The World Beyond BetterMost > The Culture Tent

In the New Yorker...

<< < (470/791) > >>

serious crayons:

--- Quote from: Front-Ranger on February 29, 2020, 02:47:49 pm ---Isn't that one of the things he's most known for?

--- End quote ---

That was my thought, too. I've only read about half of this piece, so maybe it gets much worse and I should wait until I've seen it. But he's written about his mother's alcoholism, unpleasant relationships among his siblings and other things. Apparently the one subject he hasn't written much about is his sister's suicide, and what happened in their relationship -- they hadn't spoken in four years when she died and he had a security guard keep her from entering one of his readings. (At least, that was the status a couple of years ago, according to a book review, so maybe he has since then.)

The other thing is, confessional and deeply personal essays and memoirs are so common by now -- by people who've experienced sexual assaults, incest, domestic abuse, homelessness, addiction, etc. -- this one (so far) hardly stands out. Of course most of the writers aren't as talented as Sedaris.

 

Jeff Wrangler:
Sedaris's pieces that are most memorable to me are one's where he airs his own linen, writing about things that happen to him. Of course humorists do that all the time. To me this reads like an attack piece, almost a character assassination, even though I have no doubt it's all true. I mean, writing that he told his dying father to his face, "You're more like a vegetable," and, "You're vain. ...Always were. I was at the house this morning and couldn't believe all the clothes you own. Now you're this person, trapped in a chair. ..." It appalls me that anyone would say anything like that to a dying person, no matter how true it might be, no matter much he might want to say it. It's hurtful, even if the dying person acknowledges that it's correct. Then he publishes to the whole world that he actually said it.

The beginning of the article, where he writes about his urologist and his prostate exam, that struck me as vintage Sedaris, the sort of thing I expect to read when I read him. After this, I think I will be skipping his articles, at least for awhile. This one is a real turn-off to me.

Jeff Wrangler:
Backing up a bit, I enjoyed the article about Underground Railroad reenactments (Feb. 17 & 24). I read that over lunch today.

Front-Ranger:

--- Quote from: Jeff Wrangler on February 29, 2020, 04:44:40 pm ---... writing that he told his dying father to his face, "You're more like a vegetable," and, "You're vain. ...Always were. I was at the house this morning and couldn't believe all the clothes you own. Now you're this person, trapped in a chair. ..."

--- End quote ---

Yes, that is a character assassination, but of himself. As you said, his most successful pieces are "where he airs his own linen, writing about things that happen to him." I was taken aback when he wrote about what he said to his father, but my curiosity was piqued as to why he would feel the need. He sprinkles clues throughout.

Did you notice that Hugh was always doing something to defuse the situation? Hugh notes that the icky thickener in the water is just cornstarch. When David's dad cried out for water, Hugh filled a cup and mixed in the cornstarch himself. He even got rid of a pet turd on the dad's carpet, using his bare hands, and saying "You people, my God." David and his sisters, in contrast, mainly bungled around and called the nurses for help. They were obviously freaked out by their one-time capable dad being reduced to a horrible wraith. Suddenly David and his dad's lifelong struggles come to a head, and Dad tells him "you won." David realizes that this suffering creature has replaced his father, and so he's lost his chance to finally get approval from him.

Throughout the story you can hear the dad's and Amy's soft voices, Hugh's voice of reason, and David's wry, slightly cynical and self-deprecating voice. I would like to say more about the article, but I'll wait until everyone who wants to has read it.

serious crayons:
I finally finished it.

It definitely was not my favorite DS piece ever. It wasn't very funny -- not surprising, given the subject matter, but even his more serious essays are usually intermittently amusing. And I found it ambiguous. My reactions were kind of a mix of both of yours.

To be clear, I don't have any objection to people "airing their dirty laundry." I have read so many essays and memoirs that could be accused of doing that, the idea doesn't really register with me anymore.

I got the impression David felt very conflicted himself. Obviously the dad had done some pretty terrible things, as he mentions briefly. And the condition of his house suggested some serious cognitive problems. David feels a lot of anger and contempt toward his dad. It's unclear to me whether he wants approval, revenge, closure or what.

Since the visit to the dad is paired with David's own medical test for what could have been a terminal illness, the piece seems a meditation on mortality without any specific conclusions. Maybe the point is that there are no specific conclusions. He's written of his dad fairly positively in the past -- or at least not this angrily -- so maybe he was really ambivalent. Or maybe he just did not like his father and didn't know how to deal with those feelings on his deathbed.

I should probably try to skim through it again.


--- Quote from: Front-Ranger on March 02, 2020, 07:53:43 pm ---Did you notice that Hugh was always doing something to defuse the situation? Hugh notes that the icky thickener in the water is just cornstarch. When David's dad cried out for water, Hugh filled a cup and mixed in the cornstarch himself. He even got rid of a pet turd on the dad's carpet, using his bare hands, and saying "You people, my God."
--- End quote ---

I actually got the impression they suspected it wasn't a pet's.

The other thing that's interesting about Hugh's role is that he's always being practical and helpful and kind -- even though the dad must have some objection to him, having first cut David out of the will then saying he'd put him back in as long as Hugh never got to touch any of the money.

So did the dad disapprove of David being gay? He never says so directly, and I've never seen any mention of that in the past, but that's the implication.




--- Quote from: Jeff Wrangler on February 29, 2020, 04:44:40 pm --- After this, I think I will be skipping his articles, at least for awhile. This one is a real turn-off to me.
--- End quote ---

That's too bad, if you've liked his work until now.




Meanwhile, I'm still trudging through the Harari profile. I still dislike it.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page