Category Archives: Devon Code

The Conclusion of an Interview with Matt Shaw

This is the second half of an interview with Toronto fiction writer, Matt Shaw, author of The Obvious Child, (Exile Editions). You can find the first half here. Matt discusses a range of topics related to his collection and fiction writing in general, including self-help books, storytelling, the absurd, the grotesque and the Financial Post.

When Saul, the protagonist of your story, “The Elevator,” finally manages to leave his job after several attempts, he takes with him his copy of The Thirteen Habits of Highly Effective People. There is a similarly sly critique of the philosophy of goal-attainment in “One Trick Pony,” when elementary students are told that their goals are “unequivocally attainable.” Have you read Steven R. Covey’s internationally best-seller The Seven Habits Highly Effective People, or his more recent follow-up, The Eighth Habit? What is your favourite habit?

My favourite habit: Put first things first. Chekhov’s gun on the wall. Always. Fundamentals. And take your time. Is there anything that feels slower or less urgent than a novel, than prose? Any artwork more cumbersome? Yet for a writer or passionate reader, is there anything more urgent? The principle’s good advice for writers. A golden rule. Use it in your writing habits and put first things first in the fiction. Habit five (understand, then be understood) is a close second.

I have a condescending attitude toward self-help books. Maybe that’s because I’ve never been helped by one. I find my questions only multiply when reading books. I’m probably not really interested in answers, or else I’d probably be a scientist. I do appreciate that self-help books seem to provide a certain measure of comfort for millions of people. Because of them, they think that books improve their lives. I like that point of view, even if people get to it ass-backwards. But if you look for first things first, you can find those lessons in a classic novel, too. And executed with considerable more beauty and skill.

In one sense, the title story of your collection is about the act of storytelling. At the conclusion of this story, Plektos Ersatz asks himself: “…where is the root in people’s souls…at what point does one say ‘Yes, there is the obvious cause, what eludes us, what might make our souls whole?’” What, in your opinion, is storytelling’s relation to this question?

Without lamenting it, writing stories is in every way an exercise in failure.
To a writer’s reality, it’s extraordinarily difficult to write well, to make a living doing it, to write a living, breathing work of art that is cohesive despite the fact it might have taken the writer most of a lifetime to finish. If you’ve got a timely idea you’d like to address, you better hurry, too: for most writers, writing is slow.

Technically, writing is the only art that doesn’t really use one (or more than one) of the five senses in any predominant way: painting and the eye; dancing and the body, touch; music and the ear. You can hear a story without seeing, read a story without hearing. You can even feel a story, if you can read Braille.braille04.png

Writing is entirely representative. It relies on a very complex semiotic web of meanings that flicker back and forth on one another. It is entirely imaginative. And a story, if told in a sprawling novel, relies entirely on the memory of the reader to achieve any cumulative effect of power. Through imagination and memory, you can mix up the elements. You can willfully ignore pieces of text. Particular words. You can misremember stories. Change them. And, for me, there is always the nagging reminder that there is something that I could be doing that would be more constructive or productive. Grow a garden, work for Habitat for Humanity, achieve inner peace through meditation, and earn thirty million dollars a year.

My point is that storytelling for me, like detective work, is about uncovering motive. The writer’s, the reader’s, the characters’, the book’s, and probably more. That’s why I wrote about Dreschl. He’s a pretty lousy detective, but not for lack of effort. He is earnest to the extreme. He wants desperately to understand the man he is charged with finding: a man who isn’t actually missing at all. He takes the world in. He makes a lot of notes. He tries to articulate his ideas. He fails often. Even if he is incapable of understanding his own obsession, it drives him. And, when at last he thinks that he’s got an idea – he makes up a story that’s not the least bit rooted in any objective fact that led him there. He’s left wondering. Me too.

Leon Rooke has compared your stories to those of Donald Barthelme and Franz Kafka. Are there contemporary writers of absurd and sinister stories whose work you would recommend?

I’m drawn to writers that satisfy my version of “grotesque,” which is simply to take something that is ordinarily very human and twist around just enough so that it doesn’t look human anymore, even if it is. Or to make something look human that actually isn’t the least bit human. To make it strange in the classic sense.

A few that come to mind immediately in a sort of free association: Sheila Heti’s Middle Stories, Ticknor. Amy Hempel’s short shorts. Roald Dahl’s adult fiction is sly, twisted, flawed, outdated but overlooked; too bad, because there’s something there. Tom McCarthy’s Men in Space. Pynchon’s Mason & Dixon was huge for me. That book made an entire genre new and strange: the Great American Historical Novel. Lee Henderson’s The Man Game is a recent effort in the much smaller Canadian category. At the top of his game, Leon Rooke is great. Ben Marcus, an American, wrote two books that I have a love/hate relationship with: The Age of Wire and String and Notable American Women. Roberto Bolaño. Georges Perec’s La Disparition (“A Void” in the English translation) is the greatest detective novel I’ve ever read, if not contemporary. Gaetan Soucy, Nicola Barker. Gyorgy Dragoman’s The White King. I had high hopes for Nathaniel Rich’s The Mayor’s Tongue that weren’t met, but another instructive book for young writers.

I’m drawn to Czech and Hungarian writing. Even the more realistic modes of some Central and Eastern European writers really create the aura of the grotesque because, in a westerner’s eyes, their 20th century existed in a weird alternate universe. Three collections of Hungarian short fiction that aren’t contemporary but are probably new to most people: Nothing’s Lost, The Kiss. Exile Editions put out the third, a book called Hungarian Short Stories, several years ago. I love that book. They’re all out of print, but Exile might still have some copies of Hungarian Short Stories lying around. Josef Skvorecky.

American fiction from the deep south and American Jewish writing have always had that effect on me too, whatever their mode, realism or not. For a Catholic Canadian born in the snow and raised on hockey, the subjects of writers like Faulkner and O’Connor or Singer and Malamud were completely new and exciting. Not always absurd or sinister, although Malamud’s The Tenants always strikes a chord. That was a major inspiration for my story “Dreschl & the Obvious Child.”

These days, I find a lot of truly absurd material in the business section of the newspaper: the Globe and Mail’s Report on Business, the Financial Post. The Economist is so dry and even-keeled that you can’t help but miss some of the sinister things that take place there that are worth a second look. Highly recommended.

Are you working on anything new? Would care to comment on your latest literary project?

I’ve always been fickle. In the past, I would stay on one project as long as it kept my attention. When that waned, I moved on, often never to return. Today, I embrace that attitude. I work on as many as half a dozen projects at once, constantly going back and forth, switching gears. One project I’m working on is a novel inspired by – but not the least bit faithful to – the life of Roald Dahl. Dahl was a beloved children’s author, Washington spy, married and divorced a movie star, was generally obnoxious and sometimes abusive, disliked by many, wrote disturbing (and sometimes terrible) adult fiction, was very tall, charismatic, lied often and had several affairs: a great foundation for a fictional character. The book is tentatively called The Lighthearted War. We’ll see what happens.  –Matt Shaw

An Existential Reading Journal

“… there is a very special transformation that takes place when we read fiction that is not experienced in nonfiction. This transformation, or catalyzing action, can be seen to play a vital part in what we might call, grandly, existential self-formation.”

-Sven Birkerts, The Gutenberg Elegies

What does it mean for individuals to be completely free to determine who they are as human beings? To live authentically, eschewing the notion that our natures are predetermined? To recognize that we are rational beings frequently faced with life-altering decisions that cannot be decided on the basis of rationality alone? A sense of one’s existential freedom–and the responsibility to the self and to others that this freedom entails–can be anxiety-inducing, but it can also be exhilarating.

Existentialism has often found its most compelling expression in the arts, from the films of Bergman and the plays of Sartre and Beckett, to the novels of Dostoevsky and de Beauvoir. Though marginalized as a philosophical movement by the dominance of the Analytic tradition in the English-speaking world, Existentialism remains relevant in both the popular and literary cultures of the West.

Over the next four months I will read and write about works of fiction that deal with the existential themes of anxiety, absurdity and authenticity. My intention is not to critique, but rather to appreciate and explore. My focus will be predominantly Canadian, though I reserve room for the occasional continental classic. I will begin by considering my chance encounter with an obscure Canadian contribution to this literary tradition.

I first came across No Such Mirrors through a friend. I was a studying in Montreal at the time and overwhelmed with other books I was obliged to read. J. asked If I would be willing to use my university library card to borrow the novel for him, as he couldn’t find a copy anywhere else. Petty details such as due dates, I was well-aware, escaped J. from time to time, but he assured me should I do him this favour, he would read the book at once and return it well in-advance of the deadline. I decided to trust in the existential idea that J., as an individual, is a free and responsible agent whose essential qualities need not be predetermined by his actions in the past.

I looked up the book in the catalogue and found it in the fifth floor stacks, an old paperback, rebound in bright yellow library boards. The title intrigued me, but the covers provided few clues as to the novel’s contents. The front cover featured the monochromatic image of two human eyes, disconcertingly reproduced at slightly larger than human scale. The eyes were not side by side, but one above the other, creating the impression of two separate monocular gazes, rather than a set of eyes belonging to a single individual. Above the first eye, the author’s name (ALVIN SCHWARTZ), between the eyes, the title (no such mirrors). Below the second eye, in bold lower case, the name of the publisher (writer’s cooperative, montreal). The back cover was entirely blank: no plot synopsis, no blurbs, no author bio.The inside cover of the book offered little more by way of disclosure. There was the year of copyright (1972), the reservation of rights, and an epigraph from Act I, scene 2 of Julius Caesar:

. . . it is very much lamented, Brutus,

That you have no such mirrors as will turn

Your hidden worthiness into your eye,

That you might see your shadow.

This set the tone, established certain expectations: the author has literary aspirations; there will be some amount of intrigue in this novel, perhaps treachery. I turned the page. I found a second epigraph, this one excerpted from a Māori creation myth, creating a peculiar juxtaposition with the first. I began Part One. The narrator, newly released from prison, returns to Chicago to withdraw the contents of his bank account before setting out for New York, in an attempt to leave his previous life behind for good. He abandons not only his hometown, but his name as well. He adopts, arbitrarily, the moniker “James Smith” as he makes his way through Kennedy Airport.

The tone is formal, a tad stiff, the author suspending enough disclosure to create a sense of mystery. Smith takes a room on the third floor of a run-down Brownstone on West Ninetieth. The room, he tells us, approximates the dimensions of his former cell. There is a standoff with his new landlady over the provision of a heating plate for making tea. Smith is surprised by his forcefulness in the exchange, and by the way the landlady acquiesces. This is an early indication that he is as much of a mystery to himself as he is to the reader. Before the end of the chapter, there is an alarming, one-sided encounter with the only other tenant on the floor, Smith’s eye pressed to the keyhole of his door, his ear carefully attuned to the sounds in the next room. Only after he hears his neighbour’s footsteps descend the stairs does he begin to make his tea. Smith, it seems, is a creep, a curious one, in both senses of the word.

I had to stop reading at that point. There were too many other books to be read, books on which I was required to write term papers. I passed the book on to J., leaving Smith in his room, the water in the pan on his heating plate boiling indefinitely. Several weeks later I contacted J. to remind him of the due date and he informed me that he read and returned the book, as promised, several weeks before. ‘What did you think?’ I asked him. ‘It was very good,’ he told me. ‘Fell off a bit towards the end.’

Two years passed. I graduated and moved away from Montreal. I forgot about Smith almost entirely, his boiling water gradually becoming little more in my memory than a puff of steam. Then I was sitting at my desk one evening, no shortage of books to read or tasks to occupy my mind, when Smith showed up again. He made his intentions known, and, just like his landlady, I found myself in no position to refuse. I didn’t remember the name of his book, but J. reminded me when I asked. I checked local libraries, the catalogues of used booksellers, and fared little better than J. did two years before. I found mention of a single copy for sale, listed in the inventory of the very Montreal used bookseller where I was previously employed as a cataloguer. I placed my order. Two days later I was informed that the book was not, in fact, in stock. I considered my options, placed an order through interlibrary loan and ten days later, Smith and I were reunited at long last. At first I wondered how he would have held up over time, but he was more or or less as I remembered him. We spent the next sixty pages getting to know one another, and James Smith, or “Paul Wolchek” as I came to know him, turns out not to be quite the creep he seems in chapter one, though there is no doubt he is odd.

Suddenly, Part Two begins and Wolchek/Smith retreats again into to the shadows. An acquaintance of his, Giordano, an expressionist painter met by chance outside the monkey cage at the Central Park Zoo, takes over narratorial duties. Giordano adds a new dimension to the tale, relating several, increasingly troubling encounters with Wolchek/Smith as he dabbles pigments on his palette. Then the third and final section begins and Giordano is supplanted by a third-person narrator. By the time novel’s clever and unexpected triptych narrative structure unfolds, it seems inevitable, as if the only way to really get a sense of Wolchek/Smith (the seemingly delusional, prototypical, unreliable narrator) is to gradually gain distance from the limitation of his point of view. It is in the novel’s supposedly most objective third section where the surreal and the paranormal overtake what has been to that point a realist, if unrealistic, novel.

Alvin Schwartz’s No Such Mirrors, is deeply odd and intricately structured, philosophically dense and deliberately eerie. Though there is nary a P.I. in Wolchek’s Manhattan, No Such Mirrors bears more than a passing resemblance, in style and in subject, to Paul Auster’s New York Trilogy, the first installment of which was adapted as an acclaimed graphic novel by Paul Karasik and David Mazzucchelli. Schwartz, coincidentally, wrote for Batman and Superman comics for a 17 year period, during which he was, according to Marvel Comics editor Roy Thomas, “living his life as a graphic novel before the term ever existed.” More recently, Schwartz published two “spiritual memoires” chronicling the intersection of his popular writing and private pursuits.

His metaphysical interests are frequently evidenced in No Such Mirrors. When Wolchek’s neighbour eventually gets wise to his voyeuristic tendencies, she accuses him of being, understandably, a “strange man,” who is “angry without knowing quite what to be angry about.” Wolchek is inclined to agree with her and suggests that anger comes of “discovering one’s helplessness.” “The business of transmuting those feelings into self-creation,” Wolchek explains, “is a long and difficult process.”

The goal of this process is not, for Wolchek, to find one’s self, but quite literally, to “become someone else.” Here Schwartz’s narrator defines his own end in terms similar to those in which essayist Sven Birkerts defines the fiction reader’s undertaking. In my series of posts over the next four months, I will focus on works of fiction whose protagonists doElegies.jpg deliberately what Birkerts suggests all readers of fiction do, that is, “slip free from our most burdensome layer of contingent identity” in order to create new selves. I am interested protagonists who do this in a specifically existential context, who confront both anxiety and absurdity in an attempt to embrace their freedom, as well as their finitude.