introduced her to Hamish McHamish’s statue. As we left, I felt like I needed a cigarette: my chest was empty, like something had been taken out. It was as though I had forgotten something; as though I needed to run back to close my door one more time, or return a book to the library, or turn in an assignment; as though there were another rehearsal or social or reading group to go to; as though my friends were back there waiting for me to join them.

But they aren’t. Some are in Oxford, or London, or Sussex, or Maastricht, or Oslo, or Edinburgh, or New York, or Chicago; and some are I don’t know where. But they’ve left. I’ve left. It’s over.

And that’s fine: I’m more grown up now than I was when I arrived. It changed me. The classroom, yes, but also the town, the people, the place: the streets and stones older than the language I’m writing; the people from everywhere and nowhere in particular; the music and life of an ancient tourist trap by the sea.

I didn’t have any closure (is that the word?) when I left high school. There was no sense of an ending: the teachers came to get me in the evening after a cappella practice, and the next morning I left the campus for the last time. I didn’t graduate; I didn’t sleep in the basement hallway together with my class and carve my initials into the wood paneling; I didn’t go to the graduation parties after moving out. It was just, suddenly, over.

This was the opposite: it lingered; it went on; it never seemed quite done. I finished my course, but I didn’t leave town right away; I left town, but I didn’t graduate; I graduated, but I knew I was coming back soon. Today I left St Andrews, and for the first time in five years, I don’t know when I’m going back.

I don’t know, yet, how going to university there will shape my life, and I can’t sum up four years of my life in a few words. More than four years: I first visited St Andrews in the summer of 2015 and knew immediately that it was where I was going to go to university. Seven years later, it’s over. I was seventeen when I made that decision; I’m twenty-four now, but I won’t be for long. Just under a month from now, I start the program at the University of Illinois. I don’t know what to say to finish this post. I don’t know whether I can finish it. Leaving St Andrews isn’t the end, just a change: my life goes on, and on, and on…

Writing

[2022-07-19 Tue]

Writing is difficult. Words are like stitches and a story like textile. Like a textile? Like fabric? Like? So many options. “Technique” and “textile” may be from the same Proto-Indo-European root; or rather, there are two roots that may be the same, covering the space of “beget, produce, weave.” Writing is a form of weaving, as is computation. Why is a type-writer like a loom? Sadie Plant would be proud of me.

Lately I’ve been reading Jean-Patrick Manchette’s Chroniques, his more-or-less monthly summary of what’s happening in the Noir fiction scene that he wrote between 1975 and 1995 (what an uglily formed sentence). The collection, as far as I know, hasn’t yet been translated into English, but his novels (which are next to read) have been. Manchette has a very subtle grasp of the formal tropes of his genre. He can summarize a novel clearly and concisely, and give a detailed review without spoiling the ending. He pays great attention to style and seldom mentions an author whom he hasn’t read in their entirety. A good model for anyone who wants to write about writing.

Homecoming

[2022-07-01 Fri]

little man
(in a hurry
full of an
important worry)
halt stop forget relax

wait

(little child
who have tried
who have failed
who have cried)
lie bravely down

sleep

big rain
big snow
big sun
big moon
(enter

us)

— e.e. cummings

I came back to St Andrews as a traveller this week. I haven’t been here since I left last October. What was it about “seeing new sights” and “seeing the same sights with new eyes”? Is that Balzac or Voltaire? St Andrews is the same as it was when I left, though there hasn’t been no change: shops have closed or opened, restaurants have burned up, and construction projects continue. But the pace of change is very slow, and a year isn’t long at all on the scale of centuries.

I came back to St Andrews as a tourist. It’s a place that I know well, but it’s not where I live anymore. It will always be my former home. There’s a certain permanence: I will always have gone here — and a certain transience: I no longer go here. The history of the town recedes from view and I go with it.

The eastern coastline of Fife is beautiful. Little towns perched on the sea. Hills rolling under green. Big blue sky. I saw the sea again and it felt as though I had never left. I walked down to the beach in the evening and it was exactly as it was last summer; I felt like the same person, but more: I (and I don’t know yet in what ways or how) have grown. I see the same things as though for the first time. And I am a guest here.

Home(!)coming

[2022-06-28 Tue]

I graduated from university today. Technically, my degree was “confirmed.” They were very clear about that. But beside the changed word (latin: confirmo and … ?) the ceremony was the same. The chaplin, when I spoke to him, refered to the ceremony as a “ritual.” Last year’s “paucity of quintessential festivities” — the in-person ceremonies were cancelled — only sweetened the eventual celebration.

Last night I went to a party with Ben, who wrote a recommendation for my application to the University of Illinois. I met him for a trivia quiz at the student union’s bar; we didn’t do so well. We went back to his flat, since he was leaving the next day, and I provided moral support for his packing.

The party was at the rugby club house; student DJs played; the sound system was good, as was the music. It ended quickly, but we found out where the party continued: a place called “the rat’s nest.” Some of Ben’s friends were out and we went to meet them at a student pub I used to haunt.

My first year, most of my friends had wednesday off, so we’d get a drink on Tuesdays. Nothing wild, but it was nice to socialize. We’d go to Aikman’s, in St Andrews (I’m not bothering to hide the name).

Aikman’s is on a side street in St Andrews, cutting between South and Market St, the town’s two main active streets; North St is more residential and has more traffic than South and Market Streets. There’s a taxi queue, a kebab takeaway, a neapolitan-style pizza place, and a couple charity shops on the street. The door is narrow, and you have to step up a bit to get in. The tiny six-stair staircase, hardly wider than the ordinary-sized door and carved into the stone building, is the smoking terrace. Posters for local (non-university) events line the walls as you step between the people who are spilling onto the sidewalk.

A narrow junction (the Aikman’s neighbor was originally a greengrocer, and what is now the pub was then the stock rooms) goes left to the groundfloor room or right, down the stairs to the basement bar. The downstairs is cooler and more crowded, the upstairs more conventional and calm. They serve edible but not excellent food; we loved their curly fries. They specialize in European beer.

Ben and I went down to the Aikman’s cellar last night to meet his friends, five in total. They were wrapping up in the pub but were interested in checking out the continued party, especially since it was close by. We went over to the basement apartment, set down and back from the street in a small townhouse towards the golf end of north street. A couple dozen people were there. There was no cover, so we walked right in, though Ben and I had wrist bands from the earlier part of the evening. The music was excellent. I had my earplugs so I was comfortable. We danced another hour.

Home(?)coming

[2022-06-24 Fri]

Today I return to St Andrews for the first time since I was there last. I’m in Paris (a fun time was had by all — I looked up and met up with an art gallery intern I met in Rome and we went to a street party for fête de la musique) and my flight to Edinburgh is about to board (grr — Eurail got me again). I’m nervous.

When I was in high school, I boarded at the school. When we came back from breaks, the school would send a van to pick students up at the nearby airports and bring us back. My excitement would mount as we approached the campus: this familiar road, that familiar gas station, these familiar fields. The feeling is in my chest. My heart feels warm, and the base of my throat tingles. It’s like the feeling of needing a cigarette and nothing like being in love. It mounts as we approach: my heart beats faster. My solar plexus inflates and glows. The balloon lungs grip the not-quite unhome air. The van bumps and rattles down the road and I see the street names I know (funny how the arbitray names of places become metonyms for the places themselves) and I count down the distance. The other people in the van fall silent as we approach. Arrival. The smell of home. I can still smell the sticky sweet smell of earliest fall: the building, the grass, the pond, the people.

I’m nervous about going back to St Andrews: how have I changed since I left? How much am I still the same? I imagine that the town will be the same as always — I believe it’s been the same for centuries. How will the people be? I don’t want to be the same person I was when I left, but that person wasn’t so unlikeable. But I don’t want, being in the old haunts, to fall back into old patterns. I want to have learned something, to have grown.

I don’t want to be like everybody else — this was the latent content of a dream I had the other night (the manifest content was that I miss my cat and had a room on the top floor of the hostel that I had to climb the stairs to get to). But who is “everybody else”? There were some pretty cool people in St Andrews — I’d like to be like them. But there’s bad, too: one of my theology professors (was it church history? christian ethics? patristics?) was recently accused before a court of law of abusing his wife; the court cleared him. After a ticketed party last fall, several police reports were filed by people who alleged that they had been drugged by the party’s hosts. These are extreme instances, but not outliers.

It’s odd to be back in Scotland again — it feels like a foreign country. I never was from here, even though I lived here a while. The airport hasn’t changed, nor have the trains. The countryside still looks the same, as do the people. But it feels less like home than it used to. As I write this very paragraph I am on the train crossing the Firth of Forth, heading north from Edinburgh to St Andrews. The Scots are a funny people, with terrible haircuts. It feels much less like a “real country” than France does.

I don’t feel any nervousness, but that may change: the familiar place names have a powerful effect on the psyche. And I’m still relatively far off — it’s another hour or so by train, then a bus into town. It isn’t until the last minute that the anticipation becomes unbearable.

Time passes, and the names become more familiar: Queensferry, Kirkaldy, Markinch. Someone next to me on the train is wearing a University of St Andrews sweater. The tension mounts.

Fuck Eurail for real this time

[2022-06-18 Sat]

Ok, so I have previously complained about Eurail. But it’s gotten worse: today I tried to take a train, and I discovered that the mobile pass had been removed from my device. Alright, that’s within their rights. But there doesn’t seem to be any reason that it should have been removed: I’m well within the expiration, and I haven’t used up my remaining travel days. It just…disappeared. For a bit of context, the pass is checked on the train by the conductor, who validates it by scanning a code with their machine. In short, my machine generates a number encoded in a black and white image, and their machine uses a camera to recover the number and validate the pass. The code is generated for each trip: I have to say “yes, I’m taking this particular train,” (not literally outloud, but it’s not as exciting to talk about swiping and tapping on a touch screen), and the machine generates a code valid for that particular trip.

This, of course, requires an internet connection. Which is one issue: the wireless internet in French train stations is massively unreliable: you have to connect your machine to their network, then they take you to a webpage asking for your email address, consent to their terms of service, and consent to be marketed to. When you submit the form it should say “connected!”, but nine times out of ten (I mean that literally and not as a metaphor for “a lot”) it throws an error. So you have to try several times, and then it’ll randomly work. Until it disconnects you and you have to go through the process again.

So I went to add a trip to my pass in the application today, and it turns out that there is no pass. “Right,” thought I, “I know the pass number, I can add it back to the application.” No such luck. An unhelpful error that might as well have read “oopsie!” alerted me that it didn’t work. So I tried to submit a customer service request, also through the application, and there was a slightly distinct but nevertheless unhelpful error: “that didn’t work.” Of course, the errors all end with “try again; if it still doesn’t work, contact customer service.” Which is very helpful when then process that didn’t work was precisely the process of contacting customer service.

So I bought a ticket to Boulogne-sur-mer (that should have been included in the pass but cost me €24). Before leaving, I decided to check whether there was in fact a room at the hostel there. I checked last night and there was availability, but I couldn’t book online since it was less than 24 hours before the time I would check in; I sent them an email in my best formal French (“veuillez m’avertir si une chambre est disponible…”) and heard nothing back. In a moment of panic (I began to hyperventilate like I haven’t since I was eleven years old), I decided not to risk it: I’d rather try my luck in the Lille hostel another night or two than end up stranded in Boulogne-sur-mer. Maybe not the smartest decision, but the decision I took.

Now, when I was walking to the station I felt the psychogeographic currents (why is it that it sounds intelligent when the Situationists write it in French, but in English it sounds like some time-cube bullshit? Maybe this is the secret of the CCRU…) pulling me away from the station. I said “I am the helmsman” (hello Norbert) and dragged myself there. I think the currents were trying to tell me something.

Anyhow, fuck Eurail: this is the problem with all this “application as infrastructure” bullshit. Infrastructure is difficult because its reliability has to be very close to 100%. And web apps, in my experience, work no more often that 80 or 85% of the time. So if you’re trying to replace some antiquated but ultimately reliable system with a more convenient but less reliable system, I will personally…do what, exactly? I guess “not use the system” is the easiest thing — I was going to do some “sysadmin from hell” bullshit, but that only works if someone’s silly enough to let you be their sysadmin.

Update: it turns out that the solution is to update the app. Digging through the forums, it seems as though this keeps happening, and they keep having to patch the app to fix it. I feel vindicated in my point that “apps aren’t infrastructure.”

At least Lille is cute and the food’s not bad. I was hanging out in this food-hall last night (honestly “food-hall” is exactly what it was: imagine a food court, but with real food), and I had occupied one seat at an eight-top, because that’s what was available. This group of seven kids gathered in Lille for a birthday asked if they could sit; I said “bien sûr” and got up to leave; they invited me to stay. We hung out for quite a while, as the rest of the group got in on the train. Frankly, it did me good to speak French with some age peers: I got along pretty well, and understood most of what they were saying. There were a few times when I struggled to express myself correctly, partially because I was trying to use extraordinarily (in the precise sense of out-of-the-ordinary) recherché constructions; I blame reading 19th century authors. Some of the more complicated modal and subjunctive constructions I still have to think about how to formulate; I end up using them mainly because I know that they’re possible and I don’t know the more current idiom for the same expression. Often there’s a simpler/more oral way to say what would be expressed more precisely or complexly in writing. But I got to talk to them.

There was really only one moment where I struggled to express myself: these kids were engineers, and I spoke to one who was an intern designing electrical systems for train stations. I wanted to ask whether she was putting in the power lines or the signal lines, that is, the lines to power the equipment or the lines the equipment uses to communicate. I can hardly explain it in English, so French was hopeless. Luckily, I’ve been watching electronics youtube in French, so I was able to ask whether she was working on “high voltage” lines, which got the point across. She was installing the power supplies for the equipment in the station, but not the very high power lines that power the trains themselves. She mentioned how, after doing this work, her vision of the world is changed: every lightbulb you see, for example, has to have a power cable feeding it from somewhere, and that line has to be routed and fed. I got a little sense of what it was like from the way she looked at the led strips hanging from the ceiling of the room: hundreds of little lights, all eating electricity.

In short, the antics continue. I solidified a new rule for travelling: don’t try to book last minute on a Saturday — this is the same thing that happened to me that time in Rome. Ah well. The trip continues, as does the ruckus. Don’t panic, my man. I’m trying, but it’s not easy. One of my rules for working with the computer is “when you get frustrated, walk away.” The stakes feel much lower with the computer, so it’s easier to put it down. But when it’s “where will I sleep tonight,” it’s harder to maintain a polite detachment. I guess this is the kind of constant stress experienced by people who don’t have the economic privileges I do: where will they sleep? where will their next meal come from? It can’t be good for a body to live under such conditions of doubt and uncertainty. I guess that’s what distinguishes my experience from theirs: I can pay for a bed in the hostel, if there’s one available; I can buy lunch or something to drink. I know that there’s not really any danger for me. I suppose that not panicking is a privilege, one that I should take advantage of, since I have it.

Research outline

[2022-06-17 Fri]

This isn’t a full article, just an outline for a future research project; I apologize for the incompleteness of the research so far.

Check it out: I’ve been staying in hostels, traveling. I’ve been practicing dérive, being a flâneur. In my travels through the built-up environments of the twentieth century, I’ve developed a sensitivity to the psychogéographie of the spaces; they reflect and mold the consciousness of their inhabitants. This leads me to wonder: how should spaces be designed and established? how should their building and development respond to and integrate the psycho-spiritual lives of the beings (not just humans) inhabiting them?

Let’s begin with Baudelaire, whom I’ve spoken about previously. In particular, let’s discuss the flâneur, the wanderer or meanderer. The flâneur, in the context of his essay “La peintre de la vie moderne” where Baudelaire develops the concept, is the “impassioned observer” who moves through the crowd, feeding from it; the flâneur resonates with the moving mass of humanity, and delights in their beauty everywhere it is to be found. In short, they are the kind who walks, looking at the city as they go through it (compare to Fran Lebowitz).

Walter Benjamin, in his essay “Paris, capitale du XIXe siècle,” points out that

La génie de Baudelaire, qui trouve sa nourriture dans la mélancholie, est un génie allégorique. Pour la première fois chez Baudelaire, Paris devient objet de poësie lyrique. Cette poësie locale est à l’encontre de toute poësie de terroir. Le regard que le génie allégorique plonge dans la ville trahit bien plutôt le sentiment d’une profonde aliénation. C’est là le regard d’un flâneur, dont le genre de vie dissimule derrière un mirage bienfaisant la détresse des habitants futurs de nos metropoles. Le flâneur cherche un refuge dans la foule. La foule est le voile à travers lequel la ville familière se meut pour le flâneur en fantasmagorie. Cette fantasmagorie, où elle apparaît tantôt comme un paysage, tantôt comme une chambre, semble avoir inspiré par la suite le décor des grands magasins, qui mettent ainsi le flânerie même au service de leur chiffre d’affaires. Quoi qu’il en soit les grands magasins sont les derniers parages de la flânerie.

Benjamin wrote this passage directly in French, and this is how I’d translate it today:

Beaudelaire’s genius, which feeds off melancholy, is a genius of allegory. In Baudelaire’s work, Paris becomes the object of lyric poetry for the first time. This local poetry is opposed to all country-side poetry. The gaze of the allegorical genius, plunged into the city, betrays first and foremost a profound sense of alienation. This is the gaze of a flâneur, whose life-style conceals behind a cheery mirage the distress of our metropolis’ future inhabitants. The flâneur seeks a refuge in the crowd. The crowd is the veil through which the familiar city is transformed for the flâneur into a phantasmagoria. This phanstasmagoria, where the city appears now as a country side, now as a room, seems to have inspired the decor of the large stores, who thereby use the flâneur themselves for their own profits. Whatever the cause, the great stores are the last haunts of the flâneur.

In other words, the free drift of the flâneur through the city streets and the gaze that they cast thereupon have been recuperated by the capitalists as the aesthetic content of a new kind of store, thereby capturing the new fantasy of an urban landscape produced by the flâneur. The final development of the city is the shopping mall, whose origin Benjamin prefigures in his discussion of Fourier’s passages and Grandville’s universal expositions earlier in the same essay. The flâneur’s (perhaps delirious) vision of the crowd in motion and of the poetry of city blocks becomes a new way to sell merchandise: the flâneur’s thrist for the new and different becomes precisely the means by which merchants are able to push ever more products on the consumers.

Benjamin’s pessimistic reading (this essay was written in 1939) of the flâneur’s recuperation by the forces of capital is not the only possible result of unguided expoloration through the city: Guy Debord and his colleagues in the Internationale lettriste developed, in the mid-1950s, a method they called dérive, meaning “drift”: Debord’s essay on the “Théorie de la dérive” defines dérive “comme une technique du passage hâtif à travers des ambiances variées” or (in my translation) “as a technique of passing quickly through varied environments.” They describe the process thus:

Une ou plusieurs personnes se livrant à la dérive renoncent pour une durée plus ou moins longue, aux raisons de se déplacer et d’agir qu’elles se connaissent généralement, aux relations, aux travaux et aux loisirs qui leur sont propres, pour se laisser aller aux sollicitations du terrian et des rencontres qui y correspondent.

One or multiple people hand themselves over to the drift by renouncing for a longer or shorter time, for reasons of movement and action that they usually know, their relationships, work, and leisure, in order to let themselves go with the desires and encounters of the terrain.

When you’re on a dérive, as made evident from “Deux comptes rendus de dérive,” from the same author, you let yourself drift through the city according to its inherent flow. In short, you just walk around, or maybe take a taxi or the metro, and go where ever you feel the city pulling you, telling you to go. You hand yourself over to the chance and happenstance encounters that spring up, and allow yourself to float (having abandonned all that weighs you down) through the invisible flows and currents of the urban space in it in “un comportement ludique-constructif, ce qui l’oppose en tous points aux notions classiques de voyage et de promenade,” “a playful-constructive manner, one that is opposed in all ways to classical notions of travel and walking.”

In this way, you explore the psychogéographie of the city: “il exist un relief psychogéographique des villes, avec des courants constants, des points fixes et des tourbillions qui rendent l’accès ou la sortie de certaines zones fort malaisés.” “Cities have a psychogeographic topography, with constant currents, fixed points, and whirlpools that make it very difficult to access or leave certain zones.” The city has a certain invisible rhythm and movement. Uncovering these fields and their impacts on the humans who inhabit them is the role of psychogeography, using the technique of dérive.

They are closely linked: in his “Introduction à une critique de la géographie urbaine,” Debord describes psychogeography as “l’étude des lois exactes et des effets précis du millieu géographique, consciemment aménagé ou non, agissant directement sur le comportement affectif des individus” or “the study of the exact laws and precise effects of the geographic setting, consiciously arranged or not, that act directly on individuals’ affective behavior.” Psychogeography seeks to uncover how, exactly, the spaces we inhabit affect and determine what we do, how we feel, and what we are.

One must, then, mention the work of architects such as Antonio Sant’Elia, Le Corbusier, and Paolo Soleri, who sought to redesign our urban spaces according to new techniques. Indeed, Benjamin explicitly mentions the relationship between interior design under the reign of Louis-Philippe and urban design by Haussmann in his essay cited above: the spaces we inhabit are reflections of who we are, and in turn create us. But this threatens to lead into a study of the history of urban design, potentially as far back as cities have existed, and so I’ll stop here; anyhow, there’s much more research to be done.

At this point we return to my traveling: I have been drifting around Europe, following the psychogeographic currents. Both in each individual place and across the continent, I’ve been drifting. I’ve been melting into and observing the crowd whirling before me, and noticing the details of the placed I’m in.

The hostels have each had their own personality: in some way, it seems to correlate with the design, but the social structure of the emplyees has a large role. And sometimes there’s just an inexplicable feeling about the place that makes it nice or unpleasant. Somehow, it’s easier to strike up a conversation with a stranger in certain rooms and more difficult in others. I guess it has something to do with the design.

Eurail is frustrating

[2022-06-14 Tue]

Never buy a fucking Eurail pass—you have to reserve seats in advance, which is fine, I guess. But the actual process that they propose by which you are expected to reserve seats doesn’t fucking work. The website (which is the only means by which you can reserve the seats in advance) doesn’t show the tickets and arbitrarily prohibits you from booking certain ones that it does show. And you have to book several hours, preferably days, in advance. So although you can, in principle, book in the station, it isn’t generally possible to do it the day of the travel itself. There is, indeed, a second website that allows booking seats on trains, but it will not accept electronic passes: even though the passes are in theory equivalent, the electronic pass lacks a certain code number that appears on the paper pass, and this website explicitly demands this code number, which it explicitly admits only appears on the paper pass. This, despite the fact that you are meant to book the tickets on-line, which is to say, using an electronic device. Honestly the whole thing is an enormous pain in the ass from this perspective: in short, it really isn’t an option, practically, to make long-distance or high-speed trains using the Eurail pass. I’m going to have a fucking aneurysm: is this the “don’t panic” shit? It’s literally an enormous scam. What am I supposed to do? I suppose I’m meant to have planned better in advance—fuck that noise. If the website weren’t literally fucking broken and the second site (why are there two!?) didn’t only accept paper passes (which take months to arrive in the mail), I wouldn’t have this problem. I guess that the alternative is to schlep out to the train station in Lyon today and beg them for a reservation—though I suppose further that the tickets are almost certainly sold out on the twenty TGVs a day that run Paris–Lyon. Honestly, it’s not fucking worth it: I’ll almost certainly have to buy a full-price ticket anyway, which entirely defeats the purpose of the fucking rail pass that I bought so that I didn’t have to buy full-price tickets.

Ok, so in theory you’re meant to reserve the ticket directly through the relevant national rail company, in this case SNCF, the Société national de chemins de fer français. But the SNCF, though they sell Eurail passes, don’t accept them as a discount-giver on their online ticketing system. So you have to pay them full price to book, because the system isn’t programmed to ask you whether you have a Eurail pass, though you can tell it about all kinds of other passes.

So I finally got a ticket into my cart on the Eurail site. Not a direct ticket like I wanted, but one that’ll get me there in a reasonable amount of time from reasonable stations (fuck ouigo: they go from the station at the Lyon airport, which you can’t get to on the metro. I’m not tryna take a fucking taxi to take a cheap train—it’s like when you fly Ryanair to Stanstead and the train into London is longer and more expensive than the flight was). The problem with the indirect ticket is not that I have to change trains, but that I have to change stations: it’s one of these “get from Paris Gare de Lyon to Paris Gare du Nord in 47 minutes” kind of deals—which I hate. In theory it’s an 18 minute metro trip, but who knows how the schedules will line up? It’ll be a maneuver, a dipsy doodle. We’ll see how I fare.

I guess that the conclusion isn’t “don’t get a Eurail pass,” but that it’s important to be aware that it’s a pain in the ass. They advertise it as a “just slide around Europe!”-inator, but it’s a lot of friction in practice. I met these Germans who were on the EU-citizen equivalent, an Interrail pass, and that pass only gives you two travel days in your home country so that people don’t use it as a commuter pass. These boys needed two days to get to Italy from the north of Germany, so they had to buy an extra set of tickets to get home at the end of their trip. And God is the website crummy. But it does save money, at the expense of frustration and time spent wrangling. At a certain point, it’s probably better to hitch-hike. But I’m afraid.

Not all those who wander are lost

[2022-06-13 Mon]

Staying in a hostel is like being at summer camp. I am at a hostel in Lyon, in a room of six beds. One of the roommates is almost always in the room. Now, at 5 in the afternoon, he is taking a nap in his clothes with socks on. I can see the imprint the soles of his feet made walking on the bottom of his socks, and I can smell them. The guy who made me lunch today confessed that, when travelling, he doesn’t change his underwear every day. The staff at the hostel are having their own great time: they hang out here because it’s where their friends and family are. There’s a bar, a patio, a kitchen, music, drinks, fun. The place is called Flâneur, which might mean “wanderer,” from the verb flâner, meaning “stroll aimlessly and without haste.” It’s difficult to give a precise translation, but Baudelaire summed it up well in his essay on Le peintre de la vie moderne:

La foule est son domaine, comme l’air est celui de l’oiseau, comme l’eau celui du poisson. Sa passion et sa profession, c’est d’épouser la foule. Pour le parfait flâneur, pour l’observateur passionné, c’est une immense jouissance que d’élire domicile dans le nombre, dans l’ondoyant dans le mouvement, dans le fugitif et l’infini. Etre hors de chez soi, et pourtant se sentir partout chez soi; voir le monde, être au centre du monde et rester caché au monde, tels sont quelques-uns des moindres plaisirs de ces esprits indépendants, passionnés, impartiaux, que la langue ne peut que maladroitement définir. L’observateur est un prince qui jouit partout de son incognito. L’amateur de la vie fait du monde sa famille, comme l’amateur du beau sexe compose sa famille de toutes les beautés trouvées, trouvables et introuvables; comme l’amateur de tableaux vit dans une société enchantée de rêves peints sur toile. Ainsi l’amoureux de la vie universelle entre dans la foule comme dans un immense réservoir d’électricité. On peut aussi le comparer, lui, à un miroir aussi immense que cette foule; à un kaléidoscope doué de conscience, qui, à chacun de ses mouvements, représente la vie multiple et la grâce mouvante de tous les éléments de la vie. C’est un moi insatiable du non-moi, qui, à chaque instant, le rend et l’exprime en images plus vivantes que la vie elle-même, toujours instable et fugitive.

If I may dare to translate the poet’s words (and indeed, whom else would I trust, especially without an odious license?):

The crowd is his domain, as the air is the bird’s, as the water the fish’s. His passion and his profession is to embrace the crowd. For the perfect flâneur, for the impassioned observer, it is a tremendous joy to elect life in the multitude, in the undulating in motion, in the fugitive and the infinite. To be away from home and nevertheless feel at home; to see the world, to be at the center of the world, and to stay hidden from the world; these are some of least pleasures of those independant, passionate, and impartial spirits whom language can only awkwardly describe. The observer is a prince who everywhere enjoys his privacy. The lover of life makes the world his family, as the lover of the fairer sex makes his family from all the beauties found, findable, and unfindable; as the lover of pictures lives in an enchanted society of dreams painted on canvas. Thus the lover of universal life enters into the crowd as into an immense resevoir of electricity. We can also compare him to a mirror as immense as that crowd; to a kaleidoscope gifted with consciousness that, in each of its movements, represents the multiple life and the moving grace of all the elements of life. [The flâneur​] is a me fed by the not-me, which they render and express, in each moment, by images more alive than life itself, always unstable and fugitive.

Translation is hard: traduttore, traditore. French and English are so different, and Baudelaire’s style is inimitable. The languages have changed between now and then, as have expectations and methods. A piece of this passage (in French) is stenciled on the wall of the hostel. When I arrived and saw the text, I pointed it out to the receptionist: “voilà Baudelaire!” The receptionist didn’t even notice what I was pointing at. But I think that I have captured, in a translation which is necessarily also a rewriting, something of the spirit of the words.

At a hostel we form friendships sudden and intense, but always unstable and fugitive. Today I called without warning an Iranian quantum computing researcher I met at a hostel in Naples because two Persian-speakers were checking into the hostel here and we needed a live translation; he was charitable enough to pick up and help out. I hadn’t spoken to him since we parted in Naples more than a month ago, and he was good enough to chat. Fugitive, unstable, but not unreal: we’re human beings who made brief contact, but now we each know that the other exists.

“I’ll write every day!” and we never do. But that doesn’t mean that we don’t know the people after we part. Over the last couple months I’ve been exchanging emails with a Swedish computer science student I met in Rome; he emailed the email address I have on this blog, which is (if you’re wondering) the best way to contact me. We’ve been corresponding with some regularity since then; the advantage of email is that one can take some time to respond at length, without the expectation that a response will be instantaneous. He’s begun a blog at kyq.se, which I recommend checking out once he gets posts up and running (though unless you read Swedish, you’ll have to get it in translation!).

Disappointingly, I don’t have a satisfying conclusion for this post: it’s just a few observations on a theme. I’ve been feeling lately as though, on the one hand, I am beginning to understand things, and on the other hand that I am undertaking a project too ambitious for me. I feel somehow pressed against the limitations of my own immaturity: if this is how I think now, who knows what I’ll think in a year? Or worse, suppose that I already understand as much as I’ll ever understand? Terrifying stuff. Lyon is hot and my Chilean friend and I made chilaquiles—delicious. I’m very happy here.

Off to see the sisters

[2022-06-04 Sat]

I woke up as the sun was reddening; and that was the one distinct time in my life, the strangest moment of all, when I didn’t know who I was — I was far away from home, haunted and tired with travel, in a cheap hotel room I’d never seen, hearing the hiss of steam outside, and the creak of the old wood of the hotel, and footsteps upstairs, and all the sad sounds, and I looked at the creacked high ceiling and really didn’t know who I was for about fifteen strange seconds. I wasn’t scared; I was just somebody else, some stranger, and my whole life was a haunted life, the life of a ghost.

— Jack Kerouac, On the Road

I’m carrying too much stuff: I have two pairs of trousers I don’t wear and whose seats have almost worn out; two pairs of headphones; four button-down shirts—two cotton, two linen; a portable game console I bought on a whim and didn’t use more than two days; a pair of rubber-soled moccasins whose soles are peeling off at the toes; a wool sweater; so many usb cables; two bottles of face wash and two bottles of sunscreen, because they were “buy one get one free”; five decks of cards, one waterproof and one Neapolitan; and I have to carry all of it on my person to go from point to point. No wonder I always arrive a sweaty mess. At least I have my towels: one large for bathing and one small to carry with me in the day.

The easiest solution is to give things away, but some of the things I’d like to keep for another time: the wool sweater, for example, I wore every day when it was cold; in June, though, it’s not so useful. The game console I’ll give to my sisters when I see them this weekend; I felt guilty playing it, anyway: what a waste of time. But there’re three of them, so they can play together; that’s what video games are for.

When I set out to travel Europe I had never really traveled before: I had been places, but always with family and for short stays; I had never lived life on the road, or on the rails. I left Scotland on the 28th of last September and didn’t know what I was going to do. Now it’s the 4th of June, and I’m still learning. I still have too many things; I still have to run to take the train; I still spend too much money. But it’s only been a few months: people have been traveling for years and years.

I hope that I’ll be able to travel for years and years. I feel terrible about Xerxes: I’d love to have him back with me, but I’d also like to continue traveling. I’m not sure how to navigate that. Maybe at some point I’ll bring him back to Europe with me, but until then, I’m not sure. He’s very happy at Kathleen’s house, though I wish that she didn’t feed him kibble. I’ll miss him sorely next year, but I don’t think that I’ll be able to stay in Chicago. I’d like to travel in Latin America some of the time; I can do the course remotely, which is a tremendous source of flexibility. On the other hand, it’d be nice to be able to meet in person. We’ll see how I do: once it gets below 5°C I’ll be done. I imagine that I’ll stay through the end of the calendar year and then move on. But I feel bad about Xerxes: I promised I’d take care of him, and I miss him. The things we leave behind, the mistakes we make.

Even now my father and step-mother and sisters are on their way to meet me in Verona. Who will I be when they arrive? Will they know me? What will they think of who I’ve become? And my sisters: they’re fourteen now. Who are they? What are they like? We’ll be strangers to one another, haunting each other’s lives from a distance. And for a brief, intense moment we’ll be together (all six of us) in Verona, and then we’ll go our seperate ways and live life as strangers again. But they’ll take some things from me back with them: the game console, a few books. I’ll have a little less to carry, and they’ll have some reminder of who I am.

I ramble as I ramble out under the sky

[2022-06-03 Fri]

I’m on the train again, so I have the time and space to write; I’m headed from Milan to Verona, where I will meet my father and step-mother and half-sisters who’ll come down from Switzerland. I haven’t seen any of them in two, three years. I’ve lost count of how long it’s been exactly—I don’t remember when the last time I saw them was, but I remember, when I was leaving, the girls saying, “don’t be gone so long next time!”. Of course, I was gone much longer the next time: part of it was due to COVID, but it’s not as though they didn’t travel during that time; part of it was because I’ve never once been either invited to stay at theirs, and only very rarely am I permitted to see them when I ask. I suppose we’ve all been busy, or I’m a bad influence. I don’t know that there’s anything I can do about my mother’s behavior in the divorce, but my father had started his relations with his now-wife before he and my mother seperated; my father met my step-mother through work, and their relationship was technically a conflict of interest; my mother used this fact to her advantage in negotiating the divorce settlement; I’m astonished that my father and step-mother are still married, but not that my step-mother holds some bitterness towards my mother. I only wish that it were bitterness for true things and not for fantasies.

There’s no way that I can mention this blog to my father or step-mother; I’d rather write honestly than censor myself for them. I’m really not sure whether anybody regularly follows this, but I keep mentioning it while I travel; maybe the quality of the posts is deteriorating—maybe it was never that good. I suppose that someone might read it at some point, but I’m writing it for myself more than any putative audience.

Last night I stayed up until six in the morning chatting; it turns out that my Italian improves after a few drinks, which is a universal phenomenon worthy of all to be acknowledged: reduced inhibiions allow you to speak more fluently in the target language, and reduced anxiety allows the relevant forms to bubble to the surface. My Italian is still relatively weak, but it’s certainly better than it was six months ago when I began; I, to some extent, speak the language; or at least I don’t not speak it.

J’aimerais bien écrire ce blog en français, parce que en écrivant je peux ameliorer ma langage. Je sais, en tous cas, que je ne peux pas écrire aussi nettement en français qu’en anglais : me manque la legère liberté d’expression que j’ai en anglais (et je suis certain que j’erre dans mon usage) ; mais comment y arriver sinon écrivant? J’ai appris d’écrire l’anglais, en fin, par l’écrire. Le français sera forcement le même. Mais de quoi écriverai-je?

J’observe souvent dans les communautés des langues construites cette phenomène : les gens, apprenant la nouvelle langue, ne veulent parler que de leur nouvelle langue (forcement j’ai erré là) ; ils veulent parler de tous les bonnes qualités de la langue, et ainsi ne parlent de rien d’autre par la langue. Zamenhof a dit, dans un journal d’ésperanto, “arrêtez de parler d’ésperanto : vous m’énervez!” Ce n’est pas une bêtise, ça : je trouve, dans la communauté de toki pona, que les gens aiment bien discuter/disputer la langue, mais il n’y a qu’une minorité qui la parle activement. Je trouve, pour parler franchement, que les gens qui ont les plus d’opinions sur la langue aussi la parlent le minimum (le moins? merde alors). C’est à dire : la quantité d’opinion est inversement corelée à la quantité de parole. C’est pas strictment vrai, mais il faut constater que c’est plus facile de parler autour la langue que de la parler directment ; c’est plus naturel de parler de la langue au niveau de téorie que de la parler practiquement, ou en practique (mon dieu qu’est-ce que je dis). C’est forcement encore une example, une instantiation concrète de la différence entre le téorie et le practique : Marx et ses disciples serraient fières de nous, qui tombons encore dans les mêmes pièges (je ne sais pas du tout si c’est le mot correct).

Voilà, j’ai écrit quelquechose en français. Je suis certain qu’il y a plusieurs erreurs et méprises, mais mon but n’est que la practique (!) ; je ne veux que exercer ma capacité de langue, pour que je ne le (c’est à dire, le français) perd pas. Bien sûr il faut aussi que je fasse des telles exercises dans l’italian, mais mon italian est sans doute pire que mon français. Ça va ; une langue à la fois. Peut-être la prochaine fois j’écrirai en espéranto.

That is, I should like to write this blog in French, for thus I would improve my ability with the language. For the rest, there’s translation tools (though I’m not sure how well they deal with mistaken forms!). Anyway, this post isn’t really going anywhere, nor am I: after Verona, I’m not sure where I’ll go. I’m trying to live in the present moment, but some advance planning is useful: I had to hustle to get a place to stay in Verona for this weekend, but I think that I have the situation pretty well in hand. As I’ve said before, “don’t panic”.

Bugging in, bugging out, and going shopping

[2022-05-31 Tue]

Today I left Genoa and came back to Milan. I’ve been here before: it was the first place I came in Italy when I got here for the first time last fall. When I was here last, I spoke not a single word of Italian. I sat in a café in the city and saw two German girls (my age) studying Italian—I was inspired to begin by them. As I have mentioned before, my initial plan was to learn German: I know that in the work I’d like to do, it will behoove me to read German texts in the original language; perhaps this is a hold-over from my theological training, but I couldn’t do, for example, Marxological work without reading the original text; a translation just won’t cut it.

Last time I was in Milan, I stayed at a hostel in Navigli, which was delightful. This time I’m in a sister location of the hostel I stayed at in Genoa—these hostels provide free ingredients in the kitchen, which is an enormous help. Even having a kitchen stocked with salt, pepper, oil, and pasta is already excellent. There’re also bowls of fruits and vegetables. Of course, I’m not the greatest cook, but I can feed myself. At this point in my travels, I’m beginning to think about saving some money—I have some savings, but I’d like not to deplete them entirely by the time I return. Luckily I still have some income from my parents, which more than adequately covers my expenses. I’d like to get some gear, though, so it’d be good to save up.

Packing and unpacking is an art. Someone asked me whether it’s better to leave in the morning or the evening; my preference is the afternoon, since I hate to feel rushed when I’m packing up to go or unpacking in the new place. To borrow a term from disaster preppers, I like to think of “bugging in” and “bugging out”. You bug out of a place when you leave it; you bug in when you temporarily occupy it. There’s a certain art to bugging out of a room, making sure that you have everything neatly stored on your person so you can carry it comfortably; this is part of the art of “backpacking”: you do, in fact, have to live out of your backpack.

There’s also an art to bugging in: it doesn’t do just to toss the bag in the locker and go on with your day. I’ve learned to think about the noise it’d make to get up or go to sleep: I don’t want to disturb my sleeping roommates by digging around in my bag for a toothbrush or underwear or something; I want to be able to grab it quickly and silently, without being a nuisance. There’s also a decided psychological effect to bugging in to a space: the anonymous room becomes home because I kit it out with the appurtenances of my life. I always have my teddy bear and blanket with me because they turn any bed into my bed; I like to hang my clothes because the textiles occupy the space and announce my presence.

Bugging in and bugging out regularly is a purgative: you’re forced to go through Marie Kondo’s practice of picking up and holding each object to see whether it gives you joy. Every time I pack, I realize there’s something I don’t need; every time I unpack, I leave something in the bag untouched. You’re encouraged to think of the quantity of your possessions—not only in terms of their number, but by their volume and mass: you have to fit them in the finite space of the bag and carry them on your person from place to place. I know how much space my extra USB cables take up; I know how heavy my laptop is. I have two pairs of headphones with me: one wired with a boom mic and one wireless. Do I really need both? I use them for different things, but I have both mainly to compensate for the limitations of the machines I have with me: the handy (German for “smart phone”) has a messed up headphone jack, so the wireless is better for that; the laptop doesn’t have bluetooth, or I can’t get it to work, so the wired is better for that. But do I really need both? What about the needle-point belt my mother made that I haven’t worn in months? That second pair of khakis?

On the other hand, sometimes it’s necessary to acquire. I need to get a better day pack: I have a packable one, but it’s not very sturdy or ergonomic; it’s convenient to stuff in my side bag, but it’s not really suitable for backpacking. I’d like something sturdy and ergonomic but not ostentatious: I don’t want to advertise the fact that I have expensive stuff in there. I let the perfect be the enemy of the good in Genoa, where they have all sorts of great bag stores. I’ll keep looking out, though: Milan is only going to have more.

Part of my hesitation in buying a new backpack, though, is because I don’t want to have more things; but I bought a new pair of trousers yesterday for the first time in a while, so maybe I’m getting over it. I know people who struggle more than I do to buy things for themselves; they can afford what they want and could really use it, but they demur. I’m not sure what the cause of this is, but it’s a tendency that I observe in myself, too. Is it that we don’t feel that we deserve the new thing? Is it that we feel guilt for acquiring, a weird inversion of avarice? I’m not sure; maybe it has something to do with how quickly modern commodities wear out: I don’t want to have to buy a new pair of shoes every eight or twelve months, so I’m going to wear the shoes as long as I feel they should last, regardless of their actual state. Maybe it’s because we don’t want to spend money, because we don’t feel as though it’s ours to spend. But there are tools that I have in my life that make me happy: a notebook, a computer, some eye glasses. I don’t think it’s unreasonable to get a sturdy bag to carry them in.

In which I ruminate on the fact that I still speak French poorly but my Italian is improving

[2022-05-27 Fri]

I think I’m beginning to understand my stepmother’s point: she always talked about my sisters’ feeling excluded from making friends at school because they’re from the US and therefore foreigners. I beginning to feel that way around here—people from the US tend to make an embarrassment of themselves abroad, if only because they don’t go out very much. I’m not sure: maybe I’m an embarrassment too. It’s all difficult to understand.

I don’t know why the Italians seem to be much more willing to speak in Italian than the French are willing to speak French. That’s a lie, I know the reason: it’s because the Italians, in general, speak less English than the French do; the French would rather speak French, but (I generalize here, but national characters do exist, and exceptions to them exist as exceptions) they’re not so excited about helping other people learn French, which is profoundly unhelpful. I think that one solution is just to be bullheadedly stubborn: they seem to appreciate an interest in French for the sake of the French language, which interest I can demonstrate. Certainly they would rather speak French than English, and so if you can tap into the “je peux parler français avec celui-ci” part of them (and I’m not totally certain that that sentence is “correct” nor idiomatic, but I’m trash), then they’re willing to put up with it. The main variation is the balance of the two: some people are so desperate to speak French that they’ll put up with a lot of trash, and some make you fight for every word and instant you get to be a francophone with them. As I said, bullheaded stubbornness can be a virtue.

But my sisters are in a context where they don’t have the option not to be stubborn: every word with every person is a fight, to some extent. And goddamn are the languages hard. Hard for everyone, yes, but hard for them, too. Sometimes you’re fighting an uphill battle. I’m tempted to begin to lie about my background, but I can’t think of a plausible lie. The problem, of course, is being an English speaker: nobody blames a German for not speaking Italian, or an Italian for not speaking French. But if you’re an English speaker, you’re assumed to be an ignoramus if you don’t speak every language: if you, as an English speaker, say “I don’t speak X language,” you are assummed to be monolingual. Never mind that I in fact speak Y and Z and ξ and λ; they don’t know or care. If I don’t speak X, and I was educated in English and have English-speaking parents, then I must be monolingual and therefore a buffoon.

I hate speaking English. I like to read and write it, but speaking it is a disaster. I can communicate with a few people in the minor sociolect I have from the US, I can speak the Imperial standard form with others from the British (post-)empire, and I can speak the international standard of the European Union (though with time this last is becoming weaker under the influence of the former two); I admire the beauty of other socio- and dialects of English that I understand but cannot speak. But in this maelstrom, I am lost: notice, reader, that I write an English that is very different from the way I speak (since nobody would understand me if I spoke this way) and very different from any accepted standard of the written language. I promiscuously mix vernacular vulgarities from my US sociolect with awkward (and potentially misused) archaisisms and features of the Southern English formal dialect. In short, I write a broken pidgin English que j’ai bricolé from the various scraps and pieces of languages I hear around me. And it’s decidely quirky—perhaps it’s what passes for “voice” nowadays. But I write that way precisely because I’m not constrained by my interlocutor: when I’m speaking, I have to arrive at a common language with the conversation partner; in writing, I can use my own language.

But, as usual, I digress (if there’s someone doing research on my writing, I’d be very curious to know what the overall structure of these blog posts is. I usually begin with a single sentence and use that as a prompt for stream-of-consciousness until I know the piece is done. Then I give it three or four rereads and a title. I usually aim for a chiasm, but I’d be interested to know more specifically how they come together): my half-sisters are about to begin (or are already beginning?) secondary school in Switzerland. They’ve lived there for eight years now, and have been educated in local state schools that whole time. I’m going to see them in about a week for the first time in almost three years: how they’ll have changed! I hope that they’re not still so excluded from the social environment after all this time; even if the anti-US bias continues, they might be able to become known as an exception. I’ve been happy to be told “you’re not like other Americans, you’re a normal person; I met this American who…, but you’re not like that.” Why must we be such embarrassments abroad? I suppose it’s because we don’t go very often—people from the US are, in fact, very isolated. No wonder people don’t like us.

But it’s painful to be judged in advance for something you can’t change, and it’s painful to be unable to escape the stereotype. One beauty of speaking the language is that at least you’re trying: I’m trying to be better, and it’s an unambiguous sign of my effort. You have to be stubborn as an ox to get them to acknowledge it, but once they concede that you’re a real person, they’ll be your friend. I wonder how my sisters are faring: I’ll find out soon. They’re good kids, and I want them only to be… what, exactly? Themselves, maybe. I understand my step-mother’s concern, and I wonder whether this isn’t better for them in the long run: they’ll be beautifully trilingual and able to some extent disclaim the US. I wonder what they’ll say when asked where they’re from? I’m not sure—it’s difficult to know. But I must be careful: it’s very difficult to distinguish my wishes for myself from my wishes for them; frankly, I envy them their life in Switzerland. It’s a difficult country, but a good one. I’ll be interested to check in: it’s been quite a while since I’ve seen them. I hope that they’re not being treated too harshly.

Summertime in Genoa

[2022-05-25 Wed]

So I’m back in Italy: Don’s service was last Wednesday, and by Friday everyone but me had left Charlotte. I flew out on Saturday, because I was fighting with the Chase Travel Center to reschedule my ticket; I spent most of the time on hold, not because I was waiting for someone to help me, but because the people who were helping me needed to get approval for telling me whether I was allowed to get a travel voucher and how much the value of said voucher would be. From the ammount of time it took to divide $1500 by 2, it seemed as though she had to go JP Morgan himself to get permission. I imagine, though, that they don’t trust the call center operators to do math, lest they give some wrong information and anger somebody. It was all extraordinarily tedious, and I ended up just buying another round trip—my plan is still to get the voucher refund, which I have to do before June 1st or so.

But I made it to Genoa by train, plane, and automobile—or rather, by automobile, plane, train, plane, plane, bus, train, and a fair amount of walking. It took about 18 hours in all, which wasn’t terrible. I went by a rather circuitous route—Charlotte–Chicago–Stokholm–Milan–Genoa— because it was the cheapest option at the last minute. It felt good to travel, though, and I sat next to a very nice gentleman on the Chicago–Stokholm leg: he was a Swede who had moved to the US seven years prior with kids aged 12 to 16; we spoke about my experiences moving back from Switzerland, and my father’s still being there. He was worried about maintaining a relationship with his children as they began to return to Sweden for university: he asked me about my relationship with my father, and I answered by saying that his absence was more his fault than the distance’s. This seemed to reassure Henrik, who was glad to hear that it depends more on the individual family members than on physical location. I think he already thought that way before we spoke, but he seemed glad to have the confirmation from the child’s side. I guess the kids are alright, or something to that effect.

In Genoa I’m staying in a hostel, as I have done for most of this trip. My first night I met some nice Netherlanders and Swedes (no connection) and we hung out before being joined by some Genovesi. These last were friends of the bar tender and got free tokens for the basketball arcade game in the basement; I was delighted to speak Italian with them, though I essentially abandoned my Northern European friends. I don’t know—the Italians were having a much more interesting conversation, and at a certain point I just didn’t want to speak English anymore. In my travels I’ve observed that speaking a foreign language when drunk and tired is much harder than sober and alert. Putting it that way it sounds obvious, but the effect it quite striking: frankly, I feel guilty for my English—it’s very good, because it’s the language my parents and I speak and the primary language of my education.

I think that it’s ordinary that people should want to speak their home language when they have the opportunity; it’s tiring, stressful, and limiting to be forced to speak in a language we’re less comfortable with. There’s an abstract desire to learn a language, but not everyone wants to be learning a language all the time; and since our competence in the language varies, it may be easier or more difficult to speak at different times. Sometimes, we just want to speak the home language; sometimes we want to practice a new language; often we’re just happy to be able to communicate however we can.

I met an Arabic speaker (Egyptian) who has lived in Italy for more than two years and speaks the language beautifully; we spoke Italian because I wanted to practice. Yesterday I saw him speaking Arabic with another person from the hostel, and he sounded so himself, so happy. I met a French speaker (Quebecois) and was delighted to speak to him in French; he seemed overjoyed to have found another Francophone. I met some Germans and a French girl who studies in Germany, and when I left the table, they switched to German. Between the three of us, though, the common language was English, which felt profoundly unfair (though the Germans didn’t speak French, so I don’t feel too bad). In some sense, I feel as though it is my duty to speak all of the languages, but they’re endless: even if I learned a dozen more languages, there would still be thousands of which I have no grasp. Even if I covered a large part of the world’s population by learning the top however many languages by number of speakers, I would still not be able to speak, really, to this person or that person: there’s just too many different languages, so there’ll always be someone I can’t talk to. The only way to meet a person is to speak to them in their language; maybe I exaggerate slightly, but I can see how different people are speaking their own language than they are when speaking another.

But frankly, I digress: Genoa is beautiful, and hot. It’s a very walkable, social city: it’s known for its vicoli, the narrow alleys crisscrossing through the city buildings. Most of the heart of the city is on tiny streets that can barely fit a car, tied together by paths wide enough for a single person at a time. Still, during the day it’s lively and colorful; right now I’m on a patio in the center of town that would be the snack bar at a pool if there were one, but it’s a café/restaurant instead. There are a heap of Italians reading, working, or hanging out. Over to the side a group of them are cutting out pieces for a model building—they’re working at a table covered in a sheet of paper that has the outlines of every piece they’ll need to assemble the model, grouped by section of the building; they’re cutting pieces of painted balsa wood and laying them out—next to them is the foosball table, in use. My neighbor at the table next to me just shut her human anatomy textbook; I suppose she’s probably in medical school. There isn’t much to see here (besides some extravaganzas in the harbor), but it’s a wonderful place to be. I mean to tell you it’s warm, but lovely. Vivaldi wasn’t from here, but I’m beginning to understand the Summer movement of the Four Seasons. Slow, languid, still; I met a Finnish girl who was travelling with her friend and staying in the hostel; we spent the day and evening together, and then I ran after her to say goodnight; I caught her in the hall outside her room: “why did you come?” she asked; I said, “I wanted to see you again”; close, hot, heavy; we stayed in an alcove of the emergency stairwell—the hallway wasn’t that private—till her friend got worried, then mad; now they’re off to another part of the country, and I won’t see her again; but we both have the Italian summer to melt in: calm, comfortable, safe.

Comment on meeting nice people in a hotel bar

[2022-05-20 Fri]

Sometimes I am overcome with a sudden fierce love for human beings.

Burial ceremonies

[2022-05-19 Thu]

Don was buried today. I took my turn pouring his ashes out of the urn into the hole dug in the church’s “memorial garden” for him. We each took our turn pouring a little piece of him into the ground—ashes to ashes, dust to dust, or something to that effect. It was all, in some sense, very campy: I couldn’t capture the sorrow of the occasion. Pain, disjuncture, broken connections, but not necessarily sadness. There was no somberness in our celebration of his life, but nevertheless we cried.

I was invited to sing in the choir, which I may have mentioned. I wore Don’s robe and held his folder. He and Selina had been members of the choir for more than forty years. We sang one of their favorite pieces, “My Eternal King” by Jane Marshal. The choir knew it very well, and I fell in with them. It wasn’t until the piece was over that I cried. The choir felt Don’s absence—his voice wasn’t with them. And I sang well, but not in Don’s voice part: I wore his robe and carried his folder, but I didn’t sing the line he sang. The choir sang with their full voices, and I felt what my voice teachers meant when they told me to sing from my abdomen: my voice was sore because I hadn’t used it at full power for so long. These baptists didn’t have any compunction about singing the quiet parts quiet and the loud parts loud. I sang as loud as I could and they all sang with me, and Don’s voice was still absent. When we sat down after singing the anthem, I cried. Really cried. In his folder, Don had left some tissues that I used to wipe my face and nose; I felt his weird absent presence, or present absence, in that moment; I knew him and knew that he would have offered me those tissues that he had put there for the moment when someone needed them.

I still sleep with the blanket and stuffed bear I got as a newborn. I drag them with me everywhere, including on all of my trips. They make every bed feel like home, even though they’re worn tatters and parts of them are lost (I’ve spoken about this before, but who knows where?). My step-father referred to them as my “toys,” and for many years encouraged me to put them away. For a while, when I was about eleven or twelve, I experimented with putting one away and only sleeping with the other, but it didn’t last: they’re still my most precious and irreplaceable things. I remember falling asleep once at the orthodontist while the glue or something was drying, and I felt them there with me. My mother called this phenomenon “internalization”: we know something so well that, even in its absence, it’s present to us—like a parent’s voice telling us what to do when we’re lost.

I felt that I had internalized Don—that I have an image of him as I knew him first-hand and through others, and that I know what he’d say or do. That trace of him, those tissues in the music folder, were meaningless to anyone else; but for me they were a trace of who he was and what he did. I knew him through this remnant. We spoke of him in the past tense today at dinner after the service—I think we’re beginning to accept that he’s gone. And it’s not so bad, because he wasn’t afraid. The pastor told this anecdote during his homily: “I went to visit Don at the hospital the day before he died and told him, ‘you’re going to see a light; it’s the light that you’ve walked in your whole life, and now it’s time to walk towards it.’ Don said, ‘I’ve already seen it.’” Don wasn’t afraid to die, and so we’re at peace with his dying. Not at peace: he’s missing; but not sorrowful. He’d have wanted us to be joyful remembering him, and we are; he was a man who ran the good race. We miss him dearly, and he’s dead. May we all be remembered so well when it’s our time to go.

Death and passing

[2022-05-18 Wed]

I hate euphemisms for death. “He passed,” they’ll say. “Passed”? Where to? Dead. Say it: “dead.” The man’s dead. But it doesn’t feel real: we’re so in the habit of thinking that they’re still here that we elide out the unbearable break of their no longer being. Today I went to the choir rehearsal for the service tomorrow. The choir director, or rather, the “music minister,” prayed: “we know that Don is OK, that he’s with you. We know that he has opened his eyes to what’s on the other side.” We’re so certain that there can’t be death because we can’t imagine it: it’s where we aren’t, and so the only way to imagine what it’s like to be dead is to imagine yourself somehow continuing to be.

I said grace again at dinner tonight: my heart raced and my breath caught; we held hands: if we didn’t, I’d fidget, rub my face. But somehow I knew what to say, just by saying what seemed obvious. I don’t know: it feels dishonest, but it’s easy to string together words that seem as though they mean something. I guess that’s all talking is. “Don’t worry about not knowing how to pray,” Paul said somewhere, the misogynist pig, “because the spirit will intercede with sighs too deep for words.” My cousin Karen cried because I ended with Don’s “bless this food to our nourishment and us to thy use; in his name we pray for peace” formula. Leonard said that I was good at praying, and nobody seemed to mind my doing it. I wasn’t the youngest there today: there were the two little girls, six and four. But I’m the next youngest. I left the buffet bar around which we prayed after “amen” because I had to be alone; I stood in the bathroom and prayed for myself for a minute; I felt as though Don were still alive, as though he’d step around that corner and take a plate of food to his seat. He was left handed, so he sat at the end of the table lest his cutting with the left hand bump his neighbor at dinner. I knew full well he was gone, even then: he was present as gone; insofar as he was gone he was once again present; he had become an ancestor.

In parts of the world, it is the responsibility of a certain member of each generation to carry the names and stories of the family and its ancestors, going back as far as anyone remembers. European Christianity formally condemns the veneration of ancestors, but wasn’t able to eliminate it: we’re still doing it. We gather together at Don’s death to share all the stories of him we know, to get our stories straight for posterity: who was he? how will we remember him? what will we tell about him to the next generation? He had no children (not by his nor Selina’s will but because they weren’t fertile), so he has to be folded back into our generations like leavening. The little girls called him “dit-doo.” My mother (was) asked to speak a small saying at the scattering of Don’s ashes tomorrow; she spoke at her other two siblings’ funerals, too. I worry that she’ll make it all about her: “he’s my guy,” she said. He’s our guy. He’s the world’s guy. I can see how, after two generations, it becomes hagiography.

The third generation will say “he died”—they won’t say “passed”. Why do we mince words? It seems rude, indecorous to say directly what happened. It’s too direct. Better to hint, suggest; though it’s not as though anybody doesn’t know what we mean. Perhaps it’s because we still hope that he’ll come back right away, that it’s some cruel mistake that will be corrected soon by a helpful angel who says, “why do you seek the living among the dead?” The sabbath came and went, and he’s still in the tomb where we left him. We annointed him, burned him, bought the thank you cards for the food and well-wishes. But still, we don’t pray “God be at my death,” but rather “God be at mine end, and at my departing.” I certainly can’t imagine him dead; yet dead, he is already alive again as our ancestor. Alive in our bodies, in our words, in our rituals. Alive, not out there without us in some unimaginable beyond (though maybe he’s there too), but here, with us, in us. So it seems wrong to say, now, “dead”, because he’s still part of our drama; he’s passed offstage where we’re to join him eventually, but for now we still play out the performance without him. He’ll only be dead when nobody alive knew anybody who knew him when he was alive; then he’ll be a remote ancestor, hazy and unknown; but perhaps his manner of praying will live on without attribution, and so having been alive he’ll still be discernible to the one who knows how to see.

C’est fini

[2022-05-16 Mon]

Don is dead. In fact, he had already died when I wrote the last post, but my mother didn’t tell me because there was no way I could have been there. I’m glad that I had the opportunity to be with him and Selina earlier this year; we were able to speak candidly. Selina suddenly seems very young: to her, she was only yesterday a fifteen-year-old girl running about with the Swofford boy, and now he’s dead and she’s alone in the house. He doesn’t feel gone, somehow: it’s as though he stepped out for a minute and will come back in as young and strong as he was when we knew him. In the living room there’s a photo of them walking out of the church on their wedding day: the congregation is all facing forward, away from the camera, and Don and Selina walk towards us; he smiles, proud of the woman on his arm; she smiles, wry at having pinned this man down to her; he has wide lapels on his suit and she is splendid in her white wedding dress. She could still fit into the dress; Don weighed 140 pounds when he died.

Selina’s brother and sister-in-law, Leonard and Linda, are here with Selina at the house; the two couples are a foursome that would have played bridge if this were that story; they have dinner together almost every night. They are sensitive people—Leonard can be ignorant sometimes, but he doesn’t mean any harm to anyone; Linda was a high-school guidance counselor and knows well enough how to handle the situation. When I arrived, Leonard shook my hand and said into my eyes, “it’s rough.” I know—poor Selina is all alone. When I hugged her goodbye I could feel that she would never hug her husband again, and suddenly she felt very young, very slight in my arms: I could feel the young girl who had once ridden with Don down to the parking lot where the boys were gonna have a rumble and Don wanted to break it up but she was afraid. So many (mis)adventures.

Kathleen is there (my cousin who’s kepeing Xerxes) and her father, Richard. Michael, cousin and wizard, his sister, Karen and florist, and her husband (George) and daughters (Giles and Mills) are there too. Selina receives many visitors and many contacts; someone offered to bring food and asked her when was good; she agonized over telling them that Monday was best for her: “I love giving, but I hate receiving.” Sometimes you have to let people take care of you, but so many people want to come talk about how much they loved Don (as though Selina didn’t know), and she has to sit there and do the work of speaking to them. The least they can do is feed her. Somehow someone’s going to have to take care of the house—she decorates, but Don was the workman. He never told anybody to do anything: he did it and asked you to do it with him; people alawys went along with him in doing.

I was asked to say grace over dinner last night; I used the “in his name we pray for peace” formula, but I didn’t mention the 1st Kings 19 passage: I gave thanks for the things I was grateful for—creation, love, togetherness; I asked that the food be blessed to our nourishment and that we be blessed to God’s work. I could hardly breathe from trying not to cry. It’s amazing how authority is passed down—I am the youngest by ten years, and in no sense a leader. But I was, unanimously, entrusted with this single sacred duty: to speak, in that moment, in the place of the departed (though surely he took his place from a former speaker who took their place from a former…), and so I stood in his big shoes and strong shoulders and spoke the blessing he had given me to say. God, may peace prevail; may creation heal; may love reign in our hearts and hands and mouths. I always loved the prayer from the Sarum Primer:

God be in my head, and in my understanding;
God be in mine eyes, and in my looking;
God be in my mouth, and in my speaking;
God be in my heart, and in my thinking;
God be at mine end, and at my departing.

That about sums it up, don’t you think?

Travelling

With breakfast or without?

— Anonymous Call Center Employee

[2022-05-13 Fri]

My mother is the youngest of four children and one of two remaining. Both of her parents are dead. Her last remaining brother is now dying. He broke his hip last year and his heart began to fail in the last few months; when I visited him this summer, fluid was gathering in his lungs and he had to sit up when he slept. We went to church together and I stood when I shouldn’t have: it was the centenary of the church’s founding and they played the “stand if you’ve been a member this long” game and he stood up when they called “fifty years”; I stood with him because his wife was terrified that he might fall again, and now it’s on the video that this young man stood with the old man; I’m the age he was when he joined, and he’s going to die. He’s dying.

I booked a flight back as-soon-as-possible to Charlotte from Syracuse; I leave tomorrow. I don’t have a suit for the funeral, but I’ll probably wear a choir robe: they’re not going to keep me from singing in that choir, goddamnit. And the church will sing for him and I’ll be there; my mother’ll cry and make it all about her (she does that), and Selina (his wife) will keep herself very carefully composed; Karen (a cousin) will do flowers like she did when her father died—the agony of arrangement and selection: he picked the stamens out of the white lillies in the arrangement by the altar for her father because she saw the details and they had to be perfect. And he was still dead. He’s still dying.

So we gather together once again—how odd!—and there’s nothing to be done but hope: my grandmother (whom I never met because she died before I was born) said, “the lord never gives you more than you can bear”, and the oral tradition in the family is that we love Lexie but in this she was wrong. And the infant squeezed to light cries and cries and cries and cries because it’s so bright and so quiet and so cold and so alone—and the lord said “I am the way, the truth, and the life”, but Pilate—and I understand where he was coming from—said “what is truth?” and then “I find no fault in him”. And he still died like we’re all dying like he’s dying even now.

It’s hardest on my mother because of the Swoffords she’s going to be the oldest—there’re the Ballentynes and the Greenoes and the Hudsons and the Gordons and all but of the Swoffords of Lewis and Lexie’s line she’s the oldest. All the cousins will be together again for the first time since the last funeral. And it will be my mother to whom they’ll look because she’s the only one left. Not that she’s the best suited—she’s the baby of the family and makes everything her business, and she’s still that nosy child who hung around with her cool big brother. Because Don (dying) is the closest to her in age and the one who was at home the longest after she was born so they know each other best. And there were just the two of them for a while, then it’ll be just one.

On their first date (when they were fifteen) Don took my mom along with Selina and him to whatever they did (for the details are lost to entropy) because that’s where my mom belonged. I visited Don and Selina this summer (for the brief time I could because they were clearing their affairs, since they knew he was dying) and we spoke closely—it’s from Don that I speak indirectly and circuitously; he was (I already say “was” as though I eulogize but I don’t—that will be my mother’s to do, unless the pastor does it) a solid man who knew what he wanted, and he never said, only suggested. It could be twenty minutes until his point dawned on you, and when you figured it out you saw that it was carefully, delicately woven stuff. He and his wife tell stories that seem to meander (and they fluidly pass the baton as they speak) until a punchline dawns (“don’t hit the bear!”—a story of antics whose details are blurred but the feeling of which is clear) like a sudden scorcio.

I don’t know what I’ll find when I get to Charlotte—probably a lot of waiting, and the sense that there’s nothing we can do to be helpful. I’ll procure some pimento cheese and barbeque and chicken salad and bring it to Selina in the hospital, though I know everyone’ll be doing the same. I’ll sit with him for an hour in the afternoon while he dozes so she can go take a shower. I’ll help my mother plan the funeral (it’s unfortunate that when the LORD speaks to Elijah in 1 Kings 19 The message is so mundane—there’s no great secret in the still, small voice of god after the wind and the earthquake and the fire: it’s just “go back, do these things, and I’ll take care of the rest”—because it would make a perfect reading for Don) like I helped her with her brother’s. But I’m sure that the pastor of the church will take care of it.

I can never sleep the night before a big journey—it’s technically the night before the night before the big journey because I have an overnight layover in Munich, but I fly to Munich tomorrow. Maybe it’s the night before flying that gets me, or the nerves of where I’m going. The family will be there, and they’re smart but weird. Some of them are downright neurotic (though I get that also from my father’s side so it’s twice as bad) but they’re good people, and useful in times of trouble. My cousin Michael and I will be able to talk shop (he’s a real wizard and has been that way for a long time), which will be a good distraction for both of us. But it’s been many moons since we’ve all been together—a bit over two years, when Don and my mother’s oldest sister died. I think it’s a common truism that families are only brought together by funerals.

Christ alive—do you think they’ll expect me to say grace? That was always Don’s job, and he always ended with, “bless this food to our nourishment, and us to thy use. In His name we pray for peace”. Maybe I’ll say “God, give us the patience and faith to withstand the wind, and the earthquake, and the fire, so that we can hear, in the stillness, the soft voice you send to guide us. Let us abide in love, and loving, abide in you. Now bless this food to our nourishment, and us to thy use—in His name we pray for peace.” Amen.

Learning is slow

[2022-05-05 Thu]

When I was a kid, I used to think that I could learn anything right away. I remember, when I was 12 years old, thinking that I could invent anti-gravity just by thinking about it—never mind that I didn’t know bupkes about physics or whatever rediculous knowledge you’d need to invent such a thing.

I used to keep a copy of David Macauley’s The New Way Things Work by my bed and read from it every night before I went to sleep. (A collection of Bradbury stories from R is for Rocket and Golden Apples of the Sun was another regular bed-time book, but that’s for another time.) What made this edition “new” were the chapters on computers, inkjet printers, and so on. For those of you know don’t know his work, David Macauley is a great illustrator. His other books include City, about the planning, founding, and construction of a Roman city, and Castle, which is the same for a medieval castle. There’s also one on city sewers called Underground.

Macauley’s illustrations were mostly black-and-white ink, with cross hatching and cutaways. His work is right between the sterile precision of a blueprint and the softness of a children’s book. Somehow, he makes sewage systems seem like an engineering marvel rather than a repository of human waste.

His great work of fiction is called Motel of the Mysteries; it parodies the then-recent discovery of Tutankhamen’s tomb. In it, future anthropologists discover what they believe to be a tomb of lost kings, complete with bedchamber, temple, and countless precious objects sealed in with the the dead for eternity. The reader knows that the anthropologists have discovered a motel from our time, buried and forgotten.

The anthropologists believe that the bathroom is some sort of temple and the things in it religious accessories. With great pain they reconstruct the ritual of the place, and in a climactic moment re-enact it: the head anthropologist is dressed as they supposed an ancient priest must have dressed, with toothbrush earings and toilet paper headwrap. They have finally decrypted the mysterious seal of the sacred porcelain vessel, and Macauley shows us the great anthropologist, to the delight of on-looking journalists, crying this somber religious formula into the newly unsealed toilet: “sanitized for your protection!”.

The Way Things Work is a less speculative, but also less literal work: it is a compendium of, well, how things work, illustrated (in color this time) by a colorful cast of characters: stone-age people and mammoths. The section on simple machines, for example, shows our little friends hoisting a very confused mammoth up a cliff using a pully; they text explains, with more abstract diagrams, how the people used the machine to exert more force on the mammoth, at the extent of having to pull the rope farther. The section on boyancy shows a series of mammoths trying and failing to ride a raft across the river: they have to put sides on the raft, since the weight of the mammoth displaces the water underneath the raft. Without sides, the raft is swamped and the mammoth gets soaked; with sides, the boyancy of the raft is eventually sufficient to carry the mammoth, dry, across the water. Ok, maybe my memory of the physics involved is a little spotty, but this is the sort of thing that I learned about. There were also sections on airplanes, cars, windmills, computers and inkjet printers—these last are what made my edition “new”.

I used to have great fun with these books, because they explained in just the right amount of detail for a ten-year-old what was going on. They weren’t infantalized, but they weren’t dry, either. They abstracted properly: they got rid of the accidental to reveal the essential; they removed unhelpful detail and left what I needed in order to make sense of what was happening. It was this sort of presentation that convinced me that I could figure anything out, sooner rather than later: if I could understand how a pully or boat or engine worked, why not anti-gravity or faster-than-light travel?

At the time, though, I didn’t know what I didn’t know. I thought, “surely I can figure this out—how complicated can it be?” It turns out—very complicated. On the one hand, it is important to be able to abstract away the unnecessary in order to understand what’s happening: if you don’t know what you’re doing, how will you be able to do it? On the other hand, in order to really do the thing, in order to build the car or implement the program or whatever, you have to have a full mastery of the details all the way down. You can’t cut corners on your pully, or the mammoth will fall: knowing that a pully allows you to trade length of cable for force exerted is one thing, but building a block and tackle that’ll let you lift a mammoth is another thing all together. The latter requires the former, but the former doesn’t automatically enable the latter.

I fell in this divide as a kid: I understood (vaguely) the problem, but I had no idea of all the details that went into its solution. And these details are, in some sense, the whole truth. When you abstract away the “accidental” to reveal the “essential”, you’re sorting through the details and saying “this one is helpful right now” and “this one isn’t”. But ultimately, the difference is in presentation, not in the being of the thing: all the details are necessary.

At this point I have to stop, because we’ve fallen into a subject of great importance to me that I don’t want to screw up. Allow me to collapse, as is my wont, into citation: Flatline Materialism by Mark Fisher and Dijkstra’s comment that “programming is the ability to navigate levels of abstraction”. If you’ll give me another couple decades of research and thought, I’ll explain what the hell I’m talking about.

For now, let me say this: there’s no skipping steps in computation. You gotta go through the actual material process of computing to get the result; it doesn’t appear by magic. And, more astonishingly, you don’t know in advance what the result is going to be: you just have to run it and find out.(Alan Turing, 1936) In some sense, the same might be true of human cognition: we have to go through the (physical?) process of thinking to figure something out—it doesn’t come immediately. Even strokes of genius arrive as the result of long thinking about the problem: you don’t just suddenly know the solution to a problem you’ve never heard of or thought about.

For me, now, I counsil patience. I’m working on figuring things out, but it’s not going to come as quickly as I’d like it to. Every day I learn something new, so maybe in a few decades I’ll know something interesting. For now, I have to remain in a posture of ignorant humility—how else will I figure everything out?

Knowing and ignorance

[2022-05-04 Wed]

Lawd, there’s so much I don’t know. And I don’t mean this as a general admission of ignorance or defeat: I mean, very concretely, that there are so many things that I know I don’t know. The more I inquire into computers, the greater vistas of previously unknown unknowns open themselves up to view: the more I realize I didn’t know what I didn’t know. And the more I know I don’t know, the less it feels like I know.

Ellen Ullman, whose essays are manditory reading for all tech and tech-adjacent people, explains in her classic book Close to the Machine how she keeps up with the dizzying amount of learning required in our profession:

I’ve managed to stay in a perpetual state of learning only by maintaining what I think of as a posture of ignorant humility. … Knowing an IBM mainframe—knowing it as you would a person, with all its good qualities and deficiencies, knowledge gained in years of slow anxious probing—is no use at all when you sit down for the first time in front of a UNIX machine. It is sobering to be a senior programmer and not know how to log on.

There is only one way to deal with this humiliation: bow your head, let go of the idea that you know anything, and ask politely of this new machine, “How do you wish to be operated?” If you accept your ignorance, if you really admit to yourself that everything you know is now useless, the new machine will be good to you and tell you: here is how to operate me.(Ellen Ullman, 1997 page 101–102)

Arrogance, though, is also necessary: without it, we do not have the conviction that we can learn what we have to. As a programmer, I have to “[think] that, if I [tinker] a bit, I [can] make anything work. That I [can] learn anything, in no time, and be good at it.” (Ellen Ullman, 1997 page 98) Ullman ephasizes that

arrogance is a job requirement. It is the confidence-builder that lets you keep walking toward the thin cutting edge. It’s what lets you forget that your knowledge will be old in a year, you’ve never seen this new technology before, you have only a dim understanding of what you’re doing, but—hey, this is fun—and who cares since you’ll figure it all out somehow.(Ellen Ullman, 1997 page 98)

It is only by having rediculous confidence in our own abilities that we are able to plough forward through our ignorance: otherwise, we are paralyzed by our own ignorance.

Now, how do I navigate the posture of ignorant humility and brazen arrogance? How I do acknowledge that there is no much I don’t know, and that there is nothing I cannot learn? It is a common truism that all young programmers think that they’re the greatest programmer who ever lived. Linus Torvalds (somwhere) said that this arrogance enabled him to program a UNIX-style kernel for his x86 machine. Larry Wall pointed out that arrogance is one of the crucial requirements for a programmer: you have to be willing to attempt rediculously ambitious projects.2 necessary for a project to survive: you have to be able to recognize your own limitations so that the thing doesn’t grow beyond your ability to understand, much less maintain, it. You have to be able to say “I don’t know” when you don’t know, so that you are able to learn.

I think that the worst situation is to believe that you have nothing left to learn: this is surely a delusion. It is simply not possible that you know everything there is to know: there is nobody who isn’t operating “on a placid island of ignorance in the midst of black seas of infinity.”3 As Ullman points out,

The corollary of constant change is ignorance. This is not often talked about: we computer experts barely know what we’re doing. We’re good at fussing and figuring out. We function well in a sea of unknowns. Our experience has only prepared us to deal with confusion. A programmer who denies this is probably lying, or else is densely unaware of himself.(Ellen Ullman, 1997 page 110)

It’s essentially a given that there’s something you don’t know; what you have to learn isn’t any particular system or skill, but how to learn any particular system or skill. A friend of mine, Eliza, is now working as a programmer at a large credit card company but was trained as a systems engineer at university. I asked her how she handled working a job in something that she wasn’t really trained to do, and she said “you can figure it out once you have the understanding.” I heard the italics when she said it. This understanding is, on the one hand, a knowledge of the unshaking, unchanging bottom of what a computer is and what it does, and on the other hand the conviction that, equipped with enough pluck, tenacity, and plain ass-headed stubborness you can figure anything out. Hell, if someone built it, someone else can figure out how it works.

Now this understanding is precisely a form of ignorance: we understand not something in particular, but the general form of how to make known our unknowns. Having acknowledged our ignorance in the face of a new machine, it opens itself to us. At this point, Ullman instructs us:

Now you can be arrogant again. Now you must be arrogant: you must believe you can come to know this new place as well as the old—no, better. You must now dedicate yourself to that deep slow probing, that patience and frustration, the anxious intimacy of a new technical relationship. You must give yourself over wholly to this[.](Ellen Ullman, 1997 page 102)

Perhaps this is one formulation of the hacker ethos: “I don’t know, but I can figure it out.” The hacker is convinced that, with enough “deep slow probing” and “patience and frustration”, they can approach the machine with “the anxious intimacy of a new technical relationship”. I know that I don’t know this this or that thing or the other thing: this is a form of power. Only by accepting a position of ignorant humility can we allow ourselves to learn. But we need to, in our humility, understand that we can learn what the machine has to teach us: it will, as we probe deeper and deeper into its arcana, unfold itself to us. If we give up, if we say, “I can’t figure it out”, then we are defeated and without understanding. Because understanding isn’t knowledge: it’s a conviction, an ethos, a drive—it’s a kind of humble arrogance that embraces the multiplying of known-unknowns. Because once we learn how to learn, once we understand that we can learn, we are rewarded for our efforts: our ignorance is repayed in knowledge, our humility in arrogance, our inability in virtuosity—at least until we run into the next thing we don’t know.

Ahhhh…

[2022-05-03 Tue]

I have arrived in Tropea, officially the most beautiful town in Italy. If you’re asking me, and you’re reading my blog so I suppose you are, that puts it solidly in the running for the one of the most beautiful towns in the world. It’s an ancient resort town perched on a rock above the Mediterranean; we’re on the north coast of Calbria, which non-Italians would know as “the toe of the boot”.

In Italian, they distinguish carefully between blu, “blue”, and azzurro, “azure”. The azure is the color of a clear sky, and blue is a dark azure. Azure is not in any sense a kind of blue; it’s its own proper color. (Incedentally, the Italian has a similarly precise categorization of pork products, but that’s for another day.) There’s another refinement, turchino, which is darker than azzurro but lighter than blu. Though they’re etymologically distinct, you might think of turchino like “cerulean”, though I wouldn’t swear to their identity.

There’s another great Italian word, limpido, cognate to the English “limpid”, meaning clear, transparent, serene. Incidentally, it is completely unrelated to English “limp”, which is Germanic: “limpid” comes from Latin limpidus. There’s also the near synonym nitido, cognate to the rare English “nitid”—shining, clear, bright. (I’ll admit that I hadn’t heard of “nitid” until just now, but it’s in the Oxford English Dictionary with the qualification “rare”.)

This is all going somewhere: the sea is azure by the pale sand; further out it’s blue. The sky above is cerulean; the air and water, limpid and nitid, clear and shimmering. See, in Italian that would have been much prettier, just like the beach I’m on. There’s a reason this is the most beautiful town in Italy, and it’s not the architecture.

An Italian man just walked by and asked me whether I’m working. I said “yes, a bit”. He said, “c’e il mare, non lavorare!”—“there’s the sea—don’t work!” He’s right, but I’m not working—this is play.

The sand is large-grained, like tiny gravel. It’s soft, but not so fine that it gets into everything. It’s pale and glimmers in the sun like crushed crystal. I’m sitting in the shade of a little beach tree feeling the refreshing breeze. I forgot my water bottle at the hotel, but you can’t have everything. It really is disgustingly beautiful here.

Don’t Panic

[2022-04-29 Fri]

I may have mentioned that Douglas Adams’ Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy is one of my favorite series of books. I’ve made reference to it before in this blog, though I may not have talked about my love for it explicitly. For those of you who don’t know, the Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy is the best guide book for those seeking to travel through the universe on less than 30 Altarrian Dollars a day, seeing all there is to see and avoiding all there is to avoid. Its field researchers are the most intrepid, persevering, and downright fun-to-be-around folks you’re going to find; they can be trusted to tell you what you need to know. On the front of the Guide, which is distributed electronically in a package much like a mobile phone but with a nifty sliding cover, are stamped the simple words “don’t panic.” Good advice, hard to follow.

I, of course, need this advice on my person at all times. Ironically, telling a panicking person “don’t panic” is about the worst way to calm them down. I would know: I panic a lot, and when the Guide writer in me says “don’t panic” I begin to quiver. In the Adams books, the Guide writer goes by the name of Ford Prefect, and his hapless foil is called Arthur Dent. I think that I am a little bit of both of them: when the Ford Prefect in me says “don’t panic”, the Arthur Dent screams back “lot of help that does!” I can usually hold it together just enough to get where I’m going, but it’s not pretty. As I’ve said before, I fly by the seat of my pants.

Today, I left beautiful Sorrento and am heading to Cosenza, in Calabria. My current strategy is to continue thence to Sicily, then Tunis, then Sardinia. We’ll see how much of it works out, but it’s good to have a bit of an idea of what I’m up to. I have just under two months before I have to be in Scotland, but I’ll find a flight from wherever I am to there when the time comes. In the meantime, I’m riding the rails again.

The light rail from Sorrento to Naples isn’t very reliable: it stalled out half-a-dozen stops from Naples, and we had to change trains after fifteen or twenty minutes of waiting. In total, it took about two hours from Sorrento to Naples, that is, from termninal to terminal. I passed Pompei and Herculaneum along the way, if that gives you an idea of the geography: Naples is at the north end of the bay, Mount Vesuvius in the middle, and Sorrento at the south. To continue south to Calabria, though, I had to come through the large station in Naples to catch a heavy train: there’s only light rail linking Sorrento to Naples.

I got to the station, which was another mess: Napoli Garibaldi and Napoli Centrale are two seperate stations that share a building. In practical terms, this means that the ticket machines in the basement default to Garibaldi and on the ground floor to Centrale; the trains available from the two are different. In retrospect, I probably could have changed the departure station on the machine downstairs, but by that point I wasn’t in a position to be thinking logically about the situation. I had made the tactical choice not to get my ticket in advance, in case the trains didn’t connect cleanly. I arrived behind schedule in Naples but with fifteen minutes to make my connection, so I had to buy my ticket and make the second train in that time.

It is in these moments that I begin to panic, and in these moments when panic is the least helpful. They’re also the moments that make me glad I’m travelling alone: it wouldn’t be fair to anyone else to subject them to the stress and chaos I can produce in fifteen minutes in a train station. I think, though, that not-panic must be practiced: we must cultivate not-panic in our daily moving through the world. In other words, it’s not something you learn all at once: you have to work at it over time.

That’s why it’s on the cover of the guide: to remind you every time you look at it of a simple guiding precept for traveling. And it’s on the cover of the guide not because the guide’s users aren’t panicking, but precisely because they are. Otherwise, it wouldn’t make sense to say it. Maybe the first step is to be aware that we are panicking, and that’s what the guide’s obnoxious message is telling us: when someone says “don’t panic”, the violence of our response is a measure of how much we are, in fact, panicking. And realizing “I’m panicking” is already an improvement.

Yet more adventures in web development

[2022-04-27 Wed]

I have, once again, redeveloped this website. I think it’s slowly getting better each time. The change this time was rather radical: I reformatted the site’s html files as org files, an emacs major mode. To explain what I did, let give me quick overview for those who don’t know much about web work. I am particularly interested in static sites, sites that are dynamic documents. I’m not talking about “web applications”, sites that do some computation or present some user interface or form.

Modern web sites have essentially three pieces: the content, the style sheets, and the scripts. The content, first, is the actual text that the author compeses. It is stored in a “marked up” form, which indicates to the computer where the paragraph, section, and article breaks are; it indicates which text is a header, which a link, and which the table of contents. In short, it tells the computer the structure of the text according to the meaning it has to the human: a human can easily see what the headers or paragraphs are, but the computer needs to be told explicitly. The traditional language for this on the web is HTML, the hypertext markup language, in one of its many iterations.

Second, the style sheets tell the computer how to present the document: what type face, color, weight, and size should each element in the marked-up text have? How much space on the screen should it take up? Where should the margins be? Ideally, this information is kept completely seperate from the marked-up content, which is marked only for semantic structure and not at all for appearance—in other words, you mark up the text to say “this is a heading”, but you don’t give any information about how a heading should look; that’s what the style sheet is for. The traditional language for this is CSS, cascading style sheets, so called because more specific styles are inherited from more general styles.

Finally, the scripts tell the web browser what to do with the document. This is the most open-ended part of the suite, since it is a fully-functional programming language. The core of it, though, is the DOM, the document object model. This allows a program to access and manipulate the computer’s internal representation of the structure of the document, as described by the marked-up content. The program can hide or show elements, or insert or remove them. On this website, there is a script that tells the browser to display the blog posts one at a time, even though they are, in fact, all in one document. Press the ? key to see the possible commands. The traditional language for web browser scripting is ECMAScript, also known as JavaScript.

The change I made recently was to stop writing HTML, markup, directly: instead, I write org, which is much simpler to deal with but powerful enough to give me the structure I need to make the document work. Then I tell emacs, a text editor, to convert the org to HTML and then publish the HTML to the internet. Right now, you’re (probably) reading the HTML output of the org I wrote. This saves me a lot of time, since I don’t have to explicitly write the markup: I just write the text roughly as I intend it, and org does the rest.

The styles on this site are still a little wacky: this is where I am weakest, since web styling pretty much reduces to graphic design. I copied the colors from another site I thought looked good, but it’s still not quite where I’d like it. Similarly, the scripted navigation isn’t quite right: I still have to play around with the script (the excellent org-info.js) to get it to do what I want to do. Also, the navigation is still a little weird. And there’s more content I’d like to put up, so there’ll be more to navigate to.

But I’m happy with the change to org—it makes it much easier to write and publish the posts, and that’s what I wanted. Now there’s slightly less friction between my writing and your reading, which seems to me like a pretty good thing. More imporantly, I’m learning a lot about maintaining what is now a real, though small, site. There’s some interesting questions of how and what I’m doing, and where I’m going. I’ve reached a pretty healthy feedback loop, though: I have a site, so I write for it; I have writing, so I have to maintain the site. It’s an upward spiral. Thank you for coming along for the ride with me.

Floating away (doo doo doo, doo doo)

[2022-04-26 Tue]

I kind of suck at planning my travels: I leave it past the last minute. For example: tonight is the last night I have booked at the hostel I’m staying at in Sorrento; I should be planning my next move, or at least figuring out where I’ll go tomorrow. But I’m much too happy just sitting outside at a table at a bar, writing and playing solitaire. I have my bitter rosso and my olives; I got a terrific set of playing cards from the tabbachi and it’s a beautiful day. The sky is blue, and there’s a soft breeze blowing in off the bay. The trees are regaining their green regalia, but the heat of summer hasn’t set in yet. The Italians are never in a rush for anything—“don’t panic.”

You can see why it’s hard to plan for tomorrow: I can’t admit that this today-right-now specious present will ever end. “Specious” because the present “moment” is just a plateau of flow that congeals into an illusion of “now”. I’m at rest in the sea, floating absently in the current: oceanic feeling. Boy, it’s beautiful here.

Across the piazza, there’s a row of flags: Sweden, Norway, Germany, France, Austria, Canada, the EU, Italy, Spain, the USA, and the UK. Behind me there’re two US Americans talking about the flags. He’s quizzing her, since he knows all of them and wants her to guess. He speaks loudly and confidently; she humors him. I wonder how they know one another. I wonder what their relationship is. Siblings? Lovers? Chance travel partners? There’s a pair of French travelers next to me, and in front a table of four Italians, who seem to be from this region. They’re certainly southerners—you can tell by their open speech, not as trained or restrained as the northerners.

I had a fantastic pizza for lunch and read some Raymond Chandler. Next to me an English couple were doting on their toddler. There’re palm trees here, and lilacs in bloom: everywhere the smell of flowers. You see what I mean? It doesn’t seem possible to consider tomorrow, much less le lendemain. I could melt.

Ever listen to Floating Into The Night by Julee Cruise? It’s her first album, with music composed by Angelo Badalamenti and lyrics by David Lynch. Badalamenti’s carefully layered ambiance invokes the feeling of plateau, of floating emptily in space. It’s like the slow tracks from Ladies and Gentlemen We Are Floating In Space, by Spiritualized (another one of my all-time favorites): the long now of the cycle of the song carries you away. It’s like Philip Tagg said: a chord loop is a place, a state of being with no beginning or end.

Planning ahead while traveling is like planning the next song while this one is playing: it ruins your being there in the moment. My mother’s approach is to plan before the trip: that way she prolongs the fun for weeks or months. But I’m not so practical, and once you’re already there it’s too late to plan in advance. I suppose I’ll look at some point, but this very moment I just can’t. And that’s alright: I have a room for tonight, and I’ll find something for tomorrow. At some point I’ll head out of Sorrento to somewhere further south in Italy; eventually I’d like to head over to Morocco, and from thence perhaps to Senegal. I have to be in Scotland by the 25th of June and Chicago by the 22nd of August. It’s now the 26th of April–that’s plenty of time to float in.

Monolingualism Considered Harmful

[2022-04-26 Tue]

This has always been a blog about language, so I’m going to tell you a story about language.

My parents moved to Lausanne, Switzerland when I was three months old. We lived there until the summer before my sixth birthday, when we moved to the USA. Both of my parents are from the USA and come from English-speaking families, so I speak English with them. In Lausanne, though, I was in a French-speaking context. I went to nursery in French, and the first two years of primary school in French. I spoke French to most of my friends, except those who also came from English-speaking families.

When we moved to the USA, I began kindergarten at a local school. The language of instruction and socialization was English, exclusively. Within two years I had completely forgotten all my French. My mother tried with tutors, local French-language expatriates, and summer camps to keep my skill alive, but it was all for nothing: a plant uprooted will surely die. Even my memories from my time in Switzerland were translated to English in my mind.

When I was twelve, languages began to be offered in school: in the USA, students are generally not exposed to a to-be-learned language before eleven or twelve years old and almost never take a second to-be-learned. I was lucky (private school) that my language teachers were highly competent, and that there were students in my class who were native French speakers, children of French-language expatriates.

I picked it up quickly. It felt as though, rather than learning for the first time, I was being reminded: every time we learned something it came easily, since it was something that I, deep down, already knew. Of course, there were limits: I spoke French like a native when I was young, but I was only almost six when I stopped. I had hardly begun to learn to read, and never entered into the detailed study of the language and its nuances that is necessary to master it.

After seven years of study, I spoke French pretty well. I could read and write at a middle-school level, which is respectable considering how little time, relatively, I spent studying French. After four years of very little use at university, I can still speak the language: somehow, it’s harder to forget the second time, or maybe my brain is less plastic than it was.

Travelling in Europe, I’ve had the luxury of being able to have solid, extended conversations in French with francophones. One, a French-speaking teacher of English and German, gave me (in French) this feedback: “even if there’s errors in how you conjugate verbs, you speak the language”. There are still innumerable tiny details in French that I will probably never master; I don’t think that I will ever know the corners and tricks of French like I know English’s, and my French vocabulary is still much smaller than English.

But I feel more comfortable speaking French, more myself. I feel as though I am more easily able to say what I mean in French than in English. My written English is much better than my written French, but when speaking English I struggle to say even simple things: many English speakers I meet do not, in speaking, perceive me to be a native English speaker. Perhaps I’m not.

Not all, but many of us are dislocated in language: many of us have a home language we’ve forgotten or are forgetting. English is, because of the Empire, a language of immigrants and refugees; perhaps all languages are, to some extent. Our thoughts are colored and formed by what it is possible to say in the language in which we formulate our thoughts; who we are is created by what we can say. I can more easily say what I mean when speaking French, even if I don’t know the words or trip over the grammar; what I can say in French is closer to who I am than what I can say in English.

I don’t mean, though, that I can’t write English: written English is beautiful and austere; delicate harmonies of connotation can be tuned by the fine selection of words. This is true in all languages, but in English I feel it most clearly. It’s the language my parents speak to me; it’s the language their parents spoke to them. I learned to speak from my mother, and write from my father. From my mother I learned to be indirect, to delicately suggest; from my father, to construct sentences like architecture.

Goethe said something like “the one who only knows one language doesn’t know that one well.” Kabe said that “one must speak at least three languages to be able to write with good style.” They would know. My English is certainly improved by my French: after speaking French for a while, I find that I can speak English more fluently. Knowing English teaches me attention to detailed shades of meaning that impoves my French.

There is still, for me, a break in memory where I forgot French; when I was young, I was ashamed to say “I used to speak French, but I forgot.” I felt keenly the lost part of me, the silenced voice that I missed. But that wasn’t the end: I spoke French, then I didn’t, and now I do. Known, forgotten, learned again. Such is the way of t

Map/territory

[2022-04-22 Fri]

When I was a child, I had educational place mats: the solar system, the periodic table (my mother was a chemist, after all), and maps of the USA and the world. Looking at these maps, I used to plan trips. When I started taking swimming lessons, it occurred to me that I could swim down the waterways and across the lakes: I planned to ride down the Mississippi River to the Gulf of Mexico and from there skirt the coast down to South America. I knew that people swam across the English Channel—surely this was about the same? My mother found this too sweet to disabuse, but I soon realized that the world is much bigger than it looked on my place mat.

I should have known: by that time I had already flown across the Atlantic several times. But the sweet closeness of the map, its human scale, allured me: it is much easier to imagine the world on the scale of the map than on its proper scale. When they say “1 cm:10 km”, who actually sees the kilometers? I still only see centimeters on the paper. I suppose that, were I a great scholar or theoretician, I would make some point about how our representation of space as smaller than it is is a symptom of our inability to imagine it at full scale. Borges would say something about a map so large it covered and subsumed the territory it (re)presented, but I don’t have nearly his power of creative immagination.

Really, it’s much simpler: today I was looking at a map, planning the next step in my trip, and I had this poignant memory. Traveling, I learned that I haven’t really grown up much. I’m still looking at a map and planning where I’ll head next, thinking “I could jump here, or walk there”. Never mind that I jump by an airplane or walk by a train. I am the same person I always was, and I’ve learned so much. I can’t swim there, but why can’t I go there by some other means? It’s not quite as straight forward as I thought it was, but I know enough now to make it happen: as a child, I stared at the map and imagined what it would be like to go there; now, a little more grown up, I check the map to show me how to get where I’m going.

Addictive machines

[2022-04-21 Thu]

Computing machines are addictive. Internet and gaming addictions are more or less recognized phenomena, but I don’t know whether we talk about “computer addiction” as a more general phenomenon. In classical behavioralist terms, it’s periodic reinforcement: occasional, unpredictable positive stimuli that result from using the machine—as you use the machine, it occasionally rewards you with a sudden feeling of success that encourages you to use it more. This can be easily compared to gambling addiction: it’s not very far from a slot machine to a computing machine. Like the slot machine, the computing machine provides and addictive feedback structure that: it periodically rewards our efforts just often enough to condition us to continue poking at it. Ask a programmer, and they’ll tell you that they do the work because it’s addicting. There’s a reason we feel such a drive to debug code: we’re chasing the high we get when it finally works.

Now, some people profit from making their applications particularly addicting: youtube, tiktok, and facebook make their daily bread by addicting the user, because they need the user to use their product in order to profit. In Yannis Varoufakis’s recent interview with Evgeney Morozov in The Crypto Syllabus, the former finance minister of Greece and self-described “erratic Marxist” explains how this works. “Command capital,” he says,

lives on privately owned networks/platforms and has the potential to command those who do not own it to do two things: Train the machines/algorithms on which it lives to (A) direct our consumption patterns; and (B) directly manufacture even more command capital on behalf of its owners (e.g. posting stuff on Facebook, a form of labour de-commodification).

In other words,

Any digital commodity has command value to the extent that its buyer can use it to convert expressive everyday human activity into the capacity to train an algorithm to do two things: (A) make us buy stuff, and (B) make us produce command capital for free and for their benefit.

That is, the “product” sold by the likes of Jeff Bezos, Mark Zuckerberg, and the boys at Google is their ability to modify, or control, the users’ behavior. They acquire this power to control by getting people to use their service: the more you use it, the more they know about you and the better able they are to control your actions. And the best way to get people to use the product is to make it addictive.

This is something like the cigarette company’s strategy with tobacco: they didn’t create nicotine, nor the tobacco plant it’s found in. But once they understood its effects, they did their best to maximize how addicting their product was so that the customers would be driven to buy more. The strategy at the tech firms is slightly less direct—rather than selling the product to the addict they sell the control they have over the addict—but their strategy is the same: profit off of addiction. The key difference is that the addict of the tech firm doesn’t pay anything; they don’t have to: their addiction pays for itself. The only cost is that they are controlled by whoever bids on the right to control their behavior.

A hoopy frood who knows where his towel is

[2022-04-16 Sat]

Surprise, bitches—this is still a travel blog! So I fucked up: I’m flying by the seat of my pants, and that usually works out fine. Call it privilege. But tonight it wore out: everyone and their mother and law is staying in Rome this weekend, unsurprisingly: it’s spring (Easter) break, after all. And I missed the via crucis on Friday, so I’m clearly so invested in the Roman-ness of the holiday. But I’ve fallen in love with Rome, and I’d like to stay a few nights more. Now, why I waited until today to book a room for tonight, I don’t know: I knew that I should be booking, looking, whatever. But I didn’t: I had some SICP exercises to do, and some realy good books to read. And god, the food.

So I didn’t book a room until today, which was a fuckup. I guess I was used to the idea that when I needed a room one would be available: there’s always something. But it seems as though, for tonight in Rome, there really isn’t anything for less than 1000 Euro. So I fucked up. Even this morning, as I was checking out, I knew that I should probably shower. I showered yesterday afternoon, but I figured this moring surely there’ll be another shower. I found a place for tomorrow, but for tonight I’m pretty much shit out of luck.

Now, this is all the whining of a priviledged bratty kid on rumspringa in Italy whose laissez faire attitudes landed him in a small inconvenience: I have plenty of money, so I can eat. I still have my stuff, including the machine I’m typing this on. I have my passport. I have my clothes and my wits and my A1 Italian. I know some people here, though not too well. I’m not sure what the tactic is: it’s an adventure.

On the one hand, this is a lesson: book your shit in advance; plan—don’t let the world catch you with you pants down. On the other hand, I’m having an absolutely terrific time. This is some Hitchhiker’s Guide shit: I have my towel, for god’s sake—it’s even freshly cleaned. As an aside, here’s a protip: travel with a plain white towel like the hotel linen. That way, when you stay somewhere nice enough to provide clean towels, you can trade it in for a clean one. If there aren’t towels, then you have one. I think that Douglas Adams got the classic “always have a towel” advice from Hitchhiker’s Guide to Europe, the inspiration for his comedy. But I don’t have a copy around and can’t verify it.

Not everyone’s trips are so antic-ful: there’s a school of travellers I see around here (Europe) who come to “party”. To them, Europe’s a disjointed series of party spots linked by trains and cobblestone streets. These people are generally boring and can afford the debauchery. They have beds in the hostel. On the other hand, I’ve met people who swore that if you work some you can get something to eat—if you know what to do, whom to ask, you don’t have to pay anything to travel Europe. I met a guy in Amsterdam who’d been on the road that way for years—this was through Esperanto. Now there was a fly-by-the-seat-of-your-pants motherfucker. When I saw him he was staying in a anarchist flophouse in Amsterdam with the agonizingly cool teenagers who lived, breathed, and were edge. “Rich tourists, fuck off/, said the sign on the wall. ”Rich tourist“—that’s me. Oops.

I guess this is the sort of bullshit I set out to Europe to do: antics and wildness. I’ll probably sneak, tonight, into the party at the hostel I stayed at last week. I know the folks there, and they’ll be up all night. I even still have the wrist band, so I’ll give it a shot. We’ll see whether they’re happy to see me—I sorta blew them off, but god does “party, party, party” get tiresome: see my comments above about the party spots—this was one of them. On the other hand, they’re super attractive people down at the party hostel. They’re hot and they know it.

In the end, I don’t think I’m gonna get an expensive room tonight; I may get some camping gear at some point, trade in this for that. A tarp’d be nice, or a bedroll of some sort. I guess that’s what the towel’s for. I have a booking for a hostel tomorrow, so it’s not open-ended: I just have to fuck around tonight and see what’s up. If I can make it to the morning, it’ll be cool. It’s appropriate, on holy Saturday, that I don’t have a place to sleep. I’ll keep a vigil with the disciples until the early morning, when we’ll go up and (hopefully) find the tomb empty. Happy Easter everyone, from your correspondent in Rome.


Con’t: so life is a rediculous adventure. For those of you who don’t have the patience for my bullshit, I found a room for the night. Here’s the long version: I walked to the Vatican for the Easter vigil today, on foot. With all my shit on me. I considered in my mini pilgrimage across the city to see the beginning of the new liturgical year. I spent a lot of the day in a park—lord knows which. I’m not a fucking journalist, so sue me. It was a park with little white flowers blooming and people lying, waiting. At the proper time of midday a man prayed to the kaaba (spelling?), facing east. There were many napping who weren’t going anywhere in particular but where they were. I was there with them, in the ruins of Trajan’s baths. It was warm and sunny; Rome has palm trees—did you know that? Today made sense of the quasi-tropical flora.

From there I walked to the Vatican. It’s not that far, but I had my heavy-ass laptop bag on me and that was a drag. I stopped for a snack or two along the way—pilgrimages aren’t necessarily ascetic, are they? I’m not at all sure what the difference is between a pilgrim and a tourist anyway: I’ve met plenty of people who may well have been both. So I made it to the Vatican in time for the Easter vigil. For those of you out of the know, a Roman Catholic church is without light for all of lent, or as dark as it can be while making the necessary concessions to practicality (they are Roman Catholic, after all). But the vigil, the night before Easter, reintroduces light to the church, literally and symbolically (Roman Catholic indeed). I wanted to go to the Vatican for this most holy of events, not least because I missed the services around the passion because I’m a schlub. Ma vabbè—it can be that way sometimes.

So I went today and couldn’t enter the basilica because I don’t know why. But the cops said I couldn’t so I couldn’t. Vabbè. I stood outside and listened to the service piped out to us in the piazza and took some nice (in my opinion) photos. I got through the pope’s sermon but gave up when they started in on the baptisms—it’s not the same to stand outside and listen to the service on the radio as it is to be in there with the action.

I had dinner at a place called Bukowski’s—vegetarian lasagne and pork tartare. Several glasses of wine (I quit quitting drinking but I’m not sure how I feel about it yet). It was delicious and the music was good—lots of Nirvana, which is my shit.

After dinner I had an digestivo of god-knows-what brown liquor: I swear it always tastes like the cough medicine I had as a kid: syrupy and sweet that coats your insides and stirs your head. I sat across from this Italian couple and their American friend who it turns out is an essayist (review forthcoming, not that she asked for my opinion. Whom am I kidding: she’ll never read this anyway). While the girls were out smoking, the guy and I got to chatting and he invited me to sit with them. I don’t know—it went alright (it’s so easy to abuse m-dashes: it’s an easy way to make a runon sentence look sophisticated). I mentioned that I had nowhere to sleep tonight, and the essayist invited her friends to sleep over (she had been an exchange student in his house oh so many years ago and they were delighted to be reuinited), so I’m staying in their rented bedroom. The girl was terribly apologetic: “it has no windows!”. But it’s a bed indoors, so I’m happy. Now that’s an adventure—I told you everything would work out fine. As an aside, I tried to get a copy of this collection of essays, Soon I’ll Be From The Soil Someday by Eleanor Amicucci, but she only has them available in hard copy, and the shipping to Italy is on the order of weeks. I’d pay full price for an electronic copy since I met her and I want to read them, but it doesn’t seem as though that’s an option. We’ll see whether I see her again and, if so, whether I can weasel a copy out of her. In any case, is this what’s in store for me? I guess everyone has a book nowadays, and it’s easier than ever to publish under your own steam: it doesn’t seem attached to any particular publishing house. I’m interested to see what they have to say: they’re about “plants and death”. Fascinating, no?

Clothes we wear and other problems of living

[2022-04-14 Thu]

I’m writing this so that I can get rid of something.

The summer after I finished high school, I bought a hoodie on the internet. It’s gray with a graphic printers on the front—a modified version of the X Files “I Want to Believe” poster showing a UFO, with the text “I Want to Leave”. I wore it to lunch one day that summer: a friend of my step-father’s asked how I felt about going off; I leaned back to show him the graphic. Laughter all around.

I accidentally ordered two of the things, or anyhow, two arrived. The printing place didn’t accept returns, and it was cheap enough not to be overly bothered. I gave the second one to the girl I dated that summer. She gave it back to me when we broke up in the fall. I gave the same hoodie to the next girl I was serious about—I didn’t ask for it back in the breakup, but I got a terrific tee-shirt from her that I haven’t given back either. I figure we’re even.

In the meantime, I wore the hell out of the hoodie—it’s a perfet shade of gray that goes with everything. By now, five (!) years later, the graphic is almost completely gone, but the garment itself is in great shape: a simple gray hoodie.

The other day, I bought another gray sweatshirt in a vintage store—one of better quality, softer. Non-graphic. No hood. It’s one of those that could almost pass as a sweater if dressed up. Ordinarily, I’d stuff the old one in the back of my closet, but I’m traveling: room in my suitcase is precious and lacking. Even so, I can’t bring myself to get rid of it: it carries so much of my story.

Clothes are part of our body—they are the skin we show to the world. And a garment I wore when I was younger has been part of me for a long time. This is difficult to write because I don’t fully understand it. The buddha taught that attachment to material things is the origin of suffering—he was almost certainly right. But without our material possessions, we lose track of who we are: in a world that changes, a piece of clothing may be the only constant thing outside our own bodies. Nirvana is terrifying: do I want to lose myself in the all-mind? Sometimes, I’d rather cling to the spinning whel of life/death/reincarnation: at least it’s familiar. At least I am I.

This is, ultimately, why I write: it’s a (im)material trace of the “I” that seems to be here—by entering my thoughts in the record, I commit my being to the collective archive of human memory, which will outlive me and my silly clothes. By writing it down, I transmute that pitiful materiality of a gray sweatshirt into an idea—just as I transmute the pitiful materiality of my body into an idea.

But this is all too easy. This body holds this sweatshirt in its lap and remembers their memories together. The garment is my own archfossil: it is the weird material presence of immaterial past. I know it really happened because I have the sensuous thing here, a relic of myself.

I began to write this so that I could get rid of the hoodie: “if I write it all down, then I won’t need the physical thing anymore, because I’ll have the truth of its being in words.” But the opposite is also true: now that I have written, how can I get rid of the garment? It is the physical being of the story of my life I have written down; without the thing, how will I know that my memories are true?

I haven’t gotten rid of the thing yet; I couldn’t, though I have no intention of wearing it in the near future. And it’s not the oldest thing that I have with me: I have a fleece from when I was fourteen, and my teddy bear and blanket from when I was a newborn. The bear used to have a bow around his neck, which is long lost; the blanket used to be a quilt, but the quilted part has seperated from the back and is in tatters, half lost. I suppose I dropped part of it along the way. Somewhere I was collecting the scraps of the blanket that fell off, but then I lost a large half of it. Irony of ironies.

I suppose the old saying is toujours true: tempus fugit, memento mori. Time flies; remember death. It’s more poignant in a language now dead, spoken for two thousand years in one form or another. Maybe in fifteen hundred years my words will be just as archaic, and the old saying will be just as true. Time flies, and no moment lasts forever. I cling sentimentally to the little objects that [decorate] my memories because they are constant: time hasn’t flown so fast. But once I was a tiny infant who curled up under a new quilt with a handsome, bowtied bear; now they’re tatters, and I still drag them from place to place with me. I guess everyone thinks “I’m getting old”—everyone does get old, or dies.

Am I young? I suppose I still am—I’m not yet twenty five. But I am no longer a child, and I’ve lived long enough to notice the things in my life begin to wear and change. I suppose I was going to have this realization at some point, since time moves on for everyone.

So in the end, can I get rid of the sweatshirt? I don’t know—I got rid of a shirt I had ripped today and bought an almost identical replacement at the vintage store, maybe this is the way of things. But I didn’t know that shirt as well as I knew the hoodie; it wasn’t as much a part of me. Maybe I’ll be forced to by the limitations of my luggage, we’ll see. I think that I could give it to a friend—someone who knew who I was and where the thing came from. But I can’t throw it off into the abyss of non-meaning, where it will be just another garment with no story. Perhaps it is selfish of me to want it to keep my story on it: after all, I got it from a manufacturer who certainly had their own story about it. For now, though, I’m going to keep it. An old sweatshirt is the least of the material possessions I’m attached to.

A long, imperfect post about some of my history as a writer

[2022-04-13 Wed]

I never meant to start a blog. Well, I guess I did, but I never meant for it to become what it has. This all started out as a diary: during the late winter of 2020/21 I began to keep a record of my daily activities, because otherwise it felt as though I hadn’t done anything at all by the end of the day. I would write things like:

  • Woke up
  • Had scrambled eggs for breakfast
  • Made coffee
  • Played with cat
  • Read book for class
  • Went for walk by beach

And so on. I don’t have the actual diary on me, but that’s the effect of it. After a while, though, I began to write more narratively: I started talking about my thoughts, my memories, my feelings. This was during the height of COVID-19, and I was living alone: besides my cat, the diary was often the only person I spoke to in a day. It became a repository of my anxieties, my fears, my neuroses. It became a repository of my darkest, and most joyful, moments.

I have always written as a response to a time of high activation: when I get upset or overwhelmed, my first response is always to write about it. When I was a freshman in highschool, just fifteen years old, I wrote a piece about my experience as a young queer kid in the dorms. Here it is, in its entirety (names have been changed to preserve anonymity). This was during the spring of my first year of boarding school.

I was at crew practice once, when a little coxswain asked me to crack his back. I lifted him up from behind, bounced him up and down, and realizing how light he was, swung him around from side to side. He laughed. In the milling crowd, a voice next to me said, “That looked really gay.” I was caught off guard, to say the least. He carried on: “Yeah, you looked like how when the girl comes running towards the guy, and he picks her up and swings her around and kisses her. You looked like you were about to kiss. Don’t kiss in front of me.” My mental response was, of course, “Well, fuck you too, then.” Outside, I said nothing, and only bowed my head in apology. I didn’t feel like defending myself, it’s not worth it. So what if I’m gay? Does that hurt you? GAAAAAYYYYYY. Fag. Homo. Fairy, poof, queer.

At night, we sometimes [have] dorm functions, led by responsible adults and seniors. During one, we discuss a checklist of “things to do to be a man.” They’re “Man talks.” One of the items is “How to talk to women,” which we all know means, “How to get into a [relationship.] /[sic.]/” Of course, no man would ever want to seduce another man. Weirdos. It goes without saying that we all love big tits, and fucking pussy. Why would anything to the contrary even occur to you? “How many girls have you hooked up with? None? You could totally hook up with her, why don’t you?” is a daily occurrence. What if I don’t want to hook up with random girls? It never even crossed your mind, did it, not even as a remote possibility? I said once, “You know who I thought were dating? Robert and Michael.” Response: “No way. You know whose friendship is really cute? Alex and Greg’s. They cuddle!” It’s as if “gay” isn’t even a legitimate identity; the entire idea is totally dismissed. The only attention people give to it is joking: “There’s a party in my pants, boys, and you’re all invited!” People pantomime humping each other all the time, saying it’s a “raping.” I once asked someone, when they said that they regularly “raped” their roommate, if they had ever gotten physically excited by the act. It seemed fair, what else happens when you rub your crotch vigorously against someone, for several minutes? “What kind of fucked up person do you think I am?” There’s no fear of being aroused, or any pleasure coming out of it. It’s not even awkward, it’s just a dumb joke. Because the physical manifestation of your love for another human being is hilarious. Fucking hilarious.

A Story, pt. 2: I was, like any other normal high schooler, reading a webcomic during my down time. Of course, much to my surprise, it featured not only straight, but gay sex. A lot of it. The context was really funny, so I kept reading, anyway. (Ok, maybe not so funny, but it felt good to have a stranger legitimize gay love[.]) Someone sat down next to me, and when I reached a gay sex panel, they covered it with their hand, and demanded that I change it immediately. They responded like they had seen something physically detestable, like a gory car accident, or puppies being fed into a wood-chipper, not sex. But to them, of course, gay sex is just as disgusting as any horrific imagining. Thanks anonymous freshman boy, for making the way I know to express love for another into your fucking freak-show nightmare. That makes me feel good about myself. Real good.

At a place like St. Andrews’s, you are what you appear to be. Well, I’m not. It’s only comfortable if you’re straight, because that’s what we all assume we are, because that’s the safest assumption. Well, here we go: I fantasize at night about fucking other guys, I have a huge crush on a boy down the hall. Ah well. Outside of my bed, I just have to personify as straight. I have to think, act, and love straight. I have to tell myself that I’m straight, and forget anything to the contrary, and it almost works. But I have moments where I can’t lie to myself, and I just want to scream. But if I came out? “Did you hear? Preston’s gay.” “Preston’s gay? I know it!” I’d just be the weird outsider, nobody to identify with. A community of one. There’s no role models to look up to, nobody to confide in. I have nobody to follow, but straights have dozens of normal, straight families to learn from. They have a whole world tailored to them, made to teach them how to be normal. Everybody around me is getting with girls, like it’s the most natural thing in the world, when all I want is a nice guy to talk to, and hold, and maybe, eventually, love. But, no such luck. Ah well, lonely nights in the room, here I come.

So, in the end, this place isn’t “Radically accepting.” A majority, at most, passively tolerates. “I don’t care if you’re gay, just don’t try date and me.” Because that really helps. The most (and almost only) vocal group in the whole community are those who would deny us. The only voices we hear discussing this are those around us, and those around us hate and fear us. Who cares what the teachers say? I don’t have to live, work, love, and play, with the teachers. There’s a reason the students are the most important part of the St. Andrew’s experience, and they say “No,” without even knowing it. I can’t ask a fucking guy to prom, who’d go with me? I couldn’t grind with another guy at a rave, or go to an Amos classroom with my boyfriend, or hold his hand in public. There’s nobody’s lips to kiss, or hand to hold.

But, I get it. There’s too few people, too focused on universality, to tailor to a small, hidden minority. So, if I have to suffer in silence, lying myself into conformity, to let the majority be comfortable, let me suffer, for patience is the highest virtue.

Maybe a little melodramatic, but that’s what I was like when I was fifteen. It’s astonishing how little we change: I can feel exactly how frustrated I was when I wrote that, how angry and confused. I forgot, until I read it just now, about the little details of my daily experience in high school. They’re all true, all the details. I can picture where down the hall his room was compared to mine; I remember the sticky afternoons on the crew docks and the little coxwain… The headmaster loved my piece; he loved my writing from then on. I remember sitting together with him on a bench in the front lawn of the school, reading him the piece. Of course, the spice and criticism delighted him to no end. I can only hope that it improved the school. Of course, standing behind us was another student, carefully eavesdropping; he told everything to everyone. It transpired, in the end, that he was insecure that he might be gay. God, listen to me: “insecure that he might be gay.” Someone eight years younger than me would probably call me homophobic for saying that, but that’s how it was!


In my junior (third) year, we were tasked with writing a chapel talk as an exercise in public speaking. The strongest handful from the class were invited to speak in front of the entire school. The first version of my talk was something heavy about how my mother should give me space because, like the prodigal child, I’d come back if allowed to leave. Of course, I was right: I did need my space, and I am closer to my mother now than I was then, but it wasn’t the time to say that yet. Frustrated by being unable to express myself properly, I, on the night before we were expected to turn the pieces in, rewrote it from scratch. This is what I wrote (again, names

On August 29, 1986, upon returning from a spiritual journey in Africa, Paul Simon published his greatest album, Graceland. On March 12, 2010, my uncle Louis committed suicide. And on March, 16, 2010, the title song, Graceland, was played at my uncle’s memorial service. The song’s title refers to Elvis Presley’s estate, and the lyrics describe how Paul Simon is “going to Graceland.” The music is upbeat and sparkling, with bright guitars and driving percussion. Perhaps not very appropriate to end a funeral. However, as the years have gone by, and I’ve listened to the song time and time again, I’ve come to see that it is much more fitting than I had thought at first.

Suicide has haunted my entire waking memory, and much of the sleeping. I don’t remember a time when death didn’t seem like an appealing option, as if I were clawing at the inside of the coffin of my life, and it was the only way to get free. My mother and father had a chaotic relationship, alcohol and anger issues were founding pillars of my childhood. The three of us, Mother, Father, and Son, are each plagued by incredible anxiety, about which you’ve heard a lot from this very pulpit, thanks to Ms. Nelson and her insightful words. This makes any household with us three tense and dangerous, one of us always moments away from crying, screaming, coming at the others with knives, or some dreadful combination of the three.

Lying awake at night, I dreamed of the refuge of silence. Or more clearly, of the pity that some debilitating injury would bring me. Nobody would dare scream and curse around a cripple, would they? When we moved to the states, my parents finally divorced each other, perhaps out of mercy, or fatigue. And like every child of divorced parents, I thought that it was all my fault. Maybe if I had been a more loving, more respectful, more perfect son, my mommy and daddy would still love each other. Dying became my obsession. Haunting the back of my mind was the glowing red button that said, “ESCAPE.” Escape from being lonely, and afraid, and sad. Escape from the drowning black depression that filled my body until it poured out of my eyes as tears.

Then, my uncle Louis was dead. Louis had always been the source of calm, cool, and stable in our family. When my mother had breast cancer, right after her divorce, he stayed with us. My mother still reminisces about the days when things just suddenly “worked”, and we knew that it was Louis’s magic touch that had made it so. His daughter once got her pet ferret, Mary Sue, stuck under a refrigerator. The fridge was on blocks, so it couldn’t be moved without crushing the ferret, so over the phone, my uncle Louis talked her through taking off the back of the refrigerator and pulling the ferret through its workings, sight unseen.

Then his wife found him hanging in the tool shed. Suddenly, he had removed himself from our lives. I had never experienced suicide outside of my mind before, so in that time, I observed many things. His wife, a small, quiet, brilliant woman, was destroyed. Unable to speak, eat, or even leave her curled position on the couch, she had cried herself dry until her face stayed contorted in the sheer pain of loss. His children and family had to come together to support her, and repair our own broken hearts. I had never thought of all of the mundane things that happen when somebody dies, writing an obituary, planning a funeral, tax matters, and the question of what to do with his old files.

My mother and I chose the readings for the funeral, these being John 1, “In the beginning was the word,” the 23rd Psalm, “Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death,” and a reading from Luke, the parable of the Prodigal son, which you have just heard. My mother was very touched by this last reading, and I didn’t know why. It is a story that always confused me, the seeming injustice that the father does to his elder son and the irrational kindness that he offers to the younger posing awkward ethical dilemmas about forgiveness and love. The context of the reading leads us to believe that the father represents God, and the younger son, his people.

Maybe my mother was worried that Louis had wandered away from God, his father. He had spent his entire life as a scientist looking for the answers, and they were right there with the Lord. Maybe I’m not giving her enough credit. She more likely thought that she had left Louis, and while she was away, he had died. She felt guilty for leaving him, and that she didn’t deserve the forgiveness that the father gives his son, because she didn’t deserve to forgive herself for what she had done. To some extent, we all felt guilty for leaving Louis. Maybe if one of us had called last week, or sent a quick email to check up, he would still be alive, and we wouldn’t have to struggle like we had been with our loss.

However, my mother began to cry when Graceland was played. Paul Simon’s simple song about going to a museum became so much more to us in that moment. It became a symbol for going home, like the prodigal son to his father’s open arms, like Louis to God’s. It became a symbol for heaven, for being free. It helped me begin to realize what suicide really means, and the effects that it has on those who experience its pain, not just those who commit it.

Now, I had seen what suicide left behind. I had seen the pain that it brought. I had seen the confusion and desperation that it gave to each of us. And I had seen the fear that being so close to death struck into the hearts of its survivors. And I had seen how hard we all had to struggle to forgive ourselves for what we had let Louis do, and how we had failed him.

I’d like to think that this shocked me onto the straight and narrow. I’d like to tell you all that I, having seen the consequences, never considered death as an escape ever again, but I would be lying.

Real life is much more nuanced. I’ve been in therapy for the majority of my life, working on my anxiety and suicidal thoughts, I’m drugged within an inch of my life, and I’m in a safe, supporting environment here at St. Andrew’s.

But sometimes, when I’m alone at night in the dark after a draining day, my old demons creep up to me, and I have to shove them back into the furthest corners of my mind and sometimes; sometimes [sic.] they stay around, following on my shoulder, draping themselves over my mind like cats on a warm window sill. Sometimes the call of the abyss still haunts me. So if you see me on one of those days, when I’m quiet and introspective, I’m avoiding people, and generally being surly and mean, now you know what’s going on. I’m going to Graceland.

That evening, the headmaster invited me to his “senior tutorial”, a small group of fourth year students who met to study texts of interest. We read my piece. People, generally, were impressed. I don’t know—I guess if you say something forcefully enough, people will listen. I was seventeen when I wrote that.

At University, I never had the space to express myself in the form of an essay: it’s not encouraged in the UK system to write in that style, presumably because it’s “opinion” and not “argument” (though I’m not sure that I know the difference). So I didn’t: I practiced writing in a cool academic style, but I could never get it together. It was never good enough, never right. There was always something missing. It began to make me feel as though I was a bad writer—perhaps I am. It certainly made me feel stupid. Eventually, I gave up writing for myself all together, exccept in private places that noone would ever see: I was ashamed of the spiteful, uncharitable things people said; I was ashamed that my writing wasn’t all things to all people.

Maybe the story is that I left the comfort of a small high school where I was encouraged in my excesses and went off to university where I was beaten down to size. I guess that’s one read on it. I’ve talked before about how I left university feeling stupid (and I use that ugly word on purpose because it’s painful). It’s not as though I did better on school assignments in high school: my grades were middling/low B’s all the way through, and my high school teachers critized my lacking je ne sais quoi just like my university professors did. But in high school there was at least some space for me to write creatively. I guess that’s not what university is for, is it?

In the end, I started to write this blog because I wanted somewhere to write that was my own. Nobody reads this who has any say: it isn’t for a grade, for a performance, for a group. It’s my space to write what I want to write, how I want to write it. Sometimes it’s excessively personal; sometimes it’s excessively moody. The posts are often ill conceived and rash, or they reveal far too much about me to be appropriate for the open internet. But fuck that—nobody ever did anything great by being self-conscious: at some point or another, you’re going to have to make a fool of yourself; you’re going to have to say some stupid shit. But don’t let that keep you from saying anything. It sure as hell isn’t gonna stop me.

Four square epistemology

[2022-04-09 Sat]

Those who follow my life closely might know that I’m going back to school this fall. Previously I spoke about the frustrations of applying for universities; that didn’t stop me from applying nor from getting in, though not to the program I was frustrated by in that post. I’m going into a graduate certificate at the University of Illinois in “Computing Fundamentals” this fall; it’s a one year program aimed particularly at people who don’t have any formal education in computing but who want to enter “the field” (their term).

I’m nervous: my entire computing practice has been alone, on my own terms, at my own pace. I have freedom, by myself, to pursue what I want to. But after a year of practice—in fact, after a small lifetime of messing around with computers in one way or another—I’m still an ignoramus. I’ve been reading Norbert Weiner’s Cybernetics the last couple days, and I feel like a drooling infant. Weiner, of course, was a child prodigy: he finished his PhD. at 18 years old and only got smarter from there. I don’t know, frankly, that I’ll ever understand what the sam hell Norbert’s talking about. Well, I understand the prose perfectly clearly, and I have an intuitive sense of what he’s going for. But pages and pages of equations that don’t mean anything to me but which follow “clearly” from one another begin to get me down. I’m worried that it’ll be more of the same this fall at Illinois.

I don’t know: maybe I’m just hyping myself up. It’s a classic case of imposter syndrome: everyone feels that they’re an imposter in their field, but even the experts don’t know everything: Doug McIlroy “skim[med] the dull parts” (Donald Knuth, Literate Programming page 170), and TeX had errors and mistakes. Now, just because you’re paranoid doesn’t mean they aren’t coming for you; on the other hand, even if your jealousy is well-founded doesn’t mean it’s not pathological (Lacan, citation to be found). What if I really am an imposter? We all are.

I had a professor (Mario Aguilar) who said, “the scholar is the one who knows”, which I am certain he got from Lacan too. But are they the one who knows? If they know, what are they researching? Maybe what he meant was that the scholar holds knowledge on behalf of the community: they are the one who knows more than the average bear (Yogi Bear). I have this experience with computing: I certainly know a little more than many of the people I meet; concretely, I understand more than I used to. I remember, in high school, arguing about what the internet was and how it worked; of course, being in high school, I didn’t go home and look it up: I just wanted to argue. Now I’m aware of how much I don’t know about computers, and I know where to go to learn more.

It’s time for my favorite, Zizeko-Rumsfeldian, diagram of epistemology:

Known Knowns Known Unknowns
Unknown Knowns Unknown Unknowns

This is the square of knowledge. The original context (Donald Rumsfeld, citation forthcoming) was military: we know that we know the geography of the country we are invading; we know that we don’t know how well equipped the enemy fighters are; we don’t know that we don’t know how many soldiers lie waiting in ambush for us over the next hill. Zizek’s elaboration is the final quadrant: we don’t know that we know our own ideology; it is here that the unconscious ideological fantasy directs our actions: we act according to some knowledge that we don’t know we have but which nevertheless impacts the way we know the world. Or something like that: Zizek’s work is about as impenetrable as Weiner’s—equations, graphs, and all (Zizek, The Sublime Object of Ideology).

With computers, most of our knowledge is unknown unknowns: we don’t know what we don’t know about how it all works, so we don’t know how ignorant we are. We think that what we know is a large proportion of what there is to know, and the technology firm doesn’t do much to disabuse us of this notion. On the other hand, as we move our few known unknowns into the realm of known knowns, we discover that the vacuum is filled by a larger number of new known unknowns surging up out of unknown unknownitude. For everything we come to know, we discover a far greater quantity that we now know we don’t know; the trickle of information from the top-right to the top-left produces a flood from the bottom-right to the top-right. All the time, the bottom-left is silently laughing at us, since it holds the keys to the gate between the right-side quadrants.

All I’ve learned, in short, is how ignorant I really am. Was it Ellen Ullman who talked about “islands of knowledge seperated by seas of ignorance”? When you’re on an island, you don’t necessarily know how large the sea around you is. It’s only when you set out in a little boat that you come to understand the vastness of the ocean. Hence my apprehension about the graduate program this fall: I’d like to be on a comfortable island whose nooks and crannies I (know that I) know, but I must set out into the vast (unknown) unknown, whose vastness I am only coming to know. How else will I ever learn anything?

On the move again

[2022-04-04 Mon]

I got back to Italy today. Boy, you might have thought this wasn’t a travel blog, but guess what? It is! I landed in Rome’s airport this morning after a restful several weeks at my cousin’s house in DC. This is the cousin who’s taking care of Xerxes; it was as good to see her and her family as it was to be reunited with Mr. Peepers.

Today I just walked, after I took a shower to clean the airplane stank off. I went up to the Villa Borghese Park on the north side of the historic center; the park has winding gravel lanes and trees pruned so that they have a tuft of leaves at the top of their long trunks: it was like walking in a kelp forest. The grass was under a carpet of little white flowers; couples were lying together in the early spring sun. These pair twisted their legs together so I couldn’t tell whose feet were whose; another lay on their backs side by side with their legs crossed exactly the same way.

I also saw the Spanish steps and the outside of the Pantheon (line? to go into a church? I think not…); they were covered over with tourists, so I felt right at home. But it felt like home to be in Italy again.

I’m surprised that I remember any Italian at all, but I do. It’s definitely shoddy and there’s large swaths of the language I don’t know how to use, but I know more Italian now than I did when I came here for the first time last fall, which is to say, I know more than one at all. I ordered dinner and bought face wash in Italian, so I’m getting there.

This dinner: I ate at Osteria dell’Arco, a small room tucked away in the back of town. On Sunday night, there was only one table besides me and only one waiter. But the food was delicious: I had Lonzino as an appetizer, which I couldn’t tell from any other thinkly sliced roast pork but I’m assured is a particular regional thing; as a first plate I had agnolini, little ravioli stuffed with meat, in a spiced cream sauce. It was so good I could have cried.

The secret to all this good food is that Italian people are completely non-pretentious: they know they have good food, and they love to share it. This lady was a professional waiter; this restaurant and its cuisine were her career. So when she saw that I was a well-intentioned, adventurously-palated tourist, she was happy to help. We did the whole conversation in Italian, so I missed some things and learned some things: asciutto means “dry” as in wine; its opposite is dolce, meaning “sweet”. Lampone are raspberries and semifreddo is a dense gelato. She was happy to help me learn, and I was eager to try whatever she had to offer, even if I didn’t know what it was when I ordered it.

So I’m very happy to be back in Italy—I missed being around a big, walkable city. Every time I thought I had seen some part of it, I turned a corner and caught a scorcio (“glimpse”, as when a doorway frames a perfect still life of the world outside) of some spectacular thing I had never even heard of. And I haven’t even made it to the Vatican yet!

Fuck you to that person who made me feel like shit on behalf of someone who had already forgiven me

[2022-03-12 Sat]

We have a generation of young people…so terrified of having the wrong opinions that they have robbed themselves of the opportunity to think and to learn and to grow. I have spoken to young people who tell me they are terrified to tweet anything, that they read and re-read their tweets because they fear they will be attacked by their own. The assumption of good faith is dead. What matters is not goodness but the appearance of goodness. We are no longer human beings. We are now angels jostling to out-angel one another. God help us. It is obscene. It is Obscene: A True Reflection in Three Parts, by Chimamanda Ngozie Adichie

I am not good. I am certainly not an angel. But I try to grow.

When I was young, I took the criticism of others very seriously. I more closely heeded the words of those standing by than the words of those against whom I acted. This is not to say that I have not done despicable things and betrayed the trust of those whose trust in me seemed well founded. But those people were never the ones who were most outraged at me; they were hurt, broken, collapsed, but they didn’t seek to punish me.

Those whom I hurt (and I won’t go into details except to say that it wasn’t as bad as you’re thinking but worse than anything you’ve done) I can’t speak for. But I have spoken to some of them, and I know some of their pain. I learned the pain of not knowing the eyes of the familiar face in front of you, and I learned the pain of looking through those eyes.

But those who heard were outraged and made it their business to inform everyone. Which is admirable, in its way. For what else can you but gossip when you hear of something about which nothing can be done?

And so it was those loud voices that I heard and repeated to myself, the voices of those “speaking for” those I hurt, whom they had never met but whose cause they champion.

I can’t ask for forgiveness because it’s not about me. I can say “I’m sorry” to the ones I hurt. I think they know. And that isn’t good enough, since it’s not their voices causing me guilt. I lived for years in guilty agony not because of the harm I did but because of my community rejecting me. And I tortured myself with that guilt in order to cover up the pain of what I did, because the structure of guilt is easier to think than pain. Because no human being (or at least, not I) can inflict pain without feeling pain, and that pain is sweeter and more agonizing than rejection; it is more difficult to face, for at its bottom is the recognition of impossible acts done but not understood. For if you understood, you could not have done them; and understanding, you know longer know how they could have been done.

I learned this: it is not my place to criticize others; it is not my place to “speak on behalf of” others. I can criticize myself. There is always an opportunity to criticize, because I am human and therefore ignorant. I am not excusing: I am telling the truth. I am flawed, and this does not excuse my flawed behavior. But it does give me an opportunity to learn. And if I can also learn from the flaws of others, then I might behave better in the future than I did in the past. And when I don’t behave better, since I am human rather than angel, then at least I will have more experience to learn from.

Time with friends

[2022-03-07 Mon]

So I ran away. Not quite, but I had to get out of my mom and step-dad’s house. I wrote out a few of my thoughts about that, but it’s too depressing and intimate for this blog. But basically, it had soured, so I came out to Washington DC to stay with some family.

I’m at my cousin’s house, my mother’s niece. She’s older than me, and he two kids are getting ready to finish high school. Nevertheless, Kathleen and I are the most alike out of all of our family, and it’s delightful to spend time out here. Xerxes came to stay here while I travelled in Europe (as discussed on this blog), and she’s taken great care of him. It’s nice to be reunited with him; he clearly remembers me well.

Being in DC is also an opportunity to catch up with friends: I looked up my friend Jacob from university and he was happy to hang out with me. Earlier this week we had dinner together; today we went hiking with some friends. We went up to West Virginia in a borrowed toyota sequoia, which is a minivan inside and an off-roader outside. We ate at the excellent restaurant of an aunt’s of one of our party; I had fried catfish and succotash; there was spiced butternut squash cake for dessert.

They were all lovely people; one works as a research assistant in an HIV/AIDS clinic, another in a development government agency, another as a “consultant” for a tech startup, another as a data scientist, another is sort of floating like me. We all speak the same language, as it were.

In Chicago I was around a lot of lovely people, but almost all of them 20 or more years older than me. It was wonderful to encounter and be exposed to people and learn from them, but people in their 40’s are in a very different place than people in their 20’s; it’s nice to be with people having the same experiences.

At university, it’s easy to get used to being around people who are largely in the same position you are; I’m not sure what the real world equivalent for “what year are you in? what do you study?”. I suppose that we get to talk about who we are.

I spent a fair amount of time around people my own age out in Italy (though I was much younger) and in the hostels, but it was nice to meet them in a non-transient way. I don’t know–that sounds rude. But the people I met in traveling (the few) were at most for a day; besides one, we haven’t really spoken since. On the other hand, a single day of encounter can be enough: a few minute conversation or common glance can establish the tacit understanding that we see and know one another.

Anyhow, I ramble. That’s how you know that I had a good time. But yes, fair reader, things are going well.

Where do you think you’re going, dressed like that?

[2022-01-31 Mon]

Last night I got dressed up and went out to a party. This was a party held every week whose theme is “express yourself”. I think that I expressed myself pretty well. I wore silver-glitter flared trousers, a mesh crop top, and a fur vest. I had a purse shaped like a ray gun that said “zap<” on the side. A relative of mine (it’s complicated, but family is always complicated) helped me get dressed. He wore a black latex head piece like a tail sprouting from his head. I was the side kick, as it were.

It’s difficult to tell the story cohesively, because it’s so boring. I feel as though the Nelson Sullivan fish-eye approach is the best way to show the experience; it’s very difficult to capture in writing. It was a lot like the night club scene from Basic Instinct, if you’ve seen that movie.

I never was a person who dressed up to go out, partially because I was always in a very straight context. In St Andrews, people were very accepting and did dress up to go out, but there was never a space that I felt was unambiguously queer. Maybe I didn’t do enough to seek it out.

I’m struggling for words—I don’t know how to distill or explain it. My relative says that dressing up is “intoxicating”, which is as good of a description as any. I find that social interactions are performances: conversation is improvisation. Dressing up to go to a party creates a character: who is she? why is she dressed that way? When I meet people they don’t see me in a sweater and button down; the first thing that they know about me is that I’m dressed as disco Han Solo. In some sense, it’s a ticket to be in the place: when your outfit is good, people respect your role in the conversation. We tell stories through costume; we create characters, personalities, roles for ourselves. Who am I going to be tonight?

Goodnight, childhood

[2022-01-30 Sun]

When I was a child and my mother put me to bed I had a conundrum. We always said to one another “love you, good night!”. But if she said it first, I hated to say it last and hear my voice die silent in the dark hallway, unacknowledged; if I said it first and she said it last, then I felt as though I had to reply lest she feel the same emptiness I felt when the roles were reversed. So we compromised: we went at the same time: we’d count down, “1, 2, 3, love you! 1, 2, 3, good night!” every night she put me to bed.

It must have stopped when I went away to boarding school (I was 14), but I don’t know whether we continued up until then or not. In any case it’s been almost a decade (!) since I went to boarding school, so at least a decade has passed since I last said “1, 2, 3, love you!”.

Tonight I’m getting ready to go out again (I said I would, and I think it’ll be fun, but I’m tired. I should have taken a nap this afternoon, but I was “working”) and my mother and step-father are preparing to leave for Minnesota (my step-sister’s pregnacy is complicated, so she’s delivering the baby at a hospital in Minnesota where she has access to the needed specialists). They go tomorrow morning. I’m going to miss my mother while she’s gone. I spoke to her in my room tonight and I couldn’t stand to let her leave. I felt as though there was something I needed to say/hear and I didn’t know how to ask.

Once I apologized to a friend of mine; I didn’t know what to say but I had to say something because she had just apologized to me (you’re getting the end of the story here, not the beginning) for something I didn’t know I hadn’t forgiven her for; when she said it I suddenly had already forgiven her. So I said, “I’m sorry that I haven’t always been gentle to you” and I saw in her eyes that she didn’t know that she needed to hear me say that so she could have already forgiven me.

I felt the same with my mother’s wish goodnight: I didn’t know that I had already forgotten the rhythm of my life. But if we do not forget, we can not remember; and remembering is the sweetest pain.

Progress checks considered harmful

[2022-01-27 Thu]

Sometimes I feel as though time is stripey. I don’t move continuously through the day: instead, I have states that come and go. When evening comes and I start to write (I almost always write these posts in the evening, at least when I’m at my mother’s house, because it’s when my mother and step-father are asleep) I feel as though no time has passed at all since I last wrote a post. In some sense, all the time that passed between the last post and this one is swallowed up in the gap between </article> and <article>. A whole two days passed in an instant, and here I am, writing again.

What happened? I learned a bit about Javascript from this book, and read some essays by Fran Lebowitz from The Fran Lebowitz Reader. Boy does she have this gig nailed: write enough to get a speaking tour, then just speak. She didn’t just take a break from writing, she took a broke (thanks MC Debra). But as Fran says, “writing is hard and I’m lazy”. Both are true.

Night time comes sooner every day; before I even get started, it’s time to sleep again. But I can’t work when my mother and step-father are awake; knowing they’re asleep gives my brain space to spin up without interference. Or maybe it’s knowing that they aren’t going to come up and ask me what I’m doing. My step-father in particular has the excurciating habit of asking me “make any progress today?” as though there’s progress to be made. What progress? I’m moving just as fast as I can to keep from falling behind; moving forward is out of the question. I mean for god’s sake I couldn’t even get a button to work in Javascript today, and I only started looking at the language yesterday; I still don’t know PHP or Python (I can read Python pretty well, but I couldn’t write my way out of a paper bag using Python).

But as I said, time is stripey: I don’t move forward so much as sideways. Maybe it’s a cycle: large wheels turn slowly. And I still haven’t written my magnum opus. I think that it’s inherited: my father (no step) works pathologically. If his work is not perfect in his own estimation, he isn’t satisfied and is convinced that others won’t be either; and who knows the flaw of a work better than its author? As Ellen Ullman put it in either this book or this book, an idea starts out as a perfect gem in our mind: I have an insight and the whole problem is clear. How could it possibly be so simple? How can no one else have seen it? But as we start to work the idea out, to implement it, the perfection of the idea becomes compromised by shoddy reality and our own failings until the clarity and simplicity of our original concept is loss in a heap of mess. And depending on how functional the mess is and how many people are waiting, I either shelve it permanently or throw it to the judgement of others. And then it starts over, because I have to be working on something. “Are you making progress?” How can I? Days pass where nothing happens, then I pick up exactly where I left off as though no time at all had passed. Is that progress, or just barely hanging on?

Memories. Tatters.

[2022-01-24 Mon]

I lose things a lot. Of course, those who know me know that I keep my room a mess because I don’t know where to put anything and tidying is exhausting. So my keys and cards and glasses and whatever get piled under all the junk and lost. I come by it honestly: my mother loses her things too. She can’t find her keys, or her wallet, or her purse and it’s getting late and we have to go now and “honey, are you alright? Don’t you remember where you left it? This happens a lot” says my step-father.

My mother’s mother died of Alzheimer’s disease, as did my mother’s older sister. And for someone whose life is built on thinking, losing thought is unbearable. If no one you know has died of Alzheimer’s, if you’ve never seen someone’s eyes dim and their mind fade, then go listen to The Caretaker’s Everywhere at the End of Time.

My mother doesn’t want to die of Alzheimer’s. She doesn’t want to lose her mind; she doesn’t want to forget who she is or where she is or what’s happening, because she’s seen it and it scared her. Wait until your mother starts screaming because she’s locked in a box with water pouring from the ceiling and the attendants have to come and help her out of the shower; then tell me my mother’s over-reacting.

On my step-father’s suggestion my mother got Apple’s AirTags (or however they style them; you think I care?) which beep and carry on when you ping them from your phone; the theory is that she’ll be able to find her things when they’re lost. This is classicly my step-father’s style: command and direct; when asked to stop, pout and say “I was only helping”.

So the things came today and my mother asked for my help putting it on her keys. But first she had to find her keys. She told me to keep quiet while she looked; she didn’t want my step-father to know that she couldn’t find them. I asked why, and she said, “I don’t want to be told that I have dementia”.


Edit on 2022-01-30:

hen my step-father loses something, he blames my mother. When my mother loses something, my step-father says that she has dimentia. Any time something isn’t where my step-father left it, he angers at my mother and accuses her of moving it or of throwing it away. Whenever she can’t find something, he says to her, “don’t you remember?”. Indeed, any time she doesn’t remember some feature of his life or friends, he acts insulted or surprised. He has never known any of my friends names nor shown any interest in learning them; I don’t know that he knows any of her friends, either. I have never blamed his memory for his not knowing; I blame his indifference.

Blogs, diaries, reading, filtering

[2022-01-23 Sun]

This was all pretty much doomed from the start. I don’t know what I’m doing with this site, and I don’t really have the inclination to care that much. I guess that I did the one big reorganization, but that left more gaps than it filled: the only way to get back to the main page (considered-harmful.com/index.html) from this one (considered-harmful.com/posts.html) is by navigating back using the URL or the back button in your browser. The text isn’t very hyper, is it? I don’t even have nay branding on this page besides the title. If you landed here by mistake you must have no idea where you are. On the other hand, I don’t know that anybody has ever landed here by mistake.

I’ve been reading about information architecture and responsive web design lately. It doesn’t show in this website, but I have been putting at least some thought into how to organize a website. At this point I can make a decent static site, but I know essentially nothing about styling it. In other words, I know some HTML, very little CSS, and basically no JS. Don’t even ask me about PHP or SQL or anything else. I can do XML and JSON decently, but that’s cheating.

Is it? JSON has a full top-level utility (jq(1)) whose filters I’ve been learning to use. I fiddled around with one JSON file from lipu linku, a toki pona dictionary, and made another from the CCRU’s pandemonium and numogram (someday I’ll show you my hypertext version of the numogram and pandemonium matrix). It’s very satisfying to be able slice and dice the information this way and that. It’s magical when the file you wrote gets returned to you filtered and sorted.

On the other hand, maybe it’s all pointless. I could have just used WordPress or Squarespace (ugh) to make this site. I could be hosting it on Git(Hub|Lab) pages (I still might—it’s a static site, after all). I could just be writing in my diary, which is where this all started. Maybe that’s the trick: what’s the difference between a diary and a blog? Is it possible to keep both? I pretty much stopped keeping a diary once I started this blog because whenever I have the urge to blast out a stream of consciousness piece I write it here rather than in the diary.

It’s hard to say what I’m writing about. I guess it’s my life and what I’m up to. But is that worth reading? I feel as though I should be commenting on things, or informing, or giving some sort of knowledge. What knowledge have I to give? I don’t think that this is the place, nor am I the person, for that. I’m trying to give some first-person data (is there such a thing) of what it’s like to be me, at this time, in this place. Maybe someday it’ll be of interest to someone.

How is a laptop like a typewriter?

[2022-01-20 Thu]

In David Cronenburg’s 1991 film Naked Lunch the protagonist Bill Lee (Peter Wellers) is an author wrapped up in a conspiracy run by bugs. He communicates with them through his type writer, which transforms into a creature. In one still, the machine becomes a head whose teeth are the keys; Bill sits calmly at his desk and puts his hands into the alien creature’s mouth to type. There are stalks on top of the head and its skin is waxy and pale. In another scene the machine obscenely opens to him, pink and sticky; he massages it.

I think that this machine is essentially a type writer. Or rather: in a previous generation, there were people who wrote on typewriters. There were, of course, people who wrote longhand and then sat down to type, but there were also people who sat down to write at the type writer. A type writer really is a marvelous thing: now anybody can produce typed documents, and it’s possible to create some number of duplicates as you type.

I sit down at this computer to write; I carry it with me and tinker with it. I mess around in its guts, a tweak here, an adjustment there. It complains; I attend to it. Is this an enormous waste of time? Do I long for a system that “just works?” No, I don’t, and anyway, I already have one: really all I mess around with is the software. Besides replacing the hard disk drive with a solid state, I haven’t done any hardware hacking on this machine at all. All of the finickiness has come from the linux distribution I chose and how I chose to set it up. And still there was a lot that was set up for me and works tomagically.

It’s hard to explain: I’ve been using a computer for such a long time, and it was very rare that I ever felt as though there were something that I couldn’t do or didn’t know how to do. On the other hand I am now learning the computer for the first time. I guess that I’m learning.

Dinner with Eliza

[2922-01-22 Thu]

I feel as though I should write. Tonight I had dinner at my friend Eliza’s house. I took the train down to the cool part of Chicago. Her apartment is in a three story house; she has two roommtes. She cooked gnocchi with broccoli, lemon zest and red chili flakes. It was superb.

I don’t want to say “it was weird”. Maybe I made it weird. I’m not sure. We’ve known one another since we were six. That is, three-quarters of our lives so far. In some sense, last I knew her and she knew me we were different people. On my dresser in the bedroom I am sleeping in at my mother’s house there is a photo of me and Eliza together; we’re ten, dressed in ski gear; we smile as children at the camera. On that trip she slept in a tiny closet while I got a full bedroom. I don’t know what that means but it’s truth. At about that age or maybe younger she wiped the snow off the swing for me with her glove which got all wet. The first time we had dinner alone together with each other she and I were in fifth grade so about eleven. I anticipated/dreaded/ruminated the event before/after/during. What did that mean?

Almost a year ago I sat down and began to write a memoir of my sexual life and its disorders. Some of it’s interesting, but I need to piece together the fragments. I don’t know whether a narrative is possible. Eliza features prominently; I haven’t betrayed her yet. Will I?

As long as I’ve known her I’ve been in love with Eliza. In the third grade I wrote a personal narrative where I called her “my girlfriend”; in my illustration we were holding hands. I didn’t invent the story; fiction was strictly prohibited. Her father took us to a football/soccer match. He drove us to the stadium and we sat in the back seat. There were candies on the seat between us: teardrop chocolate kisses. “Would you like a kiss?” Words mean more and less.

FLAME ON

I’m not sure how to step a gap: here is a mystery. When two people who are in love are in the presence of another or an other that impedes their communication their not speaking is communication. They direct to the other other an utterance whose surface is towards the other but whose meaning is for the lover. So they can address one another as lover and not as other because there is another other there to be other for their discourse. But when alone together they only have each other and are other to eachother and lover. In short: when you want to kiss them and think they want to kiss you but your mutual uncertainty means that you both wait on the other waiting on you until you get tired and part awkwardly. But negotiations take time and really it’s about bodies acclimating from deep dive: pressure drops slowly to avoid nitrogen bubbles in the blood.

Bubbles in the blood but I’m embarassed and our bodies slide off one another without touching like magnets turned the wrong way ’round. Maybe I smoked too much and maybe I’m tired: is stream of consciousness/quasi-automatic writing still possible? Let the network spin. And so we sat next to each other on the couch and I got as close to her as she wanted and touched her gently but she seemed unsure. But I don’t know because if I talk about it what will she say? She must know. So maybe I talk about it directly: “that was weird, right?” But if it was weird it was because of me and I’m not saying that to be neurotic. But it’s rich ambiguity and we’re negotiating. I suppose the message was “not never, but not now” and I said “me too” because she was waiting for something and I was waiting for something but what? Bodies to adjust to the atmosphere.

I redesigned this website today. Feel free to look around.

[2022-01-17 Mon]

I know nothing about web design: I made this website to learn. To experts this site probably looks like a mess and it’s still very incomplete. But I’m improving and learning.

I crashed vim—oops. I’m writing at night as I usually do and the brightness on this laptop screen was too bright. This machine runs artix linux and I didn’t know how to change the backlight. I tried use xbacklight(1) but it spat out “No outputs have the backlight property”. I tried to follow the tutorial on the archlinux wiki, but it clobbered by xserver configuration (which is really fragile at best) and I had to revert. I took to turning on all the lights in my bedroom.

I went back to the archlinux wiki and took the simple approach: modify the #+shellsrc{brightness} file, which in my case happens to be in the directory #+shellsrc{/sys/class/backlight/intelbacklight}, which is a symlink to #+shellsrc{/sys/devices/pci0000:00/0000:00:02.0/drm/card0/card0-eDP-1/intelbacklight}. You write a number to that file; the backlight’s brightness changes. Right now it’s at 25 out of 852, a merciful 2 percent. If you write zero, the backlight turns off and the screen appears black. It returns to full brightness if you restart the machine. I found this out the hard way: I forced shutdown. But vim saved the two sentences I had written (now the first paragraph) and all is well.

Today I copied all the blog posts over to a single long HTML file. I did this by hand, but it wasn’t too bad: I spent more time figuring out how to set up this file than actually copying. Now it should be easier to maintain the site, but still non-trivial. At least I’m getting practice in with HTML. I still need to get better with CSS: look at the ugly asides! I’ll figure it out though.

But I conquered the brightness. That leaves one more nemesis: the bluetooth. According to the spec, this machine should have an integrated wifi/bluetooth networking chip, but I can’t talk to the bluetooth. The wifi works fine, but so far I haven’t even determined whether this computer even has bluetooth hardware. Something to learn.

Fluency is a Spook

[2022-01-08 Sat]

The blog posts are beginning to back up, and I haven’t uploaded in a while. I’ve been busy. No I haven’t. But, as happens to all blogs, real life intervened. No it didn’t. But it certainly felt as though it did. Maybe this is the situation: I’ve been spending time with my mother; I’ve been reading; I’ve been practicing; I’ve been hanging out, killing time.

I’m not even sure where this very post is going, but I feel as though I ought to say something. I began this blog not knowing where it was going. I said at the time something like “when I have an interesting thought, I’ll write it here so that I many people can see it.” During pandemic, I got into the habit of sending long text messagesto my friends. <aside>There’s stream of consciousness, and then there’s thrashing.</aside>Some of them seemed to like what I sent, and that encouraged me to send more, of which they got sick.

BREAKING NEWS: I just entered a video chat of a group of toki pona speakers who’re playing a role-playing game together. We all look the same. As in all conlang get-togethers, as in all language classes, there is a range of comfort and ability. I dislike the word fluent, especially in the conlang context: who actually speaks these languages? As has been said, it is essentially impossible to do descriptive linguistics on Esperanto (and by extension, other conlangs) since there aren’t any speakers who are self-evidently competent. Esperanto is interesting because it has speakers who learned the language naturally from birth, but these speakers don’t live in a fully Esperanto context; they don’t go to work, to school, or to the shop in Esperanto. They invariably live in a place whose language or languages are not Esperanto. Indeed, there aren’t any monolingual Esperanto speakers.

In the toki pona community, members self-assign language proficiency grades: beginner, intermediate, advanced, fluent. Most users are beginners, a good number are intermediate, a few are advanced, and a tiny quantity are fluent. In practice, the real divide is this: can you read and write a full conversation in the language? And more importantly, can you participate in audio chats in the language?

At this game-session, one of the speakers is massively proficient, two of the speakers speak adequately, and one of them essentially cannot speak at all. It is this poor last soul’s turn I’m waiting for as I write this very post. Poor, unfortunate soul: I don’t know what they thought they were signing up for, but it’s difficult to play a role-playing game in a language you don’t understand. The poor Russian GM is getting impatient—I feel sorry for this person, but they’re holding up the game and we really don’t have a very long session. I feel bad, though: it’s a little like failing a language exam. At least the game play that we did have was good. I think that this, of course, has kinks, but it’s just getting started. One of the members of the party wasn’t here for god’s sake. If I knew steno, I could live caption the speaking of the GM—then we could all play. Or maybe this person could practice their spoken toki pona.

So maybe “fluency” isn’t a meaningful metric for conlangs, but there is such a thing as proficiency. Did I tell you about the time I went to the meeting of the Esperanto society in Bologna? Essentially nobody there actually spoke Esperanto, ironically enough. A few did, and well at that.

Metaverses

[2021-12-29 Wed]

FLAME ON

I’ve been spending lots more time in the toki pona universe. I’ve been reading toki pona, speaking toki pona, and living as a member of the toki pona community. It’s a village, a place of its own. It is a network ghost island floating through the ether of the linluwi (toki pona for internet, network, web: linluwi laso (blue/green network) is one name for ecosystem). Hyperstition eat your heart out; this is the teaching of CCRU coming true. Who knows what radical forms this will take?

FLAME OFF

Lately I’ve met a fair number of cool people on the internet. How nerdy is that? But I’m interacting with interesting people my age as we participate in a hobby. We all have at least one interest in common: toki pona itself. We often have several other passions we share: music (of different kinds), computers (in different ways), and languages (all different styles); many of us are queer. Of course, the community is far from homogenous: there are elements of all kinds, characters of all sorts. Not all of the speakers of toki pona interact with one another at all: there are generations of speakers separated across different communication media. Of course, they all communicate over the internet, but the way we can use computers to talk to one another are many.

Early toki pona speakers used forums and made web pages. Many of its early pages were hosted on geocities, which went away. The early forums were also hosted by yahoo, but they went over to <aside>This literally reads like something out of the CCRU’s writings. Note to self: revisit the CCRU.</aside> a self-hosted forum. In the meantime, many active forum users still use facebook, and the web page tradition still lives strong. Also, there is a wikipedia clone, since the toki pona wikipedia was removed. And many others blah blah blah get to the point Preston.

Discord sucks you in like the fae. Someone said that to me on a voice call last night; we were in there chatting for four hours. It’s like spending time together again. It’s like going to a party again. The beauty of it is its completeness; this is also its terror. It sucks you in and eats you up; it’s an at-all-times and at-all-places party that never turns off; it goes and goes and goes and you can never leave because the party is always beginning. Some of these servers are pretty busy. They are like spaces, or ethnicities. Some are based around games<aside>, but the best are based around hobbies. And the best are large. Active. So active that they support satellite servers that orbit like kitchens hover at the periphery of a party where you can go when the main server is overwhelming.

I use two toki pona servers, mainly, though I’m in about half a dozen. There’s a big one that’s the main landing pad. It’s actualy an English-speaking server, but some of the people there are really fabulous toki pona speakers. The very creator of the language is an active participant with whom I interact often. She seems to think that I speak the language decently—she sent me a friend request and a personal message thanking me for the help in the teaching section of the server. Not that this really matters: the point is that this server is quasi-official.

The second server is smaller, and it’s toki pona only. As far as I know, all of its members are also members of the big toki pona server; I think that its administrator is also an administrator of the big server. But this server is far quieter. It really isn’t a server at all, just a nice group chat. It’s a place where we can explicitly complain about our feelings in the main server, just like the kids who want to have a conversation are bothered by the kids who want to dance. But we enter through the front door, right into the thick of it.

My Mind is Mush

[2022-12-26 Mon]

I think that I am beginning to forget how to speak English. This is terrifying, because it means that I am no longer proficient in any language. Context: I am back in the US for the winter holidays, <aside>it seems astronomically unlikely that I will succesfully acquire a visa to enter Italy: I went to the consulate today; they asked me, “did you look at the website?”; I said, “yes, but I didn’t fully understand it. I came to ask you some questions about the forms that I require”; they shrugged. I cannot even confirm whether or not I have the right collection of documents to apply: I can only make a guess based on the information on the website and send the stack in. If it is wrong, I have to start over. I think that I have some sort of special needs or disability that make me unable to understand the requirements. Even if I do succeed in my quest for a visa, it will take three to five weeks to hear about it once I submit the application. I do not know whether there is any point at all. And I still haven’t been to Rome.</aside> and I am struggling to communicate.

How can I say this in a way that makes it obvious that the fault is entirely mine? I do not know. One of the main beauties and powers of English is its vocabulary. Because its morphology is small, words can be imported freely and have been throughout its history. Synonyms abound: why do we have both the word “incredible” and “unbelievable” in the language? What’s the difference between “continuous” and “uninterupted”? Why are there so many adjectives and adverbs? The people around here don’t speak that way. They follow the most likely collocations through the language and awkwardly piece them together into a coherent sentence. I do the same—maybe we all only follow a probability model—because if I don’t, I have to think very hard to pick out the right way to express the idea; if I pause, I am interrupted; interrupted, silenced. Perhaps I don’t have anything to say to anyone besides you, dear reader (what reader?). Maybe I’m being excessively…dramatic? fragile? sensitive? weak? uncertain? hesitant? Perhaps I demurr more than I ought to.

What is the good language? In the Anglo-sphere, schools do not teach grammar because, “all that matters is whether you are understood”. I am not advocating for a prescriptive reversal. The dialects which are “prescribed” are no more correct or real than any other; their prescribedness is caused by the political position of their speakers. So what is speaking well, then? It is using the features of the language to their full potential; to do that, we must understand them. But then again, writing is different from speaking.

lon ma pi toki pona

[2021-12-21 Tue]

The last few days I’ve been getting back into toki pona. Toki pona is a constructed language, like Esperanto, but its goal and its philosophy are very different. Conlang people love taxonomies, and each have their own, but to avoid jargon I’ll describe it this way: Esperanto’s goal is to be a means of international communication, and its ethos and ambiance (in Esperanto the word etoso sort of captures the idea of the intangible feeling in the air that defines a place) are oriented towards this purpose; toki pona (lower case, as is the style of the language) is a philsophical or art language. Its goal isn’t directly to serve as a neutral means of international communication, but to enable people to “speak well” (one of many possible translations of the language’s name). It’s most spoken of for its hyper-minimalism: depending on who’s counting, the language only has between 120 and 150 words. Incredibly, this restricted vocabulary increases rather than decreases its ability to express meaning, since each word takes on different meanings based on context.

I first learned toki pona in 2015 or thereabouts: I spoke toki pona well before I spoke Esperanto at all. During the next year or so I used the language fairly seriously by myself. At that time I wasn’t really in touch with the (small) community of speakers, but I used the language extensively by myself to write and think well (another possible interpretation of “toki”). When I went to university, I lost interest, or at least, didn’t use the language any more.

In the last several days I started playing around with it again. While I was away, the language blew up exponentially: the number of speakers is now in the hundreds, and many people are enthusiastically learning the language; last time I spoke it only a few score knew the language. This is unambiguously a good thing for the community, but it puts me in this odd position: to the kulupu (community, group, gathering) I am a jan sin (new person, particularly in the context “new to the language”), but I learned toki pona for the first time before most of the current high-level speakers did. Their toki pona is certainly better than mine, though, because they’ve exercized more.

The only way I can interact with other toki pona speakers is via the internet, so I am in several Discord servers dedicated to the language (Discord is an instant messaging platform). But the dynamics in these groups are a little odd. It is very easy to become sucking in to and over invested in the words of strangers. I don’t know how to begin to examine the phenomenon except to note that it is very easy to stay up all night chatting away without any desire to sleep. On the other hand, the “administrators” of the server can be very harsh and enforce their rules strictly: topics must be kept in their proper areas, certain things must not be spoken about, and so on. Of course, it is difficult to become aware of all of the rules, and it is very easy for those in power to shame and even eject you from the group. So I have retreated from the large toki pona server to a smaller one with many of the same people but in which the only rule is that you must speak only toki pona. I’m much more comfortable in the small space than the main landing zone for all newcomers.

Some interesting websites or: how I act when I’m insecure, which is all the time

[2021-12-13 Mon]

The main purpose of this website is seemingly to display my own ntelligence—certainly that seems to be a common enough reason to make a blog like this one. But I don’t know whether I’m as intelligent as all that: I think that I just have an occasional stream-of-consciousness essay-ette to write that maybe I’d like to share with a few readers. Maybe at some point somebody will read these pieces in retrospect: Mark Fisher’s blog was published as a book, after all. [In a development that would make the master proud, the blog seems to have undergone shoggothic mitosis: here’s another archive of the same content.] Certainly other people develop sprawling hypertext webrealms: check out Ralph Dumain’s Autodidact Project and Justin B Rye’s Home Page. They seem content to make their own sites for their own purposes. If someone reads them, so much the better.

I suppose that I’m insecure about my own intelligence: who wouldn’t be? In my experience, if one thinks that they are actually “smart” (I’m speaking of myself here), then they probably aren’t: there’s always so much to learn that one doesn’t yet know, so thinking that one already knows it all only keeps one from learning something new; in the long term, certainly a detriment. But what this insecurity causes (speaking of myself and others here) is the tendency to try to seem smart by using big, fancy words. There’s jargon, and then there’s shibboleths. Claude Piron pointed out that we often do this to make ourselves feel superior to others who don’t know the words. I know that I not infrequently (and often incorrectly) use fancy technical terms not because I must, but because I can: it makes me feel smarter to use “smart sounding” words, or at least, it makes me feel less dumb. But sometimes this jargon covers up that we have nothing to say, or it does our saying for us. (Hypertext is a dizzying power: I can punch holes through the text and connect it to other points in other texts—what a drug!) Often we (I) lean on heavy-hitting words to reassure myself that I do have something to say; this is especially true when I (and others) talk about language. Yes, of course it is useful (sometimes) to use a technical term, but often the technical terms are themselves the subject of debate (are the english compound verbs (jargon!) formed “be -ing” as in “I am cooking” “they were eating” called “progressive” or “continuous”? This is a problem I run into while I’m teaching English: many English reference grammars (A Comprehensive Grammar of the English Language by Quirk et al., the Longman Grammar of Spoken and Written English by Biber et al., and The Cambridge Grammar of the English Language by Huddleston, Pullum, et al.) call this aspect “progressive”, but the English Language textbooks that we use (The series of English File, Navigate, and Family and Friends books from Oxford Press and the Prepare series from Cambridge press) refer to this phenomenon as “continuous”—I am certain that there is an explaination for this difference, or a distinction between the two that I don’t understand. Does anybody have any insight?) and deciding which one to use is often a matter of local usage rather than correctness. Indeed, chosing what term to use can be a matter of pedantry or performance: I say “progressive” not only because I think it’s better, but because I read it in fancy reference grammars rather than ordinary textbooks (which in the end is why I think its better); I’m driven to talk like that to show of that I do, in fact, read books.

To that end, I’ll end with this excerpt from a book by my father’s favorite philosopher, Alfred North Whitehead. In his 1911 text An Introduction to Mathematics, the English mathematician prefaces his discussion of imaginary numbers with this note on terminology (on p. 87–88):

A certain type of minor intellect is always worrying itself and others by discussion as to the applicability of technical terms. Are the incommensurable numbers properly called numbers? Are the positive and negative numbers really numbers? Are the imaginary numbers really imaginary, and are they numbers?—are types of such futile questions. Now, it cannot be too clearly understood that, in science, technical terms are names arbitrarily assigned, like Christian names to children. There can be no question of the names being rights or wrong. They may be judicious or injudicious; for they can sometimes be so aranged as to be easy to remember, or as to suggest relevant and important ideas. But the essential principle involved was quite clearly enunciated in Wonderland to Alice by Humpty Dumpty, when he told her, à propos of is use of words, “I pay them extra and make them mean what I like.

So there—at least in this account, the term is just the name, nothing more, nothing less, and knowing the name is a convenience to refer to specific phenomena. Using the names with people who don’t know them only serves to show them that you have no consideration for whether they understand you or not—in the end, it only shows them clearly how insecure you are.

I’m new around here

[2021-12-03 Fri]

Surely by now I’ve lost all (three) of my readers due to my inactivity. But what can I say?—I’ve been busy. In the last few weeks I’ve gotten to know Bologna much better. At first, I could only navigate by checking a map or by tracing the paths that I knew worked. If I, say, had to get from my apartment to the Piazza Santo Stefano, I would follow Via Castiglione all the way in to Le Due Torri, then turn and walk from Le Torri to the Piazza. To those who know Bologna, this is a hopeless roundabout path that requires doubling back on oneself, but it was the only way I knew how to get from point A to point B; or rather, I knew how to get from A to B and from B to C, so to get from A to C, I would have to go via B, no matter how out of the way it was. The other day I learned a far more direct way to get from my apartment to Santo Stefano, a path so obvious that I can’t believe how far out of my way I would go. But my sense of where Santo Stefano is was so intimately linked to the path I took to get there, so I didn’t even notice that I was doubling back as I walked.

Learning a language is like learning a city. At first, you know the basic streets: I take Via Castiglione to Le Due Torre, then turn right and walk down Via Santo Stefano to the Piazza. This works, yes? I could get where I wanted to go reliably, though not exactly quickly. It worked, because I could piece together the paths I knew to get where I wanted to go. Similarly, when we learn a language, we start with fixed phrases: “my name is…” “how are you?” “I am fine” “how old are you?” “I am…years old” and so on. We piece these phrases together to get, roughly, where we’re going in the language, even if it’s not efficient or graceful.

But by chance, I went to a friend and colleage’s apartment right on Santo Stefano and discovered, to my astonishment, that I don’t have to go via Le Due Torri at all. So now I know Bologna a little better. Similarly, as our proficiency in a language increases, we become more and more able, not only to express what we want to say, that is, to get from point A to point B, but to express it concisely and gracefully: we learn the city well enough not only to get where we want to go, but to get there via the most direct, or safe, or beautiful, or romantic, or lively path (for getting somewhere quickly is only one reason to walk through a city).

Of course, this learning process never ends: even people who have lived in a certain city their whole lives still learn and discover new ways to cross and traverse the space. As they explore and re-explore their city, they (if they’re inquistive) trace new paths, new parcours across the city. Similarly, we have never truly learned a language: we are always learning it. I may feel comfortable in this city I inhabit and may be able to navigate it effectively, but I cannot claim to know it except in the most restricted sense. I can move through it and operate as a guide to its highways and byways (stale idiom) though I’m in no way an expert. But I’m learning.

Looking for VFD

[2021-11-17 Wed]

It is known, I think, that my favorite series of childrens’ books is A Series of Unfortunate Events by Limony Snicket. The series, for those who haven’t read it, tells the story of the Baudelaire children, three youths orphaned and adrift in a cruel world. In each installment (of the 13), the children find themselves in the care of a new guardian who promises to raise and care for them; invariably, disaster strikes in the person of Count Olaf, who will stop at nothing to acquire the fortune which the children will inherit when the oldest of them comes of age. In the meantime, the well-meaning adults in their lives are powerless to stop and, more often than not unaware of, the Count’s machinations. The children barely escape the Count’s clutches by their ingeniuity, resourcefulness, and a heavy dose of plot armor.

As the childrens’ misfortunes develop, they begin to discover that underlying their present quagmire is a secretive and elusive society known as VFD, of which their deceased parents, many of their guardians, and Count Olaf are or were members. As the intrigue unfolds, the children delve deeper and deeper into VFD’s elusive and ambiguous legacy: at the same time, its members are the source of great succor and great distress. They learn that the organization was divided by a schism (“schism” is the precise term used over and over in the book) on one side of which were their parents and allies, and on the other side of which fell Count Olaf and his nefarious associates.

As the children bounce around the world of the books, they discover traces and hints of VFD’s former presence, but always too late: destroyed records, burnt ruins, and missed connections are all that link them to the mysterious society that might offer safety or danger to them. VFD is a constant presence in the series but is always no longer actual. It exists as an always-already: it is never directly present to them, but its traces are never absent. Where ever the Baudelaire children are, VFD has always just departed. Often, the ashes are still smoldering when they arrive.

When I was growing up, I wanted very badly to be a member of VFD. Indeed, it was a reference to VFD initiates’ training in the prequel series All the Wrong Questions that originally motivated me to learn Esperanto. VFD, in short, were the guerrilla librarians and teachers who fought the fires of ignorance: VFD stands for, among an endless series of puns, “volunteer fire department”. VFD’s volunteers came when called to put out the literal and metaphorical fires that ravage the homes and hearts of the ignorant. It is never that VFD’s members are perfect (the schism that split the society came from within), but they are volunteers, amateurs in the truest sense, who continually act to preserve knowledge. The central motif of the series is fire: VFD is the association that saves books from being burnt.

VFD’s members move in a dense semiotic web: they communicate through accidental signs such as a coffee stain on a map, olives in a refrigerator, or subtle double entrendres. Everywhere they go, they learn to discern the traces of the volunteers who were there before them and to leave traces for the volunteers who will come after. It is this web in which the children are subtly ensnared and whose patterns they learn to discern throughout the course of the series. The friends they make along their journey, who are all searching for their own place in the confused tangle of life, become the new generation of VFD organically, naturally: they volunteer for and with one another as their paths cross and recross.


Why a sudden book review? Because, as I said, I want to be a member of VFD: those who are here where they are as volunteers, as amateurs, as those who are searching for the meaning of the path their history has set them on. I suppose that VFD is forming around me: as my friends grow up and as I grow up with them, we become and are a transnational web of the interested, the curious, and the helpful. I am, as time passes, enmeshed in a web of friends, teachers, and volunteers of all sorts. I guess that the real VFD is the friends we made along the way. To those of you who are reading and who made it this far, thanks for being a volunteer.

Sometimes you feel like a nut…

[2021-11-15 Mon]

This is a follow up post the the other day’s post. They are, however, being posted at the same time: they were written on different days, but I seldom upload the pieces on the same day that I write them.

So here I am, (barbeque sauce on my titties) teaching English in Bolonga to Italians of all ages, infant to retiree. It turns out that my English is not very good, insofar as I do not speak the same (artificial) dialect as the textbooks. Of course, most of what they do at this private language school is teach to the test, which, as far as I can tell, is all that anybody ever does. The test, of course, is handed down by the dons at Cambridge who are, as we all know, the final and absolute arbiters of the English language.

My English, of course, is not Cambridge standard—indeed, I doubt very much that the very Cambridge dons speak their own standard dialect: they certainly don’t speak it with the preposterous parody of received pronounciation presented by the recorded listening exercises. I speak a vernacular dialect of English developed in the North American colonies over the last four hundred years; the only reason that my idiolect approaches the standard at all is that I have been exposed to so many different dialects of English: over time, they average out into a roughly standard variety of North Atlantic common English. But my usage and style are certainly not those of the textbook: I don’t know that anybody’s usage is like that.

Of course, there is accidence and essence. But this isn’t a post about language: it’s a post to follow up on my being (a gerund takes a possessive pronoun because it acts as a substantive in the sentence) officially stupid. Of course, that was flamage. However, it wasn’t completely untrue: I didn’t get the grades that I would have liked to get at university, and it didn’t seem to have anything to do with how hard I worked or how much I studied. Rather, my problem was that I fundamentally misunderstood the entire program I was in (I’m boutta start flaming again (boutta = about to, an auxiliary verb for a very proximate future)).

But I’m not sure what to do now: I guess that I could still apply for this program; I don’t know (my mother hates that tick; I think that it comes from texting too much: I tend to say “idk” a lot). But if I did, what would I do then? It would improve my French and my Italian, and it would be very interesting, but I don’t honestly believe that I have anything to contribute to the sum of academic knowledge. Here I am, essentially a creative writer of essays (I want to be Charles Lamb when I grow up, but I’ll probably end up as Christopher Smart. There’s worse things, though: Christopher Smart’s poetry was set to music by Benjamin Britten, which puts him in the illustrious company of William Blake and Wilfred Owen), poetry, and short fiction. I don’t have the stomach or the inclination to be a real scholar, as evidenced by my ecclectic and idiosyncratic interests and hobbies. Being a scholar is about pleasing publishers and editors and focusing on a single subject of which you acquire a profound mastery. Does that sound like me?


This blog has become remarkably personal, hasn’t it? And isn’t my style all over the place? I’m not sure where I’m going with all this, and I’m not sure what you think of it as you read. I’ll admit that the main inspirations for the style and method of these posts are my personal diary (which is stuff that’s so absurd I won’t let anybody read it until after I’m dead and buried) and the long, rambling text messages I send to my friends, who must surely scroll past them, rolling their eyes. But I’m having fun, and isn’t that what it’s all about? For it was testified somewhere (Heb. 2:6), “you should not waste the internet’s time by writing random bullshit on your personal website. Only make a blog if you have something to say.” I say, “nuts to that.” It’s not as though many people are reading this anyway, and those of you who are clearly don’t value your time or bandwidth very highly.

Don’t apply if you can’t get in; can’t get in if you don’t apply.

[2021-11-11 Thu]

FLAME ON

Officially, I am stupid. I didn’t get great grades at University, nor during any of my other schooling. I graduated from University with a final average grade of 15.2 out of 20. This is, in the UK system, a solid Second Class, First Division degree. It is likely that, because of this degree, I will not be able to pursue a Master’s degree; this mark is, also, evidence that I should not pursue such a degree: I am, surely, not capable of performing according to the requirements of higher education.

I bring this up because I was looking at a Master’s program in cultures littéraires européennes (European literary cultures) taught collaboratively between several European universities. I could apply, but my application would be thrown away because of the grades I got in my bachelor’s. The program expects a score of 100 out of 110 on the Italian system, which is nearly perfect. The admissions site says, “if the application does not satisfy these requirements, it will not be taken into consideration.” Essentially, if you didn’t get a top-tier final grade from your undergraduate, don’t waste the Selection Board’s time by applying: they won’t read your application.

So I don’t think I’m stupid: do you? But I’m not a scholar; I never have been, simply becuase my brain is too weak to focus on a subject. I am pasisonate about one thing, then another, then another. I can see what the speculative fiction of the 1920s and the cyberpunk of the 1980s have to do with technological developments and our everyday lives; I understand their relationship with the music I listen to, the clothes I wear, the photos I take; I know that this blog is part of it all. Could I explain it to anyone else? No, not yet, though I’m trying. But none of that matters, because I couldn’t figure out what the professors’ expectations were during my undergraduate: I’ll never have the formal opportunity to learn or study what I want to, becuase, officially, I am stupid.

FLAME OFF

In other news, I got a job: I teach English at a small language school in Bologna. The classes are small, the staff is supportive, and the students are eager. And most importantly, I get to live in Italy. Comme disent les français, “il y a de pire”, et l’alimentation, c’est “pas mal de tout”. French is a beautiful language, isn’t it? Now, I get to learn Italian, which is its own beautiful tongue. And unlike French and English, the orthography is very “shallow”, which is a delightful technical term meaning that the spelling is a reasonably simple representation of how the word is pronounced, and the pronounciation is a reasonably good guide to the spelling. French and English, on the other hand, have “deep” orthographies, which is a polite way of saying “fucking nightmarish”.

Hello, is it me you’re looking for?

[2021-11-07 Sun]

They say, “I went on a trip to find myself.”

When I set out, I thought that I knew myself. I do know myself. But traveling has stripped away what is accidental. In the last five weeks, I have been to ten cities I have never been to before. I don’t stay in any of them for long. I have had the first thirty minutes of a friendship with more people than I can remember; I only know a few of their names. So I am constantly exploring a new place, a new room, a new culture. Every place has its own character, its own quality: this one goes to bed early, that one gets up late, the third never sleeps at all. This one is quiet, that one loud, in another there is always music playing. And I’m new here, in all of them. By the time you read this, I probably won’t be in the same city I was in when I wrote it. (There is a girl running; dogs chase after her.)

Humans are, like cats, territorial animals: we possess our space, and through the space, ourselves. Who we are, if we are anyone, is the story of the space we are in. It is the story of our lives in that space, of our parcourses and trajectories through and across that space, of how that space becomes part of our identity and imagination; we are who we are in relation with the space we occupy.

Before this trip, I was in an apartment: that was my space. And I poured myself into that apartment: it became saturated with me, with my neuroses, fear, and pathologies, and with the waste junk released by a human when they are left alone. Most days, I didn’t speak to anyone besides my cat. I was an animal in an enclosure, resenting its capitivity, and terrified by the lights and noises that menace it from outside; when the door is opened, it cowers in the corner, unable to claim the freedom for which it longed; and so I paced back and forth, grinding myself into the space I was stuck in.

Then I shot out into the open. That apartment is gone, a dim memory. Good. There are new places to explore, to discover, to become a member of. (The children are kicking their football against the brick facade of the basilica, and the girl with the dogs is walking home.) I met a man who went by the name “sendomulo”, which means “person without a home”: he has been traveling for years and years. Who is he? He is who he is, wherever he is. What is space to him? The earth is his territory; perhaps someday it will be mine, too.

In other words, I finally broke down and bought a digital camera: I’m having a terrific time exploring Bologna, led by the lens. I missed the careful, methodological process of photographing a city: I am rediscovering the joy of crossing and recrossing the same space and encountering and re-encountering it from every angle. Expect many more photographs on this site in the near future.

Stuff to carry

[2021-10-25 Mon]

Sorry for the long hiatus in posts. As far as I know, Cíara is the only person still reading this blog, so it’s not as though I have a large audience to disappoint.

I am an overpacker. I always bring too much stuff with me when I travel, just in case I need an extra sweater, or another shirt, or a rain jacket, or socks or underwear: who knows when I’ll next get to do laundry? Who knows what situation I may need to dress for? I need this sweater and that sweatshirt, just in case I need to present myself in different degrees of formality; I need these cotton and those woolen socks, just in case the weather turns; I need two jackets, one for rain and one for shine. And I haven’t even started on the chargers (UK and EU), and writing utensils (pen, pencils, pencil sharpener, eraser), and musical instruments (well, just the practice chanter), and notebooks (this one’s a journal, that one’s for ideas), and miscellaneos junk (who knows when I might need lacrosse balls to roll out my back, and it seems prudent to carry a couple extra masks, and what about all these printed COVID tests and plane tickets and passenger locator forms?) that I carry along.

When I get to the ho(s)tel or home or place I’m staying, I open my bag and all of this stuff explodes out from its confinement. Instantly, every available surface is covered: sweaters, shirts, and pants hang over chairs or the foot of the bed and cover the floor; on the night stand crowd coins, slips of paper (receipts, tickets, bills of money), my watch, mobile, glasses cleaning spray and wipes, masks (used and new), and a million tiny things that surge out of my pockets at the end of the day. In the hostel, I immediately declare my presence simply by spreading my stuff everywhere: where I am, there too spreads a cloud of co-travelling bits of this and that.

But it’s about territory: I am a stranger in a strange new land, passing through a beautiful, voluntary exile. I am priviledged precisely to have these things with me: most people dislocated in space don’t have the luxury of carrying their posessions with them. I carry not just myself, but material and personal reminders of who I am and where I came from. As I carry things with me from here to there, this sweater or lighter or pencil is not just a lighter or sweater or pencil, but the pencil/sweater/lighter that I brought with me; when I put it down on public display in whatever room I find myself in, I declare: “here I am, and not just me, but a whole entourage of things.” By coating the room with my meaningless stuff, the place becomes for me a temporary home.

In the Rhineland

[2021-10-12 Tue]

I have to learn German. And Italian, and Spanish. Trust me, there is nothing more frustrating than being in a country and not speaking the language. If everyone spoke Esperanto, it wouldn’t be so terrible, but English is so damn difficult that, very often, it is almost impossible to communicate.

So I’m in Germany, right? Cologne. It’s a nice enough city, but it doesn’t have (or I couldn’t find) a real “old quarter”. Maybe that’s because it was all bombed to hell in the war. THere’s an enormous cathedral that took 600 years to finish: they started in the 13th century and didn’t get it done until near the end of the 19th century. Sixty or so years after it was completed, the allies blew the thing up. Most of it survived, but the restoration work continues to this day.

Besides the old cathedral, though, most of the center-city dates from after the war. I can only hope that a person from Cologne will read this and show me how wrong I am. Still, the city has a remarkable number of high-quality museums, covering the city’s entire history back to the Romans (Cologne comes from “colonia”, colony in Latin) and an enormous collection of art. THere is even a large Picasso collection. I, of course, went into the EL-DE house, which is a former Gestapo headquarters since converted into a museum of National Socialism. Particularly striking were the cells in the basement in which the secret police held prisoners while they were interrogated; the inmates left etchings and engravings on the wall testifying to the horrors of their imprisonment. This museum did little to glorify the history of National Socialism in Germany. In the US, we tend to both hate the Nazi’s killing of their enemies and admire their aesthetic vision for Germany. Watch the show Man in the High Castle to see what I mean, or look at stills. This museum, however, showed the history in a very different light: dirty, grungy, sadistic, and evil. There was none of the sleekness or aesthetic with which the US associates the NSDAP: this was a story of violence, torture, and how people lived through it all.


Here’s why I want to learn German: I made a very good friend at the hostel in Amsterdam who is French. Really, the only way that I was able to befriend him as well as I did, being as American as I am, was by speaking French. So I passed the last few days speaking pretty much only French, and made a good friend from the experience. I also met Germans in the hostel who seemed equally interesting and nice but with whom I was unable to speak because I don’t know German. In some sense, it is necessary to make friends in the friend’s native idiom: only thus can they express themselves fully. Thus, in order to really befriend the Germans I meet here, I must be able to communicate with them, at least some, in their language.

I, from this experience, have gained a new appreciation for my friends at university whose mother language is not English: they accomodated themselves to me, and understood me in my native idiom, but I wasn’t able to encounter them in their home language. It’s like this: speaking to someone in a language that isn’t theirs is like meeting them at school or in the course of life; speaking to them in their language is like going to visit them at their home, or better, at their parents’ house. It’s not that anybody’s English wasn’t excellent, but that speaking a foreign language is very different from speaking one’s mother language.

There are many people whom I encountered on this trip, and I will encounter more I’m sure, with whom I would have liked to strike up a conversation but with whom i did not share a language. Trust me, it’s a frustrating and painful feeling. Alright, one can identify that one is friendly or kind without language, but one cannot really speak without language (hmm….). Of course, Italian is just as useful in Italy; maybe my interest in German is caused by my being in Germany. Yet, in the eternal words of the girl from the tortilla commercial, “porque no los dos?” And what about Spanish? And I haven’t even mentioned non-European languages yet: in the hostel here I’m staying with someone whose first language is Hindi, and how many tines would Mandarin have come in handy? We’ll see: I met someone the other day who said “so you only speak three languages?”—around here, three is a bare minimum for someone who graduated high school. Five is desirable, and more is always better.

The city of canals

[2021-10-10 Sun]

So, I’m still in Amsterdam. It’s a really fun city, and my trip is fully underway. Yesterday, I went to lunch and spent the afternoon with some US-people (America is a continent, so “Americans” means “people from the continents of America”—what do you call people from the US?): we got omelets in De Pijp, a hip neighborhood in Amsterdam near the museum district. It was nice to get out of De Wallen, where the hostel is: it’s an intensely-touristed part of the city, but nice enough. We sat in a Sarphatipark, which is beautiful; all the Dutch cities I’ve visited so far are well greened: trees line the canals, and green spaces abound. The US nationals I was with (Frank Lloyd Wright (a famous US architect of the first part of the 20th century) designed a series of houses he called “Usonian”, because “American” didn’t mean the right thing), being from the US, immediately made friends with the US citizens (the Esperanto word is “Usono” for the country, “Usonano” for a person from the US) sitting next to us (parentheses are a power that is easily abused).

One of those whom I was spending time with had lived in Amsterdam for several months; he suggested that we rent a small boat and ride around the canals. In the meantime, we picked up a French friend from the hostel. The boat rental was a good idea, but it was fortunate that he was an experineced driver: even though the boat was slow, the canals are narrow, busy, and winding; it would be all too easy to bump into a bridge or wall. Still, as the late afternoon sun painted the 17th century town houses clustered against the canal a soft gold, we admired the beauty of this city in which we found ourselves. Because it was a boat trip, and this is what happens, the sun set and we were suddenly freezing (the days are relatively warm, sweater or jacket but not winter coat weather; the nights, though, get quite chilly). What’s more, the dizzying one way system bamboozled our fearless captain, and we ended up one canal over from the place where we were to return the boat (Amsterdam is built on concentric rings of canals, which open into the habor but which are cut off from one another in their middles). We called the place to let them know what had happened, and they, in their straightforward Dutch way, said “that sounds like a you problem”. So we were about half an hour late. The little electric canal boat did its best, but it was limited to 5 or 6 km/h: no wakes in Amsterdam’s canals, and these tourist models are speed limited, presumably to prevent property damage.

So we made it back and returned to the hostel. We promptly went to the rooftop terrace and unwound: our poor host did an excellent and generous job showing us around Amsterdam, but he was properly embarassed at the way the boat ride ended. Also, one of our number was well intoxicated and made a right ass of himself with the poor boat rental people, who could not have been older than me. As our friend put it, “I need you not to be tourists for a little bit”, as we made our way back to where we were staying.

On the roof, we encountered a large group of Germans, whose English ranged from rudimentary to better-than-mine. My French friend and I were delighted to encounter another francophone (a Belgian), and spoke volumously in French. The Germans spoke German, and at the edge, the francophones and I spoke English with the Germans whose English was strongest. Several of our member spoke Spanish, as well.The USonian (maybe it’d be easier to call him a “Californian”, which he was) who made an ass of himself with the boat rental people was, predictably, making an ass of himself here, too: he kept yelling “speak English!” and mocking the Germans’ language. I could tell that the Germans were complaining about him, but wanted to make sure. I didn’t, however, didn’t want to ask in English lest the Californian hear, so I saked the Belgian in French, and he asked a German in Spanish. They were, in fact, complaining about him. Maybe this is what Wittgenstein meant by “language games”.

In Amsterdam

[2021-10-08 Fri]

Where did I leave off? First, sorry for the incredibly inconsistent upload schedule (as though there’s anybody reading this): travelling is incredibly messy, especially the way I do it. But here I am in Amsterdam.

Since the last installment, I stayed with the Esperantist in Utrecht—it went very well! We spoke at length in Esperanto, the first time I ever really spoke the language with anyone else. My host is an Esperantist of long standing, so his Esperanto was beautiful. He was very accomodating of my staggering through the language, but with the exception of a few “how do you say…” moments, we spoke in Esperanto the whole time. It felt a bit like a high-school oral test: speak about yourself, your past, your interests and activities. I even had to give and listen to phone numebrs in Esperanto, a true challenge. I realized that I don’t know my phone number, really; I just know the syllables of it in English. I had to think very, very carefully to translate it. I practiced it in Esperanto and French afterwards, just so I have it down.

So here’s the deal: I checked into a hostel in Amsterdam called “The Bulldog” because it is right in the middle of the city and reasonably priced compared to other options. Turns out, it’s a globally-renowned party destination right in the middle of De Wallen, known as the red light district. The red lights, in case you don’t know (I didn’t) are those that illuminate the sex workers in their booths: the streets and lanes are lined with glass doors, behind which stand sex workers plying their trade. To enter, you make a gesture or glance at them, and they open their door and invite you in to a bath-house style booth. The red light is a merciful wash of color: I saw one of the booths empty with a plain, white light shining, and the reality was positively clinical. In the dark, in the red light, the effect is as though Raymond Chandler and Philip K. Dick dreamed of electric sex work.

In one of the coffee shops, there was a table with a touch screen built into the top, probably to gamble or control the juke box. The surface was scratched and beaten up, and the customers sitting at the table completely ignored the screen. I remember seeing such things in technical museums when I was young, and before that in science fiction movies and television. Then, I thought that such a thing must be the height of technological sophistication and would surely be the center piece of any room. It was shocking to see it attract no more attention than a table cloth or coaster; I suppose that’s how you can tell that the technology is completely integrated into the society: it dissolves into the background, as though it were there the whole time.

Dutch lessons: “hoi” means “hi”; you’ll often hear it doubled: “hoi hoi!”. There is something charmingly Mr.-Burns-answers-the-phone about it. Of course, the Amsterdammers speak excellent English and, in practice, whole regions of the city simply are English-speaking. I think that this has at least as much to do with the French, German, Spanish, and Italian tourists as it does with the Anglophones. Of course, the Dutch also speak French and German, and I wouldn’t be surprised if the Spaniards and Italians could slide by in their native languages. More thoughts forthcoming, but suffice it to say: if English is the international language, what does that mean for the English-speaking nations and cultures? Will they dissolve and become diffused among all the other nations, no longer to have a meaning of their own? I do not know, but it sure is convenient to speak English comfortably.

Music without speakers: in the SpeelKlok Museum

[2021-10-05 Tue]

When I arrived in Utrecht, it was raining. I sought shelter in the Speelklok museum, the city’s museum of automatic, mechanical instruments. Their collection ranges from clocks that play songs on the hour, through self-playing pianos for the living rooms, to the incredble orchestrion, which plays violins and piano accompaniment. The collection is crowned by a number of enormous automatic organs from dance-halls and carnivals.

There is something very whimsical about the mechanical instruments, and it is a joy to watch them play. During the tour, included in the price of admission, the guide played several of the instruments for us. One table clock, from the 18th century, contained an organ, and the painting on its front moved: the figures in the scene were minutely actuated, so that the cows wandered across the scene and the carpenter sharpened his tools as the organ played. Another, made by a taxedermist, featured birds that moved and sang; their voices were played sweetly by pipes hidden in the clocks base. There was a rabbit, hidden in a cabbage, that would pop out as a music box played, and an acrobat on a ladder who did a handstand to musical accompaniment.

The orchestrion was a delight, and called the “eighth wonder of the world” at the Brussels world fair: three violins were harnessed to mechanical fingers, and a ring bow spun around them. When it was time for the violin to sound, it was tilted forward into the spinning bow, and the mechanism pressed the string on the neck. All the while, a piano was played, also by machine. It was a truly unbelievable spectacle. The dance-hall organs, enormous and gaudy, played drums and pipes for a party: the carnival organ had been programmed to play “Happy”, by Pharell Williams.

I do not know what this means, but I cannot help saying it: what is the difference between these programmed musical automata and an audio recording? Even before the electric loudspeaker was invented, music recorded on cylinders and disks supplanted these mechanical monstrosities. While the goal of the pianola was the imitate a human player, a recording simply reproduces the sound made by the huamn musician. Interestingly, the recording process is not one way: some of these mechanical instruments were so beloved that they were recorded on records and the records were distributed. Perhaps the advantage of a recording is this: a recording can imitate any sound, but the musical automata can only play the physical instruments that they contain.

The Speelklok museum, all in all, is a terrific place to spend an afternoon, if you’re into that kind of thing. It is absolutely essential to take the guided tour: the instruments on their own are hauntingly inert; when they are activated, however, the whimsy and fun of centuries of human ingenuity springs to life before you.

Vojaĝoj en Esperantujo (journeys in Esperantoland)

[2021-10-05 Tue]

Today, I leave my hosts in Maastricht and head to Utrecht. There, I am staying on the couch of an Esperanto speaker I found on Pasporta Servo. For those of you not in the know, Esperanto is an constructed (invented, artificial) language from the late 19th century that is meant to be a neutral international common language. In practice, English serves this role in the EU now; the advantage of Eperanto is that it is not anybody’s native language, so everyone is on equal footing, and it is significantly easier to learn than any natural language (no irregularities, but lots of idiosyncrasies). I wouldn’t say that it is easier to master than any other language, but it is very easy to reach basic proficiency. Because the grammar is simple and regular, learning the language is pretty much all about vocabulary. The genius (and the creator, Zamenhof, figured this out by trial and error) is that words are derived from one another according to their meaning. For example, “bona” means “good” and “malbona” means “bad”.

The Pasporta Servo (“Passport Service”) is a couch surfing association dating back to the 1970s, when it was published as a small directory of Esperantists who were willing to host travellers. The one rule is “ne krokodilu”, that is, you must speak in Esperanto, even if you have some other language in common. I’m looking forward to it—couch surfing has a distinct advantage over hostels: it’s free!

I plan to stay in Utrecht tonight and maybe tomorrow, then head to Amsterdam. I’d also like to go to Rotterdam at some point, but that may have to wait for another trip. I am planning to be in Lausanne, Switzerland next Friday, and I’ll stay there at least a few days. In the meantime, I’d love to see what else the Netherlands has to offer. Then, on a recommendation from Cíara, I’m planning to go to Bonn, then Strasbourg in Alsace, then on to Lausanne. From Lausanne, I’m planning to go to Italy, which I will cover very, very thoroughly. I got a full breakdown from one of Cíara’s class mates about where to go in Italy. Eventually, I’ll work my way down to Rome.

Being “abroad” is a curious experience. Where is my home? Certainly I feel as “at home” here, despite not speaking the language, as I do in the US. In fact, in many ways, Maastricht was more comfortable than Evanston. Those of you who know me might know that I am an absolutely terrible driver, and, as I tell anyone who will listen, walkability is one of my main desiderata in a place to live (I got myself into a tangle with that sentence, didn’t I?). The Netherlands, of course, is the only country in the world where the cars precede carefully lest they be run over by bicycles. Most of downtown Maastricht is closed to cars, so the roads are comfortable and safe to walk on (though the cyclists will not hesitate to run you down).

Moving in the Netherlands, and in Europe, gives me a new appreciation for the importance of an international language. We have a common measurement system, and Europe has a common currency, and, in practice, it has a common language: English. The Dutch, in particular, speak astonishingly beautiful English: at times, I am embarassed at the roughness of my speech compared to their mastery of the language. Esperanto has the advantage over English of being easier and more neutral (see, not all English adjectives behave the same), but English has a massive bulk of media produced and distributed around the world. Until Esperanto music, movies, and television become as common as English-language media, the “international language” (the formal name for Esperanto is “la lingvo internacia”) doesn’t have a chance. Even if people learn Esperanto, they’ll still have to learn English anyway.

The hope, of course, is that an international language would preserve, rather than plow over, the national languages. One of the beauties of the world outside of the US is the linguistic diversity. Even Limburg, the province of which Maastricht is the capital, has its own dialect of Dutch: all the street signs have two spellings, one for standard Dutch and one for the Limburg dialect. North America, on the other hand, is remarkably consistent linguistically, especially given its size. Esperanto, one would hope, would allow people to speak to one another and protect their ability to speak their own native tongue. Perhaps, though, it would have the same flattening effect that English does. Maybe that has more to do with the mass of US cultural exports than with the language itself. The Dutch, of course, use a number of Anglicisms: the high-school girls on the train in the seats behind me, though they are speaking Dutch, use English terms such as “cringe” and “what the fuck” in the midst of their speech. Perhaps there is a world where they use Esperantisms instead.

Down to the Low Countries

[2021-10-03 Sun]

Last night in Paris was an adventure: the hostel, it turns out, was next door to a bar that the students of Belleville frequented. The place was hopping, and the music was good.

On the morning of the first I travelled from Paris to Maastricht, via Brussels and Liège. Maastricht is an absolutely beautiful university town in the southern corner of the Netherlands straddling the river Maas. The journey out was relatively painless, but I learned that, in many circumstances, one must book a seat and pay a reservation fee, even with an Inter/Eurail pass. Luckily, the fee is a small fraction of the price of the ticket, but on the other hand, only a few discounted tickets are available on each train; if there aren’t any available, you have to pay full price, or wait. I managed to get from Paris to Brussels no problem (&#x0080;<!– euro symbol –>25 for the ticket), but I accidentally got on the wrong train from Brussels to Li&#x00e8;ge: you see, I bought a ticket for an Inter City train, but I accidentally got on an Inter Cty Express. The Deutsche Bahn people were very nice and only charged me the &#x0080;10 “supplementary” fee; they could have easily charged me a fine in addition to the booking fee. Now I know.

Maastricht is fabulous: I’m hatching a hair-brained scheme to do a master’s degree in Europe, inspired by the beauty of the city. Maastricht has about 120,000 residents, a far cry from Paris and London’s millions of inhabitants. Still, the downtown is extensive and busy. Many of the main shopping streets are pedestrian only. The town hall, on the market square, has a carillon in its tower. Throughout the day, the bells will not only ring, but play: as my hosts (thank you to Mads and Cíara for your hospitality and generosity! Someday I’ll host you at mine) and I walked around the antique market held on the square each weekend, the town hall bells played a concert for us. Mads pointed out that the bell ringer was clearly over-qualified: the playing was truly virtuosic (though I don’t know enough about carillon playing to really make a determination).

I know Mads and Cíara from undergrad in St Andrews. Cíara is in Maastricht doing a Master’s degree in digital media cultures (I forgot the exact title of the program). This week, she’s studying “future imaginaries”: how do we envision the future? One of her readings was about the use of metaphors in information technology: the internet as “highway” or “frontier”, data as a liquid that “leaks”, and so on. Fascinating stuff: Mads and I are both as excited about the program as she is. As we discussed the use of metaphors in language, I could tell that Mads was getting excited: he and I did theology together, and in Christian theology there is a long history of worrying about the appropriateness (or inppropriateness) of metaphors for God. It’s easy to get theologians excited, if you know what to say to them.

In the Netherlands, as in France, COVID vaccination checks are common: restaurants, bars, movie theaters, and museums all want to scan your QR code. Because of Brexit, our UK vaccinations are not accepted (all three of us were vaccinated in the UK). This is not because the vaccination itself is wrong: it is the very same vaccine that we would have gotten here and is a kind that is explcitly permitted. The problem is that we do not have EU QR codes, so the scanner rejects us. In France, I was able to convert my UK QR code into a French one, so that I could flash the French code and enter into venues. Fascinatingly, even though French QR codes, being from the EU, are supposed to be accepted in the Netherlands, mine isn’t. It must be some idiosycrasy of the French to accept the UK code. Mads and C&#x00ed;ara will eventually be able to get Dutch codes, but they are waiting on their citizen numbers, which will enable them to get a DigiID number, which will let them get a Dutch QR code. There was also some reason that they had to travel in person to the one office in the Netherlands that could take care of them, and in the meantime, C&#x00ed;ara’s request for a number was forgotten about until she sent a follow-up email after some weeks had passed. And Mads and C&#x00ed;ara are EU citizens! So, in short, it’s all a massive mess, and the EU are taking every opportunity they can to cause inconvenience for British people. Ironically enough, Mads and I aren’t British (C&#x00ed;ara is from Northern Ireland, so she’s technically not British either), and none of us voted to leave; in fact, the Brexit referendum was held before Mads and I moved to the UK!

Through the tunnel

[2021-09-30 Thu]

Today I’m leaving London for the continent of Europe (this has become a de facto travel blog, hasn’t it?). After extensive negotiations with the Eurostar people, I managed to get a train to Paris, where I will stay overnight. It turns out that one must book and pay for a seat on the Eurostar train under the channel to France, even with a Eurail/Interail pass. Still, the pass earns a massive discount (about 85%), so it’s very much worth it. The problem is that there are only a limited number of seats available for Eurail travelers, and that it is often necessary to book far in advance. I, of course, had no idea. I couldn’t get a discounted ticket to Brussels or Amsterdam for another two days, but I can get on a train to Paris tonight. So I’m off to Paris. It’ll be nice to be there for a bit, even if it was an accident.

Xerxes got to my cousin’s house last night and is settling in nicely. The whole transaction went off without a hitch, astonishingly enough. I miss him a lot, but I know that he will be happy at my cousin’s; she is going to take excellent care of him. Last night, he seemed happy enough, but I heard from her today that he is hiding behind the furniture and hissing. She and I agreed that this is a perfectly understandable attitude and that we would do the same if it were acceptable for us to do so. I’m sure that he’ll calm down, but I feel bad for him: moving isn’t easy for anyone.

As for me, I am now in France. The trip through the Euro Tunnel was as uneventful as could be expected: besides occasional emergency lights, the tunnel is dark. I suppose that it is this quality that makes for a truly great engineering project: digging a tunnel under the English Channel (“la manche” en Français, which translates to “the sleeve”) was an enormous and unprecedented feat; yet, now that it is dug, going through it is no more exciting than any other train journey. In fact, less exciting: there is no scenery at all. This is an example of what Graham Harman, after Heidegger, calls tool being: the infrastructure, when it works, disappears. Thanks to the Euro Tunnel, France and Great Britain simply are connected; there is the political rigamarole of crossing the border (more of a rigamarole now than before because of Brexit), but practically, travelling from London to Paris is just as easy as travelling from Edinburgh to Londom. Easier, actually: the Eurostar trains are more comfortable than the LNER, and the international terminal of St Pancras is luxurious indeed. Even so, the 50 kilometer tunnel under the channel is a miracle and an enormous challenge to build (to put it lightly). So the implementation was an enormous pain, but the interface is extremely straightforward. May all of our engineering projects be so successful.

Passport control was actually a complete breeze: I showed my passport and my French COVID app, and I was through. France now accepts NHS vaccination certificates, so I could upload my proof to the mobile application easily; now, it is as though I had been vaccinated in France. France, also, is relatively relaxed about COVID: negative tests are only required for those who are not vaccinated (unlike the Netherlands, who may or may not require a negative test result from all those coming from a “high risk” country, regardless of their vaccination status (I say “may or may not” because there is varying, conflicting information on the Dutch Government’s website)). In any case, there shouldn’t be any more checks when I arrive in Paris: we’ll just walk off the train and into the city.

I booked a bed at a hostel in Paris tonight. This will be the first time I have stayed in a hostel since the summer after my first year of university, when the touring company for the student opera in whose chorus I sang (Händel’s Xerxes, hence my cat’s name) stayed in a hostel in Berick-upon-Tweed. I’m looking forward to it: if nothing else, it will be fascinating to see who all is staying there.

When in London…

[2021-09-29 Wed]

I dropped Xerxes off at the airport today. I took the tube from my friend’s house where I am staying out to Heathrow, about a two hour journey in total. Xerxes was a very good sport about it: I think that he’s almost used to going out and about in the carrier, or at least, isn’t so afraid of it. He complained a little when I put him in the carrier at home (his little arms could reach out of the carrier through the grate and wave around, which is why I couldn’t use this very carrier to ship him); once we were on the move, though, he calmed down.

I came back from the airport on the Picadilly line and got off at Picadilly circus. I suppose that I must have known that London has a Chinese neighborhood, but I was very surprised to find that I had stumbled into it! I circled around the West End, generally heading towards the British Museum. Due to my excellent sense of direction, I ended up in Trafalgar square: I was heading in the completely wrong direction! I did snap a picture of the designated busking zones in the square. The white circles are for unamplified musicians, and the yellow one in the back is for a musician with an amplifier.

Circles for buskers to stand in.

Consulting the map, I headed towards the museum again. Soho was a delightful neighborhood. Used and antique book stores, camera repair shops and museums, and so many cafés. In the meantime, I stopped to mail Xerxes’ stuffed animals to the US; they’re going on the slow boat: it will take a month or so for them to arrive. I also heard from the shipping company that Xerxes was checked in successfully, and that all was good to go for his flight. Hang in there little kitty—your journey’s almost over. Mine, on the other hand, is just beginning. Jarndyce antique books. James Smith and Sons umbrellas.

On the move

[2021-09-28 Tue]

My cat Xerxes and I left the town I went to college in today. We’re taking a train down to the big city; tomorrow I’ll put him on an airplane back to the US, and the next day I’ll take a train to the Netherlands. I am very grateful to my cousin because she aagreed at the last minute to take care of Xerxes for some time while I travel around. It’s good to have family who’ll look out for you.

Traveling on the train with a cat is very straightforward: I loaded him in his carrier and carried him onboard like any other luggage. The carrier is the right size for him to travel in the cargo hold of an airplane: very roomy. Lots of people stop by and say hello to him; he’s very excited by all the attention. I can tell that he wants to get out of the carrier to hug people and explore his surroundings, but he seems comfortable enough in there. He hasn’t vomited or gone to the bathroom yet, which is a blessing.

About four hours into our six hour journey, Xerxes began to panic. It seems as though he’s not sick of the crate per se: he seems frustrated that the metal grate is seperating him from me. He was mewling pathetically, so I fed him. I hope that he doesn’t vomit. If I stay away from him, he calms down; standing in front of the carrier looking in at him only seems to rile him up. He began to reach out of the crate and rub himself all over it; he frantically began to try and dig his way out. Hang on little kitty—we’ll be there soon.

Unfortunately, the flight wasn’t so straight forward at all: I engaged the services of a shipping company, which was helpful, though expensive; there was a lot of paperwork to fill out and a number of bureaucratic hoops to jump through. It seems as though they’ll take good care of him, but I won’t be sure until I hear that he’s safely at my cousin’s house back in the US.

Here are some pictures of him on the train: Xerxes in his carrier Xerxes in his carrier

Downloads and bookstores

[2021-09-27 Mon]

I about half way through Anna Karenina. When I finish, I will make a post of quotes excerpted from the book. This post is a follow-up to that post, even though this post comes first chronologically.

My reading has been seriously slowed by moving. Tomorrow (Tuesday the 28th), my cat and I get on a train to the big city; I will put him on an airplane to a cousin’s house, and the next day I will get on a train to set off on my rumschpringe. Yesterday, I turned 24 years old.

The post of Anna Karenina excerpts will begin with a comment on the translation I used. The simplest explaination is that I am using the translation that they had at the local bookstore; while that is accurate in essence, it is actually a suturing over of the truth. In fact, I am reading Tolstoy’s book, as I read most books nowadays, on an electronic device. I downloaded the copy of the book from a so-called “online library”, but this is also a suture over the truth.

What do I mean by “suture”? I mean that, were I to explain how I actually got the book, it would interrupt the continuity of my writing with the writing that came before. To say “I am using this translation because it was the best electronic version available at the book sharing site I download electronic texts from”, though it would be strictly speaking accurate, has a completely different connotation than “this was the translation that my bookstore had available”. The latter sentence could appear in a text (at least, some semantically equivalent sentence could appear) from the 19th or 20th centuries. The more accurate sentence, however, is more puzzling. It could easily be a true sentence spoken in the late 20th or early 21st century, but it could also be appear in science fiction.

To say “I got the book in a bookstore” instead of “I got the book off of the internet” is to suture, which is to say, paper or plaster over the disjunction between my world and Tolstoy’s: Tolstoy could very well say something like “the bookstore had thus and such translation”, but it would be impossible for him to say “the internet had thus and such version” (though Anna Karenina’s focus on trains, which were first introduced in Russia just after Tolstoy’s birth, is also an example of this kind of change). To maintain the illusion of continuity with 20th and 19th century authors, whose work I read and whose dialect I (mostly) share, I must suture over the breaks between my world and theirs. Is this dishonesty? Disavowal? Denial?

“Give me it!”

[2021-09-25 Sat]

I was at the beach today (St Andrews had an absolutely spectacular September this year), and I heard a young boy scream to his brother as they threw around a disk toy, “give me it!”. This construction immediately struck me as odd. It is, of course, correct, insofar as I (and more importantly, his brother) understood him clearly: he wanted his brother to pass the toy to him. But the construction “give me it” nevertheless made my ears perk up. Let’s take a look.

Style directs our choice among alternative equivalent phrasings; grammar tells us which alternatives are equvalent and permissable. Let us consider the possibilites:

Table 1: Alternatives
Give me it.? Give to me it.* Give me the toy. ^*Give to me the toy.*
Give it me.* Give it to me. Give the toy me.* Give the toy to me.

In accordance with common practice, small asterisks (*) mark sentences that are obviously unacceptable. The unmarked sentences are valid, and the small question marks (?) indicate the specimen sentence. This table really ought to be in three dimensions: picture, if you will, the right two columns stacked on top of the left two columns. I can find three possible transformations, for a total of 8 forms. First, the word “me” might or might not be preceded by the preposition “to”; second, the pronoun “it” might be replaced by its (inferred) referent “the toy”; and third, the order of the arguments can be swapped: “me” might precede or follow “it”/“the toy”.

Let us begin by giving names to sentence parts. The first word in all of these sentences is “give”, which in this situation is acting as an imperative verb: the boy was telling his brother to do something. The words after the verb, the nouns “me” and “it”/“the toy”, I will call the verb’s “arguments”. These arguments can be distinguished by their semantic and syntactic roles. The first role is the agent of the verb, who is sometimes but not always the verb’s subject. In this case, the agent is the person at whom the utterance is directed; the sentence lacks an explicit grammatical subject(compare: “you give me the toy”, in which the subject and agent is “you”). The patient of the verb, the thing to which the action of the verb is done, is “it” or “the toy”. The recipient is “me” or “to me”.

It seems as though the rule is this: when the recipient does not have a preposition, it must come directly after the verb. Otherwise, the patient follows the verb. In the case of verbs with only a patient, the patient comes directly after the verb and is called the “direct object”: compare “eat it”, “kiss her”, “see them”. When there is a recipient and no patient, then the recipient comes right after the verb, but it sometimes takes a preposition: “tell me”, but “talk to me”. “Tell to me”* and “talk me”* are both forbidden.

In our sample, the pattern seems to be that the recipient takes a preposition only when it follows the patient; otherwise, netiher argument has a preposition. Thus: “give me…” and “give…to me” are equivalent. The oddness comes when the patient is replaced with a pronoun. “Give it to me” and “give me the toy” are perfectly acceptable, and “give to me it”* and “give the toy me”* are completely unacceptable. Even so, “give me it” sounds odd. It fits, however, with the pattern, and it (and its twin “give it me”*, which is awkward because the recipient lacks a preposition) has the advantage of being only three syllables, rather than four or five like the alternatives. When a young boy is calling out to his brother on the beach, he wants to use as few syllables as possible, but he still follows a stable pattern in his speech.

Bibliography:

Alan Turing (1936). On Computable Numbers, with an Application to the Entscheidungsproblem.

Ellen Ullman (1997). Close to the Machine: Technophilia and Its Discontents, City Lights Books.

Larry Wall (1999). Diligence, Patience, and Humility, O’Reilly.

Footnotes:

1

I actually don’t remember whether there were two or three patches — my mother stopped replacing them several years ago, or I stopped asking. Now the blanket’s gone and I can’t check.

2

The full quote is “Three great virtues of programming are laziness, impatience, and hubris,” from (Larry Wall, 1999) The essay, though, goes on to discuss “some other virtues: diligence, patience, and humility.” He continues, “If you think these sound like the opposite, you’re right. If you think a single community can’t embrace opposing values, then you should spend more time with Perl. After all, there’s more than one way to do it.” The last is a classic aphorism of Perl, the programming language Wall designed and implemented.

3

HP Lovecraft, “Call of Cthulhu”.

Author: Preston Miller Firestone

Email: firestone.preston@gmail.com

Created: 2024-03-19 Tue 23:59

Validate

stories.html0000644000175000017460000022264114576466455012203 0ustar pmfusers Short Fiction
UP | HOME

Short Fiction

Madeline’s lost

August 2022 through May 2023

Madeline and Sally check in to the Hotel Benjamin on Tuesday afternoon. Madeline (or “Maddy,” as her parents called her) has never stayed in such a nice hotel before, so she’s excited. She walks into the big lobby with Sally, who has a suitcase on wheels and a purse across her shoulder. Maddy’s clothes are all in Sally’s bag, but Maddy carries her backback with her blanket curled up in the bottom, and her bear’s head poking out of the top of the bag watches behind Maddy as she walks. Sally and Maddy go up to the big desk where the man waits for them. Sally talks to the man over the desk, but Maddy can hardly see: the rim of the marble counter meets her right in the forehead. The man (Sally calls him the “receptionist,” which Maddy finds difficult to say: “recepyoniss”; Sally laughs) hands Sally a key and points across the lobby to the elevators. Sally and Maddy cross a sea of carpet to reach the golden doors. Maddy makes faces at her reflection.

Sally and Maddy’s room is enormous: Maddy jumps on the bed (“get down from there!” cries Sally, but she remembers her youth and lets Maddy enjoy herself a little longer), opens the minibar (“now don’t drink any of that…”), looks in the bathroom and every cupboard (“what’d you find?”, and Maddy shows Sally the iron and ironing board, the safe in the closet, and the soaps and towels and shower caps), and falls into bed, exhausted. The sun is just beginning to set, and the windows are turning gold.

Sally says, “what do you want for dinner?” and Maddy asks for a ceasar salad. Sally talks into a telephone on the nightstand, and soon a man arrives with a cart on wheels. He rolls the whole cart into the room and parks it in front of Maddy. There’s a white table cloth and silver utensils, and the silver dome in the middle makes Maddy’s reflection look tiny and distant. The man whisks the dome out from under Maddy’s nose and swirls it behind him with a flourish of the wrist. “Your dinner, madam,” and he bows slightly. Madeline nods her head in thanks. The man straightens, winks at Maddy, nods to Sally, and flies out of the room; his jacket tails flutter behind him as he leaves. Maddy eats dinner.

“How was it?” Sally asks.

“Very good, thank you,” Maddy replies.

The sun is red and the light in the room is dimming. Sally says it’s time for bed and she and Maddy begin to unpack. Maddy opens her backpack: Mr. Poppins and Ms. Bubble seem to breathe easier once released from their confinement. Maddy and her blanket and her stuffed bear snuggle into the big bed and sink among the stacked cushions. Sally turns off the light next to Maddy’s bed and reads until Maddy’s breathing is deep and slow.

The next day, Sally and Maddy go to a museum. Maddy leaves Mr. Poppins and Ms. Bubbles in bed when she gets up and doesn’t think anything more about it. Maddy loves going to the museum: the people in the paintings are funny-shaped, like her face in the silver dome over the salad last night. She remembers going to museums with her parents, who took her through and pointed out their favorites: her mom always loved still lifes of flowers; her father, landscapes. Remembering their advice, Maddy takes our her notebook and copies down the names of her favorite paintings from the museum; Sally promises to help Maddy look the artists up when they get back to the hotel for dinner. Before going to the dining room, they stop by their room, which has been cleaned and the beds made. Mr. Poppins and Ms. Bubbles aren’t there. Maddy pulls back the bed covers to look for them. They aren’t there.

“Maybe they’ve fallen under the bed?” Sally offers, and Maddy gets down on her hands and knees to look. They aren’t there.

“Maybe in my bed?” and Sally pulls back the covers, but they aren’t there either.

“I don’t know what happened to them!” Sally says at last, after Maddy has looked under both beds, in all the cupboards, in the bathroom, in the safe, under the ironing board, and in the minibar. “They’re just gone!”

Maddy supresses panic: they can’t be gone!, she thinks, there must be some mistake. Maddy remembers when she left Mr. Poppins and Ms. Bubbles at the hotel by her grandparents’, and how her parents convinced the staff to look for them and send them back to her express with a note saying “please take care of this bear and blanket.”

“Why don’t we go down to the front desk and ask?” Sally suggests. She takes Maddy by the hand and steers her into the hallway. The door to their room is heavy and closes slowly behind them. It glides across the carpet, and Maddy’s view back into the room narrows to a tiny slit that shuts — click. The sound echos up Maddy’s spine. Something in her life has permanently changed. Her eyes are heavy and full; her chest is weirdly empty; her heartbeat echoes in her ribcage.

Maddy and Sally step out of the elevator on the main floor and walk over to the big front desk. The same man who was behind the desk the day before is there. Maddy stands back from the counter, so that he can see her as she speaks.

“Why don’t you tell the man what happened?” Sally prompts Maddy.

“I left my stuffed bear and blanket in our room, and now they’re gone.”

“I see. And what is your room number?” the man asks, and Maddy doesn’t know. She looks silently up at Sally, who says,

“Four thirty-five.”

“Very good. And could you describe the lost object in more detail?”

Sally looks down at Maddy, who blushes. “Go ahead and tell the man about Mr. Poppins and Ms. Bubbles,” Sally says to Maddy. Hearing their names spoken in the big lobby embarasses Maddy. She has never felt so young, so much like a child.

“There’s two of them. One is a bear, fuzzy, brown, and handsome; the other is a blanket, quilted, red, blue, and green, with animals on it.” Maddy falls quiet: she feels that she should not tell the man too much about her bear and blanket, even though his face remains still and calm.

“I see. When did you see them last?”

“I left them in the bed this morning, and when we came back just a few minutes ago, they were gone.”

“Ah, let me see here…” The man clacks at the computer terminal on the desk in front of him and peers at the results. “I don’t see any reports of a lost item fitting the description you gave, but I’ll let you know if anything pops up. I’m sorry for the loss; we’ll do everything we can to help.”

“Thank you very much,” Sally says (Maddy looks down at her feet in silence) and leads Maddy by the hand across the lobby to the hotel’s restaurant. “Do you want to eat down here tonight, Maddy?” Sally asks. Maddy peers into the large room, with golden ceiling and crystal chandeliers. It is still too early for the main dinner crowd, but a few tables have people Maddy’s age with their parents.

A woman in a black dress and white sneakers, about Sally’s age, approaches them and asks, “how can I help you?” Sally asks for a table for two, and the woman walks them over to a table with menus under her arm.

“Here you go, my dears,” she says, delivering them to a table with glasses and silverware all laid out on white cloth. Maddy and Sally sit, and Maddy makes faces at herself in the shiny silver spoon: she looks at herself, distant and upside down, in the concave side; she flips the spoon and sees herself, still distant, but right side up. She twirls the spoon around and imagines she’s tumbling head over heels.

After dinner, Sally tucks Maddy into bed, and Maddy reaches out to hug Mr. Poppins and Ms. Bubbles. But they aren’t there. Maddy’s arms are empty. They rest against her chest, awkwardly bony, deflated: Mr. Poppins should be there, with Ms. Bubbles around him. Maddy should bury her face in Mr. Poppins’ fuzz and rub Ms. Bubbles edges between her fingers. She should be able to smell them, but all she can smell is the clean sheets. Her chest is hollow, and her throat dry. Maddy stays awake a long time, long after Sally goes to bed and her breathing becomes smooth and regular.

The sun shines on Maddy’s face and wakes her. Sally is already up and dressed: “you seemed tired, so I decided to let you sleep in some. Want to go to the zoo today?” Today is Thursday, and Maddy and Sally are staying in the hotel until Friday. Mr. Poppins and Ms. Bubbles are still missing, and Maddy doesn’t know what to do about it. As she and Sally walk through the hotel’s lobby, Maddy looks at the counter: nobody there. She and Sally cross the lobby and leave through the big revolving door. Maddy watches her reflection in the glass: she’s almost transparent, like a ghost floating over the world beyond the window. Then they’re out of the door and on the bright street with the noises.

As she and Sally return from the Zoo, Maddy’s head feels clearer. She and Sally ate lunch at a restaurant Maddy often went to with her parents, near the zoo overlooking the wide lawn sloping down to the pond. Maddy’s mother loved to order a scoop of mint chocolate chip ice cream for dessert (“just one scoop!”), and her father always had the ceasar salad (“best in town!”). Sally bought Maddy a cone of mint chip ice cream on the way back from the hotel, and Maddy’s breath is still cool when she enters the lobby again. Seeing the receptionist back at his post, Maddy steps over to the front desk. The receptionist is the same man from before, but he doesn’t show any sign that he recognizes Maddy.

“Excuse me sir, have you located my comfort objects?” Maddy asks the man.

“Have I located your what?” The man seems confused.

“My comfort objects: the bear and blanket!” The man squints down at Maddy for a moment, then his face clears.

“Ah yes, now I remember. No, I’m sorry madam: we haven’t found anything yet. I will let you know the moment anything appears.” He speaks gently, but without any great emotion. Maddy sees nothing in the man’s face to suggest that the man is terribly upset. Maddy can tell that he intends her no harm by the openness of his expression, but by its mildness she knows that he is not deeply invested in helping her. Maddy takes the initiative:

“Is there anyone else who might know anything?”

“Well,” the man thinks for a moment, “the cleaners might have seen something. You said that you left them in the bed in the morning and they were gone in the afternoon? Normally, the cleaners come by in that time.”

“Where can I find the cleaners?” Maddy asks.

The man checks his wristwatch. “They’re cleaning the rooms as we speak. If you go through the hallways, you’ll be able to find them. They move with a cart of cleaning supplies; if you see the cart, you know the cleaners can’t be far off.” Maddy thanks the man and runs to meet Sally at the elevators.

As they step off on their floor, Maddy sees the cleaner’s cart parked by the side of the hallway outside the open door to a room. It has a big basket filled with dirty sheets from the rooms, and bottles of all shapes and descriptions. Through the open door, Maddy can hear a vacuum cleaner running. As Sally continues to their room, Maddy strays behind to talk to the cleaners. She looks in the open door and sees the same woman from the restaurant last night vacuuming. Maddy waits for her to turn the loud machine off, and Sally waits in front of the door down the hall. The woman switches off the vacuum and wheels it towards the door, when she sees Maddy.

“Hello!”, her face is bright.

“Hello,” says Maddy, “I lost something, and…”, she hesitates, unsure, “I wanted to know whether you’ve seen anything.”

“What did you lose?”

Maddy thinks about how to answer this question. This woman seems warm enough, but Maddy remembers the way the man at the desk responed: polite yet unmoved. Maddy decides to say, “my stuffed animals. I left them in bed yesterday morning, and by the afternoon they were gone.”

“What’s your room number?” The woman’s brows drift closer together, her lips purse slightly, and her eyes focus closer on Maddy’s face.

“Four thirty-five.” Maddy looks down the hallway towards Sally, who still stands in the doorway. The woman looks down the hall, then back at Maddy.

“No, I haven’t seen anything. I’ll ask the rest of the staff if anything’s turned up. I’m in the restaurant again tonight — come down and see me. My name’s Meg. If you ask for me, they’ll know who to bring you.”

“I’m Maddy.” The younger girl holds out her hand, and the older girl shakes it. “Thank you for your help.”

“Not at all. Oh! and one more thing: do the stuffed animals have names?”

“Their names are Mr. Poppins and Ms. Bubbles. Mr. Poppins in a fuzzy brown bear, and Ms. Bubbles is a red, blue, and green quilt.”

“Alright,” says Meg, looking straight into Maddy’s eyes, “I’ll see what I can do.” Even though Meg is much taller than Maddy and doesn’t stoop down, Madde feels as though she and Meg are looking at one another from the same height. Maddy nods, thanks Meg again for her help, and continues down the hallway to her and Sally’s room.

Sally is holding the door open when Maddy reaches her. “Learn anything?” she asks. Her face is still.

“No, but Meg promised to look around. She says she hasn’t seen anything, though.”

“Too bad!” Sally’s response is honest, but her mood isn’t dampened. The two of them go into the hotel room, and Sally drops on her back into her newly-made bed. “It’s so hot! I may just take a nap for a while. If you promise not to leave the hotel, you can run around for a bit and do whatever you want. I’m beat.” Sallly kicks her shoes off and stretches her arms above her head. She rolls on to her side and is instantly asleep.

As Maddy opens the room door to leave, she turns to look back into the room. For an instant she sees Mr. Poppins and Ms. Bubbles in her bed, propped up politely on her pillow. But even as the tears come to her eyes the vision fades, and Maddy can only see a blur of color where the stuffed animals usually live, like an after-image from a bright light. She holds her ragged breath and crosses the threshold into the hallway.

Looking to her right, Maddy can see Meg’s cart, now a room further along, and the elevators at the end of the hallway. Now is the time to take stock: what do I know of the situation?

Missing: One stuffed bear and one quilted blanket.

Description: The bear is fuzzy and brown, and the hair around his eyes is ragged. (Maddy remembers her mother cutting her hair. “Mr. Poppins needs a haircut, too!” Her mother trimmed the hair around his eyes. “Now hold still…”) The blanket is quilted in red, blue, and green, with patterns of animals: a lion, a walrus, a monkey. (Maddy sat with her father looking at the blanket and pointing: “What’s this one?” “That’s a zebra. They make a honk noise.” “No they don’t, daddy, that’s silly!”)

Last seen: On the window-side bed of room 435 in the Hotel Benjamin, at around 10 a.m. on Tuesday. By 2 p.m., they had disappeared.

As far as Maddy knows, only a few people have access to the room: Sally, whom she can’t suspect on principle; Meg, whom she doesn’t want to distrust; and potentially other employees of the hotel, whom Maddy hasn’t yet met. Of their own accord, Maddy’s suspicions land on the last group; at their head in her imagination is the receptionist.

Maddy knows that she must do something, and that time is running out: she and Sally leave on Friday, and today’s already Thursday. Maddy decides to speak to the receptionist again. She heads for the elevator, passing Meg and her cart along the way.

As the elevator bumps down to the first floor, Maddy looks at herself in the mirrored wall. The mirrors cover the upper half of the inside of the elevator and are about waist height to an adult. Maddy, though, can just see her face perched above the rim at the bottom of the mirror. She looks at her reflection and tries to look fierce, but she can’t conceal from herself how frightened she is. Hopefully nobody else will see the fear in her eyes.

There is no one behind the counter when Maddy reaches it. She has to stand back from the surface a little ways to peer over it, but as far as she can tell, nobody’s there. There is, however, a golden bell with flowers engraved on it; a little button on top swings a hammer to tap the side of the bell and call the receptionist. Maddy doesn’t want to draw any attention to herself, but after waiting a few minutes, she doesn’t see any way around it: she rings the bell, and its ding fills the lobby and lingers than Maddy would have thought possible before finally melting into the plush. The receptionist appears through a door behind the counter.

It’s not the same person she spoke to last time: this is a younger man, and Maddy recognizes him from the room service the first night she arrived at the hotel (how long ago that seems now!). He looks down at her kindly but without urgency. “How can I help you, madam?”

“Yes. I, uhh, I lost something in my room.”

“What did you lose?” Maddy hesitates — how should she describe Mr. Poppins and Ms. Bubbles? She decides that less is more:

“My stuffed animals.”

The man looks at her soberly.

“And when did you see them last?”

“Yesterday morning. I spoke to the other…”, here comes that big word again, and Maddy, with a tightened throat, chokes out “person at the desk, and he said he’d let me know if they’re found.”

“I see. Let me take a look for you.” The man stabs some buttons at his computer termial and examines the screen. “No, I don’t see a report here that it was turned in. It’s possible, though, that it got found today and hasn’t yet been filed in the system. If you wait here a minute, I’ll run back into the office and take a look.”

“Thank you very much,” says Maddy in her most dignified voice. The man nods slightly and steps back through the door behind the counter. While she waits, Maddy turns to survey the lobby. Its ceiling is high, and she tilts her head back to look at it. A giant chandelier is suspended in the air above her. Its crystals’ facets reflect the lights nestled among them on golden branches and cast shards of color across the ceiling.

The last time Maddy stayed in a hotel was when she went with her parents to visit her mother’s family. Maddy’s father said that they stayed in the hotel to give Grandma and Grandpa their privacy and winked at Maddy; Maddy’s mother rolled her eyes, but the corners of her mouth twitched upwards despite themselves. Maddy and her parents had rooms next to one another with a door between them. When Maddy’s parents thought she was asleep, they gently shut the door; Maddy heard the door close, but didn’t mind giving her parents their privacy. She knew that they would be there in the morning when she woke, and that she could run into their room with Mr. Poppins and Ms. Bubbles in her arms and jump in bed between them. She held her stuffed animals closer to her chest and felt Mr. Poppins’ fuzz against her cheek and worried Ms. Bubbles’ patches with her thumb till she fell asleep.

The receptionist’s footsteps behind her bring Maddy back to the present. The edges of the receptionist’s eyes are turned down, and his voice is soft when he says, “I’m afraid they aren’t there. I suggest that you check again tomorrow: the night porter might find them and turn them in tonight.” He pauses for an instant, as if not sure whether to continue speaking. Then he says, “I’m sorry for your loss,” looking straight into Maddy’s eyes over the gleaming stone counter and its wooden trim. She holds his eyes for a moment, and her chest begins to ache. Her eyes drop to the floor and she mutters, “thank you,” to her shoes. She walks back across the lobby to the elevator.

Maddy steps into the elevator and the doors close behind her, but she doesn’t press any buttons. Here she is, in this room of mirrors: three of the walls are mirrors, reflecting one another and creating the appearance of infinity in this tiny box. Maddy looks at herself in the mirrored wall and sees an endless hallway fading into the distance. She tilts her head this way and that, she whirls around to catch a glimpse of the end of forever, more and more frantically she tries to out-run her reflection. But she can never look past herself in the mirror: as the reflected hallway drifts off to infinity ahead and behind, her face is stuck to the mirror before her. She looks at her red eyes and swollen eyelids and smiling-grimace mouth.

Her mother wiped Maddy’s tears with a tissue from her purse, and her father pulled out a handkerchief to help. Whenever she skinned her knee, or the other kids made fun of her, or she broke something by mistake, her parents were there to help. There was nothing they couldn’t find, or fix, or bring back. And now they’re gone: I’ll never see Mr. Poppins or Ms. Bubbles again. Maddy doesn’t want to despair, but the situation is beginning to seem hopeless. She’ll see what Meg has to say — she almost forgot! A sudden hope springs in her, and she holds it close and shields it against the chaos around her. She presses the button; the door slides open; Maddy tears out of the elevator across the lobby to the restaurant.

Meg is just coming to the hostess’ stand when Maddy stops at her feet, breathless. “Hi Meg, any news?”

Meg smiles with her mouth, but her eyes don’t move. “I’m sorry dear, but I’ve asked everyone: nobody’s seen your stuffed animals anywhere. I’ll ask again before I leave tonight, but it seems like they’re gone. I’m…” and here Meg has to swallow once, twice, before continuing, “sorry.” Her voice breaks and she turns away from Maddy.

“That’s alright. Thank you for your help.” Maddy’s voice is soft, and she speaks without any change in pitch or quality, as though she didn’t understand the meaning of the words she was saying. Maddy turns and walks back to the elevator. Meg watches her go, and the receptionist; the color of the sunlight in the windows is going to gold and crimson. When Maddy gets to the elevator, she steps in and raises her hand to press the button for the fourth floor, but before finding home her finger stops and floats in space. Everything seems very close to her now, very present. She closes her eyes to block it all out; she bites her lip, harder, harder, to hold back the screams rising in her chest; she puts all her weight behind the tip of her right index finger and stabs the button.

The elevator arrives on the fourth floor, and Maddy walks down the hallway to her room and lets herself in. Sally is still asleep. Maddy’s bed is plain white, and empty of stuffed animals. The patch of color where she thought she saw them is gone. Mr. Poppins and Ms. Bubbles are gone. She won’t have time to look for them tomorrow: she and Sally have to get up early to get dressed and go down to the cemetery to say goodbye to their parents for the last time.

The Fountainhead

October 2022

The fountain pours into you. Your eyes and ears are filled with its blessings: the sweet relief of stimulus. Never a video too long, a song too loud, a word too harsh; everything is exactly as you want it to be. Enjoy! Everyone else is, the fountain tells you so. You watch the people dance and sing and run off into the sunset, but never more than you can stand: a count of eight, a couple of lines, a few strides, then the next. You twitch your finger and another thing comes into view. You raise your eyes: who can help you? Only the fountain, and it opens itself to you as it opens itself to everyone, just for them, for you are unique and special, UUID 3CA23F5E-DEE6-47B2-A4B9-B4A730D81546. There’s no one like you, and no one understands you the way the fountain does. You raise your arms to touch it, but it’s so difficult. They’re so heavy, your arms. When did you need them last? They drop to your side and splash in the water.

You want to dance, you want to sing, you want to feel the sun on your face. The fountain obliges: more dancing, more singing, more joyous sunsets. Did you know that the earth orbits the sun? that the moon orbits the earth? that the earth revolves around you? The fountain reveals all these things to you. You raise your arms to join the dance, a little higher this time, a litle closer to the receding fountain. Did you know that moving in the immersion tank can cause injury to you and harm to the environment? It’s better to lie still and let the fountain move for you: the fountain says so and all your friends nod in agreement. Your hands splash down into the heavy water and float next to your body. The fountain closes back over you. Look at the people having fun! Enjoy! Your toes squirm with the fountain’s pleasure; it sees your pleasure and heightens your enjoyment. Look at them fight! Look at them scream! Aren’t you glad you aren’t them? Tell your friends how happy you are! Your ankles begin to drift towards you. Your knees float up out of the water. What agony! What joy!

Bump. Hard. Splash. Dark. Bright. Scoop. Carry. Deposit.

There’s a face over yours, but it’s not like the dancing faces. It’s a flat circle with a drawn-on expression, and concern for you plays across it. You’re on a rough dry surface that presses into your flesh and iritates your skin. You’ve been very naughty. You shouldn’t move towards the fountain, or it won’t move towards you. But you want to dance! You want to see the sunset! You want to touch the grass! The fountain does all that for you with no strain, no burning, and no yucky dirt. It’s much easier this way. Let it take away your pain and leave only joy. The face flies away to the right and your head rolls over to follow. It returns to its stand on the wall and the arms that held you stand at attention next to it. Everything is still, and the terrible silence lasts a very long time.

Your left knee floats up and over and pulls after it your hip, then your buttock off the rough surface. You swing your ankle out into the air over the side of the platform you’re on. Where’s the fountain? Why did it leave you? Where’s the pleasure? Where’re the friends? Your left hip teeters up over your right, and you’re falling down towards the floor. For an instant you’re flying, then your knees ring with the impact and your nose is burning. You drop your cheek to the ground and your eye shuts against the cold and hard. You strain your other eye all the way to the left and see the unreacting arms and their blank face on the wall above you. There is no fountain. There is no longer any joy.

You try to lift yourself. You drag your hands up towards your shoulders to press the floor away. Your body is so heavy and so weak. The floor pushes into you and you into it; there is no uplifting, only sinking down. Your elbows drop. After a while a puddle spreads on the floor under your crotch. You lie in it until it chills you. You shiver. Time passes. The arms lift you and carry you back to the tank. They lower you into the heavy water and close the lid over you. The fountain springs into being before your face and pours its blessings into your eyes and ears. How you missed it! How lonely you were! How joyful the singing and the dancing and the playing! How free the sunshine and the wind in the leaves!

In The Eyes

April 2022

When I enter the Ego Death bar, the bouncer shows me how to connect my personal machine to their local network. “Here ya go!” She waves at a sign next to her as I step through the door. “The party starts after midnight. Till then, grab a drink upstairs and take a look around.” I look back to ask her if I have to, but she’s already waving her metal detector over the person in line behind me.

These European places always have some sort of newfangled apparatus to “enhance the experience.” I connect my machine as asked and an overlay on my contact lenses swings into my visual field. I ignore it for the moment. The gimmicks on the lenses are usually advertising junk, but every so often you can get a discount out of it. I can always take the lenses out if it gets too annoying: these lenses are expensive, but essentially disposable; I have a pack of them waiting to be opened at home.

The ground floor of the Ego Death is a hastily converted restaurant: the retrospectively added pseudo-wood bar with brass-like trim awkwardly sprawls across the space past its original restraints; it cuts the room into weird corners and pockets, each nested in by someone looking to lose themselves in the stale wheat smell of too much spilled beer and the sticky sweet remnants of cola.

I elbow my way to the bar; the crowd is already beginning to press in warm and close. I order a vodka and something. I get a fizzy drink in a plastic cup for 8 euro. God I hope this gets me drunk—I need it. I clear out of the onslaught at the bar, sipping off the top of my drink to keep too much of it from getting on my shoes. I hold the drink above my head as I work my way around the bar to the row of high top tables packed in between the bar and the booths on the far wall.

I sit at the end of a six-top whose other end is occupied by an English pair. As I sit, I make brief eye contact with the girl; she doesn’t quite cringe, but she makes her displeasure at being interupted felt. I none too gracefully swing off the high chair with a creak of platicized leather and step away from their territory. I glance around and make brief eye contact with her; she smiles subtly: SYNACK. Message received.

I wander in search of a defendable position, preferably a corner or some other high ground. There is a tiny dance floor squeezed between the bar and a preposterously large DJ booth; a few dancers desultorily bounce to the beat. The back portion of the ground floor, tables and chairs, is even more hostile: I can smell the intolerable intimacy and avoid it. I circle back to an unoccupied corner of the bar next to the bussing station and plant my elbow in something sticky; this is my territory now.

I look around the crowding room, thinking how rediculous and animal we are; I know she agrees with me, her eye contact says so. Shocked, we look away. I wander my eyes around the room, tracing the darkened wood-like plastic trim up to the ceiling and around the plaster-like foam molding and down into her face opened directly at me, seeing me. Who sees me in a place like this? My face softens into a tiny smile that I intend to say “I see you too”. Her gaze shoots away from mine like a magnet turned the wrong way around.

The overlay swings back in to view. Did you like? Nod! I squint, confused. What’s this? If you didn’t, shake your head! Huh. I guess it’s some kind of opinion survey. Goddamn they’ll get anything to run on your machine nowadays. But if it makes the experience better, why not? When in Rome, do as the Romans’ programs want you to do. I nod; the overlay blinks to confirm and drops out of view. I just catch the girl nodding to herself, too.

Elsie and I used to go out together sometimes, but it’d get sloppy. I always wanted to go home early; she always wanted to keep dancing. I never got along with her friends, anyway: bunch of vapid twits. I guess we are the company we keep. But she got sick of me, as well she might get sick of someone who more than once voiced his unwelcome opinions of her friends outloud. At least once, he voiced it in front of her friends. It may have been this that caused them to dislike me, though at the time it seemed worth it to speak my truth. Was it worth the relationship? I suppose it must have been.

The bar is right crowded now; my strategic position on the counter is beginning to be challenged. A crowd of Americans close in on me, speaking loudly:

“And I said that, like, she’d have to, like, try wayyy harder than that to, like, keep up with me.”

“Totally bro!”

“Yeah, I mean, you know, she never, like, got on my level, man.”

“Yeah!”

These boys are each a solid eighty kilograms of meat, built like steer. Their tee shirts are monochrome and tight, their skin rippling and tattooed. The most ostentatios tattoos are animated: the rising sun on this one’s upper arm has rays that gently swirl against his warm skin. They’re clearly delighted to be in far-away Europe having a terrific time; I hope they all get laid tonight. Interested? No.

I abandon my position, my cup empty. In the meantime, the crowd has built up around the bar; people crowd and shove, none giving any ground in the struggle to drink from the frosted glass bottles stacked behind the bar. I swirl the watery ice around the bottom of my cup and drink the dregs of it; the ice rests on my teeth and chills them. I release the cup, sucked dry, from my lips. Invigorated, I try to elbow my way through the crowd; a matched set of girls speaking German growl as I try to push past, so I retreat. I’m not sure how badly I need a drink, anyway.

I drank more with Elsie: that’s how we got together. We met volunteering one summer, but our relationship was always impeccably professional. We were packing medical supplies to be shipped off to Bolivia to save the children dying of blood cancer or some such good deed. I don’t know that it was real—for all I know, the whole thing was a sham to look good on a CV.

Anyhow, the first day I arrived at the charity’s office, I knocked on the door and she opened it, pushing it out toward me. She was the most beautiful person I had ever seen. She had soft brown hair and soft brown skin and soft maroon lips. She was wearing a too-big sweater that suggested the curve of her waist between her ribs and her hip; the sweater had fallen off her shoulder on one side, and her hair was loosely tied up.

“Here to volunteer?” I could feel my face flush as though bruised.

“Yes…?”

“Good, c’mon in.” She stepped back, holding the door open with her arm extended as I stepped in past her. For a moment, we faced one another, standing close enough that I could have leaned forward and fallen into her wide brown eyes, but my feet carried me past her into the office.

“Terrific,” she closed the door and followed me, “let’s see what you can do for us.”

The music is building in here as it approaches midnight. The popups in the overlay are becoming more insistent: interested? Sure, I guess; I don’t care. How about her? Yeah, why not. I’m not sure what it means, anyway. Certainly some sort of cross-promotion: it must be assessing my opinion of people’s hair styles or clothes or the way they’re standing or something. Do you like this one? Absolutely.

“Alright y’all, time to get the party started!” The door to the basement opens, revealing a narrow stone staircase winding down under the rediculous DJ booth into the bowels of the building. “The dance floor’s open, and there’s no line at the bar!” People begin to filter downstairs. I’m in no rush to dance; that was Elsie’s thing.

At the end of our summer together, the charity had a night out to thank the volunteers for their service. She wore a tight black skirt and a white tee shirt. Her nipples peeked through the taut cotton. Elsie, as always, was the life of the party. She led us in the dancing, a little circle of unsure colleages in a big, generic night club somewhere in the city. I stood obliquely to the rest of them, swaying slightly with the music. She stepped over to me and danced at me; I could feel the music through her body and my body began to swing with it.

Elsie danced completely freely. She knew, unselfconsciously, unarrogantly, that she was beautiful. She moved her body like an instrument; the speakers reacted to her body’s every twist and turn. Her hips bounced and the tweeters wailed; her shoulders rolled and the woofers groaned. My body rolled in with hers, closer and closer. Her hair, her skin, her lips were close enough to smell in the sweet sweat smell of exertion and attraction. Her hips closed on mine and my hands found her back.

The bar up here has pretty much emptied out, so I order another vodka and whatever from the bartender, who’s closing up shop. I taste my drink in the plastic cup—it’s heavy on the whatever. The overlay swings around again: head downstairs! I comply—that’s what I came here for, isn’t it? I duck down the stairs, descending into a dungeon; the pounding noise wells up toward me as I go down.

Delirous lights cut and splice human bodies: a cheek, a wrist, a thigh. Someone coming down the stairs behind me presses me forward, and we are forced ever closer together as our bodies gather in the too-warm cellar of the once-and-future restaurant. Ego death. That’s what it is: the bodies jump and the music pounds to their jumping; the speakers respond to the music of their moving together, echoing electric amplification of exertion and abandon.

The faces are blurred, distorted. I can see none of them clearly, except for the vague sense that there’s someone there. Her face is clear, though—the girl whom I saw earlier. We make eye contact once again; this time it holds. She’s illuminated by a light whose source I can’t see but which follows her, highlighting her cheeks, the tip of her nose; her lower lip casts a soft shadow and quivers. She smiles delicately, and I know that she sees me the way I see her: SYNACK.

We begin to dance together, and her queerly highlighted face, bright in the confused haze, approaches mine. Her hips and mine lean on one another, and my hand finds the small of her back. She rests her forearms on my shoulders and lets her head drop forward, swinging back and forth on her limp neck; the top of her head brushes my lips, and I can’t help but begin to kiss, breathing in the warm human-animal smell of her. It’s as though we’re alone in the room; everyone else has faded away to dull oblivion as the red-blue-green lights shatter and spin on her neck and shoulders and wrists.

“HEY!” I scream, “HOW COME YOU’RE SO BEAUTIFUL?”

She giggles. “YOU’RE CUTE TOO!”

“NO, I MEAN, THE LIGHT?” She leans against me and her head is warm on my chest—an intimate moment.

“IT’S THE SERVICE!”

“THE WHAT?”

“THE SERVICE!”

The damn thing in the damn contact lenses in the damn local network in the fucking…

I step back from her and reach for my eyes to pop the lenses out. She scowls and looks around: I get the sense I’m not the only one who looks angelic to her tonight. I finally get the damn things out; they scatter on the floor and are lost underfoot. The people slide into focus around me, green and blue and brown and silver and all the colors of every ranbow broken up and shaken together; and this girl is just one of them, already off looking for another match. And behind where she stood is Elsie, dancing with her own personal angel, his tattooed sunbeams rolling in the dizzy lights of Ego Death. And to me, she looks just like anybody else. Synchronize?Acknowledge.

Stewart is Lost

May 2021

The car slithered into the parking lot like a particularly aggressive species of beetle: all angles and sharp corners, its hooded headlights gazing angrily forward, daring anybody to tell the car’s owner that the car wasn’t worth the obscene amount of money that its owner had payed for it. The concrete was a dismal gray and reflected the dismal gray sky, which occasionally sent down a desultory rain drop to keep the concrete unpleasantly damp. The car parked. Its driver’s side door opened, and out stepped a man who, if possible, looked even more like an aggressive beetle than the car he stepped out of.

He looked up at the gray office building that rose out of the parking lot and embedded itself in the gray concrete sky. Its windows reflected the clouds. He walked towards the building like a man heading to his own execution: he always dreaded these appointments with the psychiatrist. The man’s clothes were gray, as were his eyes, face, and hair. Except for the red lights on the backs of the cars rushing past on their way from nowhere to nowhere, everything in sight was gray.

He reached the front door, which stubbornly refused to open automatically for him. He was reduced to pushing the “open” button, like a savage. The glass doors slid apart, and he entered into the gray lobby of the gray building. A gray receptionist asked him whom he had come to see; the man told them the name of his doctor. They (the receptionist) pointed him towards a bank of elevators on the left side of the lobby and told him which floor to go to. He walked over to the elevators and pushed the call button.

The elevator deposited him on the 27th floor with a smart ding. For a change of pace, this floor was a putrid shade of brown. He stepped out into the hallway and hesitated before picking a direction at random. He reached the end of the hallway without finding the door he was looking for, so he leisurely strolled back down the other way: he was in no rush and didn’t mind being late. Finally, he reached the door he was looking for; he took a deep breath in and out before opening it. He stepped in.

The waiting room had a few chairs, and a capsule coffee machine and water dispenser stood in the corner. A side table hold out-of-date gossip magazines. Yet another receptionist peered out at him through a window in the wall.

“I have an appointment for this afternoon,” he told her, “my name’s Stewart.” She smiled.

“The doctor will see you shortly,” she informed him. “Please have a seat while you wait.” He sat in one of the uncomfortable chairs and simmered for a moment. He stood up to make himself a coffee from the machine, but thought better of it. He poured himself a cup of water from the dispenser instead.

“Stewart?” He turned to see the psychiatrist waiting for him. “Come on back,” the little doctor said. Stewart followed the doctor back through a maze of hallways until they reached the doctor’s consultation room. The room was decorated, if you could call it that, with a jumble of not-quite-completely-tasteless fabrics: the couch was large diamonds, and the throw pillows boasted interlocking circles. Squares and crosses chased each other through the pictures hanging on the walls. The psychiatrist sat at the desk and opened his laptop; he gestured to the couch, on which Stewart obligingly sat.

“Just a second, let me pull up your file.” Stewart wondered whether this was the same psychiatrist he had seen last time. The face looked familiar, but you could never tell these days: it was even odds that the face had been ordered from a catalog rather than produced the old-fashioned way. Perhaps it was convenient for all psychiatrists to have matching faces: it certainly made Stewart feel crazy, which was all the better for the psychiatrists.

“So I see you’re taking 40 mgs of Exonall,” began the doctor. “Is that right?”

“No, I take 60 mgs of Tyroxol,” replied Stewart.

“Of course you do,” said the doctor, “and how is that?” Stewart never knew how to answer this question. The medicine had stopped the aching panic that gnawed at his solar plexus and sucked his lungs out of his anus, but it had stopped everything else, too.

“I can’t complain,” he finally replied.

“Hmm, very good,” said the doctor, who then spent several minutes typing notes into the computer. “And your sleep?” Stewart thought. He supposed that his did lie down at night, close his eyes, and open them again when it was morning. Did that count?

“I guess that’s alright, too,” he said.

“Terrific!” said the doctor, after several more minutes of note taking. “Is there anything in particular I can help you with today?” the doctor finally asked. The gears of Stewart’s mind turned. He longed to say…what, exactly? There was something he had to tell someone, and he didn’t know what it was. His chest ached.

“Umm…” was all he could manage. The doctor raised an eyebrow; nothing else in the room moved. Stewart was certain that he could hear the hair on his head growing as the silence lengthened between them. A lesser psychiatrist might have filled the painful silence with empty words, but the University of St John faculty of medicine had taught this psychiatrist better than that, as the diploma on the wall proclaimed. Stewart dragged his eyes down from the diploma to his psychiatrist, who hadn’t stopped staring at him. “I guess…” Stewart began. No, he thought, that’s not right; try again: “I feel…”

“You feel…” prompted the psychiatrist. Stewart longed to say “I feel nothing at all and everything at once,” but he was worried about looking crazy in front of the doctor. He settled for “I feel fine.” Technically, he did feel fine, as evidenced by how finely his life was going. He was a competent, though not outrageously terrific, employee/colleague/spouse/whatever. He couldn’t remember much about his life outside this building, but he was sure that he had no problems doing it acceptably well.

“That’s good to hear,” said the psychiatrist (type type type), “it sounds like your mood’s improved since we last spoke.” What mood? thought Stewart.

Out loud, he said, “feels that way.” The psychiatrist beamed.

“Then I’m happy to continue your treatment plan unchanged,” said the doctor. “That sound good to you?” Stewart said it sounded fine. “Is there anything else?” the doctor asked. Distantly, in the dim recesses of Stewart’s brain, a hundred thousand hominids were screaming and beating themselves as if they were on fire, though the fire was in their nerves and bodies and not where anyone else could see. Stewart’s face smiled placidly as his heart began to assault his rib cage.

“No, that’s everything,” he said through the smile that had taken up residence on his face. The hominids screamed and wailed their inhuman cries of agony within him. “Thank you, doctor.” He stood and began to leave. The doctor finished his last burst of note taking and smiled at him as he left.

“You can find your own way out?” the doctor said.

“Yeah, I’ll be fine,” replied Stewart. The doctor’s door closed behind him, and he was alone in the hallway. He picked a direction at random and began to walk. The hallway continued on a ways, then it turned to the right. Stewart turned with it. The hallway around the corner looked exactly like the hallway he had come down: putrid brown carpet, stale cream walls, and regularly spaced frosted-glass doors. He walked on. Behind one of the doors he passed, he heard sobbing.

“There, there,” came an awkward voice, “remember your skills.” The sobbing climbed several decibels and was joined by furious typing. Stewart cringed and moved on. After a seemingly infinite length, he reached another turn in the hallway, this time to the left. He hesitated. He felt as if the waiting room wasn’t this far from the doctor’s office, but he wasn’t sure. Behind him he heard the pattering of tiny feet, and then they were next to him and careening around the corner as the child they carried sprinted by him. He stepped around the corner to see where the child was going, but the child was gone. Must have gone into an office, Stewart thought. He shrugged to himself and decided to continue the way he was going. You’ve got to stick to something in life, even if that something is a random direction down a hallway. Stewart wasn’t sure he could think of anything else he had stuck to in his life. Come to think of it, he wasn’t sure he could remember anything about his life before he entered this building. The psychiatrist seemed to think he was doing fine, though, so he decided not to worry about it. The hundred thousand hominids in his head did his worrying for him.

This hallway carried straight on for what seemed like an impossible distance: looking behind him, Steward could no longer see the corner around which he had come. The hallway stretched on endlessly in brown, cream, and frosted glass. The building must come to an end somewhere, he reasoned to himself. If I keep going in a straight line, I’m bound to hit the end of it sooner or later. He peered down the hallway ahead of him, which seemed to extend endlessly into the distance. He decided that it must be his eyes playing tricks on him. Maybe this was another of the psychiatrist’s nasty pranks to make him feel crazier than he already felt.

He wanted to stop and ask for directions but didn’t know which of the infinitely many doors to knock on. He picked one and leaned against it to listen: “this office has 8 light bulbs in it, and the waiting room has 16,” he heard. No good: it wouldn’t do to interrupt a session in progress. He wandered on for a while before stopping at another door. “That’s alright, too,” he heard in a voice that was very familiar. He backed away from the door slowly: apparently his struggles weren’t so unique.

After an indeterminate amount of walking, he picked another door at random to listen to. He leaned against it and heard nothing, Timidly, he knocked. Still nothing. He eased the door open. Sunlight streamed out into the hallway, and Stewart was looking at rolling green hills, delicately filigreed with the gold of afternoon sun. He slammed the door in shock. When he finally worked up the courage to open it again, he found himself looking into an empty office decorated exactly like the one he had been in with the doctor. He screwed his eyes shut and shook his head; the hominids screamed within him.

He carefully closed the door to the empty office and stood in the middle of the hallway. It extended endlessly off in both directions, an infinite series of identical doors. He began to feel the grip of anxiety tightening around his throat. He took a deep breath in…and out. Ah, that’s better. With a firm grip on himself and a deaf ear to the screaming hominids, he strode on down the hallway. A child sprinted past him.

“Wait!” he shouted, “where are you…” but the child was already out of sight. Some trick of perspective, he rationalized; these doctor’s offices seem as if they’re purpose built to drive you crazy. Given the exorbitant fees the psychiatrists charged for going crazy, he reflected that it was quite possibly true that they wanted him to feel a bit loopy. Another deep breath and he was off again. He chose to ignore his shaking hands.

As he continued down the hallway, which showed no signs of coming to an end, he began to think about his meeting with the doctor. Why had he said nothing, when he should have said something? Or perhaps: why did he say what he said, when he should have said what was inside him? He thought back to the last time he had told the truth to a psychiatrist (he wasn’t sure whether it was the same one): “doctor, I feel like my guts are trying to strangle me and my heart is playing xylophone on my rib cage.”

“Hmm,” said the doctor, who began to type furiously. Minutes later, he said, “I think we should increase your dose by 20 mgs.” Stewart tried to remember how long ago that was, but time was all jumbled up in his head. The increased dose had reduced his guts’ homicidal tendencies but did nothing to soothe the hominids he kept locked away in his brain. Them, he could live with. He always had.

Another child sprinted past, almost knocking Stewart over. “Hey!” Stewart yelled. The child ran on; Stewart ran after them. “Hey you, wait!” The child showed no sign of acknowledgment, except perhaps to run faster. Stewart clenched his jaw and picked up the pace. Their feet pounded the carpet: the child’s light, Stewart’s heavy. “Come back!” gasped Stewart, out of breath. The child ran on easily into the distance and was gone. Stewart stumbled to a halt and leaned against the wall, panting. He hadn’t run since…in fact, Stewart couldn’t remember the last time he had really run. He never seemed to need to in the life he couldn’t quite remember but which the psychiatrist assured him was going fine.

When his heart rate had returned to resting, Stewart tried another door at random and found himself looking into a movie theater. From the back of the house, he could see that all the seats were full. He stepped down the aisle, hopeful that one of these people would be able to give him directions.

“Oh, darling!” said one of the giant faces on screen.

“On my dear one!” replied the other. Their enormous lips collided with one another, and Stewart’s bowels quaked as the score rose to a booming climax. He peered down into the face of one of the audience members and was astonished to see a face that looked a lot like his psychiatrist’s; this face’s eyes were fixed on the movie.

“Excuse me,” whispered Stewart. No reply. He coughed awkwardly. “Excuse me,” he tried again, a little louder. Still nothing. He reached out to tap the person who might have been his psychiatrist on the shoulder.

“Stewart!” He started. The faces on screen were looking directly at him. “Please don’t disturb the audience,” they said in unison.

“Sorry,” he muttered and retreated back up the aisle. The on-screen couple resumed their kiss, each wet smack delivered in throbbing surround sound. He stepped back into the hallway and was almost crushed by a stampede of children.

He ran with them: wherever they were going, he wanted to go there too. And under his feet the brown carpet dissolved into brown dirt, and the hallway dissolved into the school yard, and the gray man and the gray building and the gray life that the psychiatrists assured him was going fine were gone, and he was 12—no, 10!—again and running a race with his friends in the delicate afternoon sunlight that crowned the green hills behind the school yard with gold. And there was no more life he couldn’t quite remember, and he ran and ran and ran as the cries and shouts of a hundred thousand children coursed through him as they rejoiced in freedom and in their lives as fresh and new as the green leaves that bud in spring.

Doomscrolling

June 2021

It happened again last night: I was doomscrolling1 through the endless feed of trash videos the algorithm serves to me, and I scrolled right by it. The video: this time, it was called “do you want to be free?” No thumbnail, no channel, no view count: just a black rectangle, and the title: “do you want to be free?” Before I could react, my thumb had already scrolled past it; I scrolled up to look for it, but it was gone.

If you look up “do you want to be free?” on youtube (or for those following along at home, try: “how to be free”), lots of random junk shows up, among it gurus and sages, ready to dispense the wisdom of ages. All the world’s philosophies are recommended and available; you can learn how to break free of debt, the past, attachment, and all manner of things: an endless stream of content to watch that’ll, hopefully, liberate you. None of it was what I was looking for.

This video—If I can call it that—wasn’t like any of these. It wasn’t an answer to anything; it wouldn’t teach me anything. It had no transcendent wisdom to offer, none of the distilled teachings of eons digested into bite-sized videographic chunks. But as I scrolled past it, I knew that it was what I was looking for—something I didn’t even know I was missing until it’s too late.

This keeps happening: an article in a periodical will flash by and disappear, a book will be on a shelf as I skim by and gone when I go back to pull it out, or I’ll over hear snatches of a conversation whose participants I can’t find. Each time, I know immediately that this, whatever it is, is what I’m looking for; but by the time I realize it and go back to look, it’s already gone. It’s like something out of a weird story: I spend my time agonizing about what I’m going to do next, what I’m doing now, and what I already did and didn’t do. I’m so caught up in my own garbage that, when an answer appears, I don’t notice it. And when I do notice it, when it seeps into my thick mushy brain that this—​this!​—is what I was looking for, whatever it was is already gone.

But as I say, it happened again last night on the phone, while I was doomscrolling, burning out my retinas with 1080 by 2300 LCDs programmed by a distant algorithm that knows me better than I know myself. It was at this point that I gave up and went to sleep; the sun was long gone, and I had work in the morning. Still, my thumb seems to scroll of its own accord whenever I pick up the phone: it takes an active effort to put it down.

I dreamed that I was young again—a common recurring dream. I dreamed that I visited my childhood and walked through the halls of my old school just as they were when I walked through them for the first time. And I knew that I was an interloper, but my friends and teachers were there and welcomed me back, as if I had been away on a long trip. In some sense, I was coming back from a long trip: across the years, I reached back and touched the memories and the places in my heart where the memories are lodged.

I awoke to the sun: morning. Zhuangzi dreamed that he was a butterfly, and when he awoke, he asked whether he was a butterfly dreaming he was a man. I dreamed that I was a child, and when I awoke, I asked whether I was a child dreaming I was an adult. Still, my body is no longer a child’s, and I have seen too much of the world to retain a child’s innocent hope.

Like an adult, I went to work: I tagged clothes, took payments, and counted people coming in and out of the thrift store. I moved lazily, floating through the day. My thoughts ran in one course: “do you want to be free?” Free from what? Free from this? The tedium and the condescending managers and the obnoxious customers? What would I do instead?

“Joseph!” I came to, staring into space while I was standing at the cash register, “we’re closing.” I smiled and nodded: another day gone. I went home and stared into space until it was time to make myself dinner. I can’t say that I thought anything at all.

Sometimes, I try to read; but the more I read, the more my reading list piles up: every book, every story, every poem, carries with it hundred other books I should read but I haven’t. I’ve never even read the classical Chinese text that Zhuangzi’s butterfly parable comes from: I just know the anecdote from other sources. Another one for the list.

It’s easier just to doomscroll—there it was! Damn: too slow. Another video, asking: “who are you?” Again, no thumbnail, no channel, no view count or likes: just a black rectangle and the agonizing question: “who are you?” But it was gone off the top of the screen, and when I scrolled up, it was nowhere; I reached the top of my feed without finding anything besides cooking videos, video game let’s plays, and make-up community drama. An underwear model is starting his own CBD company. I put the device down and slept. “Who am I?” I ate my dinner and went to bed without coming up with anything in the way of an answer.

I dreamed that I was in a beautiful old city. Cobblestone streets wound around the bases of megaliths erected in a by-gone era to the glory and hubris of humanity. I walked along the twisting ways; around each corner, I found a vista more spectacular than the last. It seemed to me that these dizzying towers and cathedrals whispered to my heart: “be like us,” they said, “the patience of centuries is settled in our chinks and crannies. What nameless masons toiled to carve our stones, each one of which is a sculpture? What master plan arranged our design and construction? What hands and backs pulled and strained to put each stone neatly in its place?” The scent of the ages was unbearable: centuries, millennia wafted through the streets on the soft evening breeze.

I awoke with my face in my pillow and the sun in the window; its rays were just beginning to hazard their way into my room. I went to work again, where I thought of nothing except that ancient city and those ageless monuments. The sun marched inexorably across the shop floor, making of the mannequins and the clothes racks a sundial that testified to the passing day. When the sun shone across the shop at a steep angle, the manager emerged to close the door that I had been guarding.

“Stand here, Joseph, and let the last customers out.” Very well. After I saw them leave with their used fast fashion and garish plastic fascinators perched on top of their piggish heads, I left, too.

As I walked home, I passed a book shop—closed. In the window, nestled among the cast-off best sellers and the computer-generated romance novels, there was a void that opened onto an endless expanse of spirit and dreams. I almost didn’t notice it as I rushed by. As I passed it, I stopped and my eyes were pulled to it: before I knew what I was looking at, I was watching my dreams of cities, of my child-hood, of everything I didn’t know I lacked until that very moment, as they called to me from the abyss balanced delicately on the cheap shelf; we were separated only by a pane of glass. My heart rose within me.

I heard footsteps approaching, and I turned to watch a passer-by. When I looked back at the window, the void was gone: no more hope for me, just the mass-market fantasies they sell to palliate our aching and lonely hearts. Needles began to prick the back of my eyelids; I blinked the tears away as I walked home.

There were no interesting videos that night: I scrolled slowly and carefully, just in case. No dreams, either. Wake, work, repeat. So my days pass. I try to read, but I can’t focus; I try to write, but the words come out all wrong. What am I looking for? I don’t know—and when I realize I’ve found it, it’s too late: it’s already gone.

“Joseph!”

“Huh”—I’m at work, apparently. I can no longer tell waking from dreaming, not that there’s much to tell about either: I glide through both as a passive observer.

“Can you cover the register for a second?”

“Yeah, sure.” I assume the position behind the counter. Cash flows back and forth; I take clothes off of hangers and fold them into bags; “will that be cash or card?”—“would you like a receipt?”

“Joseph, I’ve come for you.” A voice, like trumpets and timpani, cuts to my innermost parts and wakes me from my stupor.

“Excuse me?”

“I said: are you taking donations?” A perfectly ordinary little woman with a perfectly plain voice peers up at me and holds out her black garbage bags of cast-off junk.

“Oh…uh, yeah. Just dump ‘em back there.” I point to the overflowing bin of random bags, piled up absurdly high: people donate anything that they want to get rid of but which they feel guilty about throwing away. We throw most of it away, anyhow. She thanks me and totters off with her gifts of precious junk.

That voice echos in my dull head: it knocks against the cotton candy stuffing between my ears. Where did it come from? Where was it going to take me? A customer steps up with their proud haul of last year’s fast fashion trends. I don’t think anymore while I check them out.

The store closes, and I walk home in the early evening breeze. The sun casts gold on the street from its comfortable perch on the western horizon. The bars and restaurants turn on their strings of electric lights that ornament the tables and awnings, all of them glowing gently like so many voltaic fireflies. At one of the sidewalk tables sits an angel, their wings folded behind them and their countenance outshining the afternoon sun and the electric lights, all of which dim in deference to this holy one who stepped down from heaven for a quick apéritif. They calmly sip white wine in the hazy warmth of the summer evening. I can’t help but stare, but nobody else seems to notice the messenger seated among them: the other tables are full of laughing, noisy people, all of them focused on what a great time they’re having.

The angel looks at me and smiles; they wave to me and gesture to indicate that I should come and join them. In a daze, I walk over to the host and say,

“Excuse me, I’m just going to join my friend. They’re sitting…” I point at the table at which the angel calmly sits calmly sipping wine but which I now see is empty, “there,” I finish lamely; I chuckle nervously as the host gives me a look. “You know, I must have been mistaken: I’ll go check next door.” I scurry away, leaving the host to deal with the sunburned and wrinkled good-time retirees who stumbled up to the entrance behind me.

I ponder these things as I walk home—was it the angel whose voice I heard? Or was it the one who sent them who spoke to me? I enter my little apartment. I put peanut butter on bread: my hands feel too swollen to cook—not an actual swelling, but they feel huge and numb like oven mitts.

In my dream that night, the angel and I are walking through the halls of my old school; the trees are green and the light filters softly through into the old building through the windows. I say, “isn’t it the wrong time of year to be playing the ghost of Christmas past?” They smile. We sit down in the dining hall, which my memory has embellished with chandeliers. Teachers and students gather for lunch. Nobody seems to notice my companion, but they’re happy to see me, as always in these dreams.

Together, the angel and I leave the school building and walk out into the streets of the ancient city, which I know to be the angel’s home. They seem as much part of the city as the cobblestones and the megaliths. I long to be here with them, but I know that I am only visiting from a long way off.

I awake feeling satiated: with the sun streaming into my room, the dream of another day begins again. Work is slow and uneventful. I go to the bathroom and doomscroll absent-mindedly as I’m on the toilet. There it is! “What do you want?” The video’s there, and I stop my thumb from scrolling past. It sits still on the screen, waiting for me. I hesitate: do I want to open it here, now? If I don’t open it now (toilet or no), then I might not find it again. I tap it with my thumb. It loads, slowly. Damn the shoddy signal in this pit! Finally, it begins to play:

“What do you want?” Yes—there’s the voice! It’s not the same coming out of the tiny phone speaker as it was when it pierced my heart out of the ether, but it’s the same heavenly voice nevertheless. The screen’s still black. “Do you want to be free?” Oh yes, voice, I want to be free to join you in the eternal city of my childhood. “Is your life a dream, and your dreams only memories?” How does this voice know me and my innermost self? There on the screen is the angel—its is the voice that speaks. It says: “come to the Holy Mountain Retreat Center; we’ll take care of everything.” Plinky piano music starts up as a mock version of the stone city from my dreams fades into view. “We offer many services, including…” I close the video in disgust. Damn advertisers—they always know just how to get to you.

Footnotes:

1

According to the internet, “doomscrolling” more specifically means compulsively scrolling through depressing news articles, often late into the night. This story is about compulsively scrolling through youtube and not current events, but the neologism was too good to pass up.

Author: Preston Miller Firestone

Email: firestone.preston@gmail.com

Created: 2024-03-19 Tue 23:59

Validate