Tampilkan postingan dengan label Gunnar Benediktsson. Tampilkan semua postingan
Tampilkan postingan dengan label Gunnar Benediktsson. Tampilkan semua postingan

Jane Unrue - To be alive requires that we build a catalogue of like-like images and stolen words and phrases, things we can put to use

Jane Unrue, Life of a Star, Burning Deck, 2010.

“An actress of sorts, a woman recalls her childhood, longs for her absent lover, imagines traveling overseas, and wanders through gardens and galleries of art. Hers is a life meticulously lived, a carefully crafted and rehearsed engagement with a real and imagined world; a search for love and meaning that has left her, in the end, alone. Unrue’s intricate and intriguing sentences — now one word, now comprising whole paragraphs and interrupting one another — manage to fuse detachment and emotion, heartbreak and humor.”

“Artifice is at the heart of Jane Unrue's latest novella, a sequence of short, poetic reflections by an unnamed, lovelorn protagonist. This is not to say that the narrative lacks heart; if anything, this compact tour de force interrogates the truism that art can be either heartfelt or cerebral. The narrator has a passion for theatricality. Her ruminations are peppered with stage directions: " 'You’re right,’ I said (chin tuck), ‘I haven’t told you much about myself’ (syllabic lateral movement of the head on much about myself)." Her episodic memories of lost love share a similar staged quality, as much preoccupied with props as the dramatic action itself: “How I had waited for a moment when the setting and the lighting indicated we had finally found our scene, the scent of roses as if atomized through tiny tubing woven through the fence.” Behind the stagecraft, however, Unrue’s protagonist seems to search for an authenticity that she fails to find in the intimacies we take for granted. Provocatively, Unrue inverts the dichotomy of being on versus off the stage. If the narrator of Life of a Star feels like she is acting her way through life, it’s because so much of it is played out through assigned roles (child, woman, artist). By foregrounding narrative artifice, Unrue suggests new possibilities—both personal and aesthetic—such artifice obscures. The narrator’s comically surreal tryst on a cruise ship, and her memories of her actress mother, are among the most evocative sequences in a narrative that reveals emotional truths rather than evades them.” - Pedro Ponce

“I wish I had a better story for you,” confides the unnamed narrator a third of the way into Jane Unrue’s new miniaturist novel, though there’s hardly cause for so modest a claim. With just over one hundred pages, some of them hosting no more than a wee phrase or the clarion burst of a sentence, and most of them giving out well shy of the bottom margins, the novel, though slender, is emotionally thorough, dense but not crammed, and unnoisily original in the bloodbeat and quiver of its prose.
Unrue writes intricate, ribbony sentences that often reel themselves into the safeholds of eccentrically stacked, unindented paragraphs as lyrically loaded as Joseph Cornell boxes. Sometimes these gracile ribbons get snipped short of tidying grammatical resolution; the narrator, we learn, is in fact something of a mean whiz with a scissors and a knife.
Nearing (or already well submerged in) the loneliness and lovelessness of early middle age, she’s the daughter of a washed-up actress, and though not officially an actress herself, she has discovered the only certain way to insert herself acutely into experience: to regard every instant as an opportunity for performance, for representing herself rather than entirely being herself (and whatever further self-discovery that might finally require). So confused is her life with theatricality that rain falls “as if it had been yanked from buckets poised on rafters up above,” and stage directions are tucked into her thoughts, slipcased between parentheses—“(Full-body modesty)”; “(Mild eyebrow tip)”; “(single-handed heart-grip).” “Since there is artificiality in mere utterance,” she’s convinced she “must live the words.”
But life, as she practices the living of it, amounts to casting herself into an ever-narrowing repertoire of melancholy enactments unfolding mostly in the galleries of a museum (through which, profusely ruffled and garbed in preposterous layerings of underskirts and other costumic outlandishments, she kills hour after hour skulking coquettishly, hoping to pry one or another man loose from an alarmed wife) and by the fountain in a public garden, where she suffers little more than half a dozen rendezvous with, one gathers, her only lover ever, a worldly man who is apparently married (it’s a furtive, futureless courtship). From these outings she returns, unconsoled, to the ticktock isolations of her rented room, where she spinsterishly busies herself with embroidering a bumblebee onto a pillowcase (her goal, fittingly enough, to arrest the buzzy wingbeats into a stitchy stillness) and broods over her rooming-house childhood, during which the arrival of an alluring slip of a girl with dollhouse manners and a goshing vocabulary left her feeling upstaged, driving her to rages of violent jealousy. Her mother admonishingly declared, of all things, “I don’t know who you think you’re fooling with these histrionics.”
But the narrator is scarcely one for foolery. Three-quarters of the way through her account, she brashly encapsulates the desperate program of her life in a dizzying, self-aggrandizing, one-sentence manifesto: “The one who stimulates attraction to herself by molding her complexities to meet a given situation and by demonstrating, at the same time, the effect her having on the situation has upon her own self, wins.” By now, though, she has been rehearsing herself further and further away from the heart-quickening enmeshments of life and deeper into claustral despair. Small wonder, then, that images of graves and buried girls figure so tormentingly in her imagination; it’s as if she wishes to be pulled alive from the burial pit of her part-playing self.
Inviting itself to be read as a phantom refinement of the celebrity-autobiography genre, Life of a Star, direly melodic and winsomely elliptical, belongs in that rich vein of contemporary fiction that forgoes narrative overrun, overmuchness of dialogue, and reportorial sprawl, and instead dispenses itself in slivery, pivotal declarations and gleaming summation. It’s a novel cored to the climactics, the crucialities—and it’s entirely a perfection.” — Gary Lutz


“In Jane Unrue’s third novella an unnamed woman visits galleries, fountains, and piers, and observes the underweight litany of her existence. This is a book to be read all at once with a long evening spreading ahead, in order to best note the slow, dexterous rising of tension, the avid portrayal, and the bare yet startling language. Unrue punctuates the unnamed woman’s thoughts (they occur while she does her needlework, visits the museum’s garden, and wanders in a city where she seemingly has no acquaintances) with muted intensity. Unrue’s sentences are as calm as they are discerning, often running against one another and interrupting in humor and emotion:
'The color of my eyes is something people might not well recall. And though petite, at times I seem
Look how her––!
wonderfully, oddly
She’s not one little bit––!'
Mine is a woman’s face, though something of the child hides back behind the surface of my veering eyes.
Prose vignettes - at times one line takes up a whole page - read like private journal entries, and reveal a woman who is either on the verge of a crisis or has barely survived one. With time we learn the woman is a kind of actress - a failed actress, a closeted actress, a successful actress are all strong possibilities. The woman bitterly recollects a carefree girl from her youth who ended up acting (“I was diminished by her”) and the memory of this girl is followed by a taunting line from an adult, which appears in quotes and occupies a page: “Child, have you ever aspired to perform upon the stage?” These and other tidbits make it clear that once upon a time the woman had wanted to be an actress, and that now she is not (or never was). In fact, the ambiguities regarding the narrator’s occupation and her general background serve to highlight the incandescent and disturbing tension Unrue has created in the narration throughout the book:
'I pick the scissors up. A sparkling vision fills my head, those long-gone Christmas Eves and other nights-before when I would feel the glittering gaze of someone peeking in to see if I was just pretending to be asleep or if I really was asleep. I clip it, thread it, knot it at the end, and tell myself I wonder if I’m acting now.'
We are in limbo, just like the narrator. We find grounding in the woman’s memories of her childhood and of the conversations she once had with her lover. The conversations appear to us snipped, but they are beguiling. The woman and her lover converse on the nature of isolation, their relationship, and sex. That was the woman’s past.
In the present, the woman stares into the eyes of the subjects of Renaissance paintings, she plays a femme-fatale role (self-cast) at a gallery in the museum, and also hires herself for a part she wrote for herself. This last role is a “straightforward though deeply layered story” about a woman who lives in a one-room flat above her mother’s defunct flower shop. The woman acts out the role in a voyage, on a boat deck. Wearing an evening gown and donning a sea-pearl evening clutch, the woman concentrates on her manner and poise. The woman plays the role, rehearsing the execution in grueling and intensive practice sessions, so that “I, please God, might not convey to those around me evidence of jealousy, resentment, malice, desperation, anything.Life of a Star reads as though Marina Abramovic or Allan Kaprow truly succeeded in erasing the lines between art and life - but the result is disturbing. Akin to the hair-rising fear we feel from looking down an abyss, we look upon the nameless woman playing her voyage role, reacting to the passangers on the boat as if her fellow actors, and we wonder how far she will be able to go without finally stepping into insanity:
'Soft blonde hair, her dress black taffeta, a beaded coral cardigan around her shoulders, she moved gracefully, so pretty, and he uttered something to her that I could not understand before I heard him tell her clearly, rather loudly, that he’d screw her (she had downward eyes) until she’s bleed (soft face; not shocked). Then suddenly she ran away.'
The mother-character in me wept for daughter’s bitter disappointment as the father in me shrank in weakness to confront that bastard piece of shit, while she, the woman that I really was
It seems I have no feelings I can call my own.'
Unrue strikes on a narrative drama that is interspersed with ordinary epiphanies, which reveal a life richly lived, but underscored by a quiet, masterful tension. The woman’s triangular connections with the world and her self (when the self she knows is slipping) are utterly intriguing. This is a portrait of a woman entering art and losing herself in it, increasingly unable to find the center of her own emotions. Life of a Star is a book for theorists, art lovers, academics, but mostly general readers who are both grateful and uneasy to find a writer who experiments with blurring the line of art and life.” - Ingrid Rojas Contreras

“Jane Unrue creates a truly riveting novel that brings new perspective on the woman’s search for love, and so much more. “Life of a Star” is a top pick for literary fiction collections.” —Midwest Book Review

“A woman, alone, embroiders a bumble bee onto a pillowcase and, while doing so, she recalls the first play she ever saw, how she once terrified a young rival into leaving town, how she seduced the married man by a public fountain. Life of a Star by Jane Unrue is the story of a woman embroidering her life. The unnamed female narrator reveals to the reader that, though she was never a professional actress, acting has deeply influenced her. As a child she constantly noted the way others were perceived and, in doing so, learned how to control the ways in which she was perceived. Her remembrances are peppered with stage directions, such as in an argument with her mother: “And I hate (looked:sink) you (mirror) too! (Floor.)” Her mother was a professional actress, but the narrator uses the craft of acting as a lifestyle choice rather than a profession. Instead of making money off her acting skills, she makes relationships.
The most emotional recollections are those surrounding an unnamed ex-lover, a married man. These moments, as all moments in the book, are recalled out-of-order, but the encounters with the lover are differentiated in that they are numbered in chronological order: “Encounter number four. ‘You’re right,’ I said, (chin tuck), ‘I haven’t told you much about myself’ (syllabic lateral movement of the head on much about myself).” The narrator uses the same self-employed stage directions with the man she loves and she did with her mother, constantly manipulating the distance between herself and the other through this carefully constructed artifice.
The novel unfolds as a series of disjointed thoughts, images, scenes, and memories. The book is 112 pages long, but may be read in a single sitting. No scene lasts for more than a page and a half, and an entire page may contain only a single sentence:
“It seems I have no feelings I can call my own.”
“New needle. (Bigger eye.)”
“Black satin thread emerges through a tiny hole: beginnings of a body.”
When multiple sentences do appear on the same page the language goes to the opposite extreme, becoming complex and lyrical: “Retracing all your steps along the corridor of trees, to search for an escape look up and see if you can find a dirty-looking star above this dead-eyes image of a garden conjured as if just to keep you from returning to the woman underneath you in your bed and telling her that it was only sadness for the many losses in your life, the many tragedies you’ve see, that caused your gaze to wander toward the wall.” It becomes difficult to get your bearings in a sentence such as that, especially in the middle of a story that is being told unchronologically by an unreliable narrator. It becomes essential, then, to approach the novel as you would a poem, to untether yourself from the presumptions of narrative and allow the sentences to grab you and pull you along like a riptide.
When the narrator decides she wants to close her self-created dramatic distance she finds herself unable to do so, commenting “it’s always stumped me why so many of my very most tender and authentic memories are tangled up with over-practiced words and stiff, exaggerated moves.” Having practiced fake emotion so well for so long, she has robbed herself of the ability to show genuine emotion in a genuine moment. This touches on an even greater question: is it possible to react genuinely once you’ve peered behind the curtain and seen the power of staged drama?
Ultimately, the narrator discovers through her musing both that she desires emotional intimacy and that she absolutely cannot have it. And even as she recalls her life to the faceless reader, she ponders the question, “I wonder if I’m acting now.”” – Dana Norris

“Anxiety suffuses much of Life of a Star, Jane Unrue’s lapidary bloodletting, and much of it is borne from the narrator’s bemoaning of language’s limitations, memory’s imprecision, romance’s sudden changes, and the seeming impossibility of love. The novella, composed of luminous, evocative fragments, is much like a mosaic wall, albeit a ruined one, missing patches of tiles, where the viewer must fill in the necessary blanks. Incredibly perceptive and imaginative, the unnamed narrator elliptically relays her brief moment in the limelight, her strained “encounters” with a lover, her attempted suicide, and her difficulties with finding a language to seam the mangled threads of her life together into some kind of whole:
'No matter how I try to focus motivation, limiting associations, drilling each part of a sentence individually, not too emphatically, it’s always stumped me why so many of my very most tender and authentic memories are tangled up with over-practiced words and stiff, exaggerated moves. For instance, any recollection of a figure standing next to me is so unbearably entwined within the lifting of my hands as if to block the morning light out, that I’m left to pick through words and objects, moments of remembrance, for the slightest hint of anything that I can even begin to recognize as someone close enough to reach.'
It’s a despair familiar to any writer who, continually exploring the vast resources of language, still finds him- or herself incapable of generating the proper vocabulary, syntax, and narratological framework to encompass the baffling complexity of psychological and emotional experience, of pain in all its forms. Emotionally off-kilter, the narrator isn’t satisfied with what she sees, feels, and thinks unless her experiences are given some kind of form or contained in a concrete way. She’s utterly self-conscious and spilling over with doubt: “It seems I have no feelings I can call my own.” Finding “artificiality in mere words,” she feels she must “live words.” Wandering naked in an idyllic scene, she distances herself from her surroundings by wondering how to contain it, capture it, control it: “It was the kind of scene to paint on onion skin, and then to wrap around a lantern, turn it slowly, see the bridge slide into view and out, and my naked body coming, going too.” Oscillating in time, the narrative also sometimes shatters into incomplete sentences, mirroring the narrator’s own fractured perception of both her past and present. And many of these fragments are intruded upon by other voices:
'The color of my eyes is something people might not well recall. And though petite, at times
I seem
Look how her—!
Wonderfully, oddly
She’s not even one little bit—!'
Unrue’s performance is quite arresting, here. Her poetic renderings of consciousness are expertly handled: she carefully maps her narrator’s vacillations and her confused outlook on life; and she harnesses the flotsam and jetsam of external things: the observations and judgments from other people she’s collected over the course of her troubled life. The narrator, embroidering, sewing, and stitching in the midst of her reveries is, at times, overwhelmed by her fanciful surroundings and the gravity of her personal history. Her own expressive inventorying serves as a way of bringing sense to the senselessness in her life: “To be alive requires that we build a catalogue of like-like images and stolen words and phrases, things we can put to use.”
Immersed in these wrenching scenes, where Unrue’s melancholic lyricism overflows, it’s easy to feel like her narrator who, after reminiscing about kissing her lover says, “This was a moment when the image and the words collide, the kind of moment people live for.” At one point, the narrator, embroidering, compiles a wish list of all the things she needs for her craft. This list could also serve as the best summation of how this novella was put together for it, too, is a “catalogue of patterns, stitches, backgrounds, combinations and suggestions, useful bits and pieces, images.” Unrue’s imaginative precision gives way to indeterminacy, clarity to tentativeness, cohesion to dislocation. The events and images in this world are delivered in a sensuous prose that harkens back to Carole Maso, another accomplished master whose prose belies great intelligence, insight, and a willingness to submit to the seductive power of the sentence. Think of Life of a Star, then, as an illuminated viewfinder, one where parallax, ambiguity, blur, and discontinuity may impede immediate recognition, but one which still impresses through the sheer power of its startling imagery and commanding poetics, its accretion of clues and repetitions. In the end, all of the fragmentary, floating images in Life of a Star finally cohere into an enigmatic portrait of a burned out visionary, an object lesson on the fleetingness of desire, of the perpetuity of pain, on the doubtful, but nevertheless worthwhile, possibility that language may bring meaning to life, or, at the very least, help one to endure its vicissitudes.” - John Madera

“arrived the other day courtesy of Waldrop generosity.
I started it tonight and read to page 62, just over half the little novel.
It's quite good.
I was already a fan of Jane Unrue.
Googling her just now, she seems to be a well-kept secret.
For now.
But that situation cannot last when one writes as well as she does.
Jane Unrue reminds me in an odd way of Jane Mendelsohn (I Was Amelia Earhart).
They both write subtle novels composed of almost ectoplasmic prose.
In a weird way, it's like an inheritance of the Jamesian thing (the supernatural James anyway).
But they conveniently clean up his ridiculously Byzantine grammar and tool sentences and paragraphs of much more palatable length.
They keep that Jamesian mystery inherent in grammar itself, but they get rid of the Jamesian sprawl.
I suppose Mendelsohn's vampire novel is a bit slight, but I liked it. She was sort of the literary belwether on that, as vampire erotic lit broke shortly after her first novel along those lines.
But the Amelia Earhart novel was wonderful.
I listed Unrue's book House on my shortlist of "The Ten (or was it Twelve?) Books by Burning Deck Press You Should Own."
This one is about strange-fitting clothes of the erotic.
Also, it is about the torturously well-fitting clothes of jealousy.
Jealousy's ridiculous sartorial splendor.
And the wreckage that follows.
As usual, Unrue shows us that a straight line or direct stare is always the longest distance between two points we are trying to use to reperer in any real investigation of the world.
(Sorry, Kaplan's novel uses the French verb on every other page and now it's stuck in my head!)
Unrue's prose is deliciously Lobachevskian like that.
The irreal is found, as ever, to be more convincing. At least when it comes to that strange creature we call narrative.
She writes very well.
I see I have missed a novel, Atlassed, which came out in 2005, which I will need to hunt down.
And I see she published a novella in the swan song of 3rd Bed, Vincent Standley's wonderful magazine (of which I was happy to be a part on more than one occasion).
I probably actually have that somewhere in this house or the old one.
I'll try to review this when I finish it.
I can already recommend it.
Stylistically, it's that delightful mix of novelistic innovation and unapologetic anachronism--that thing so many contemporary French novelists (yes, P.O.L!) do so well.
P.S. Love Keith Waldrop's cover art for this!” - Willliam Keckler

“Reading Jane Unrue’s novel Life of a Star is similar to the experience of entering a quiet room and seeing the broken shards of a glass figurine lying on the floor and though when seeing the wreckage one is not familiar with what the shards once composed while intact, the essence has not changed—the figurine exists broken, it’s brokenness animated to high art.
The novel is made up of brief sections no more than two pages long. The unnamed female narrator at the center shifts back and forth between childhood and adulthood, between angst and agony, between galleries of art, the sewing of a bumble-bee pillowcase, lovelorn encounters and an early envy for a little girl “…far more likely to dazzle than” she could ever be. She hasn’t always been alone, but she is now.
What does this narrator want? Certainly the title is a wry play on words. The narrator is in an incredible amount of pain. She is a star only in her own multitudinous mind that announces stage directions for her to enact like “(Full body modesty.)” “(Eyes wide.)” “(Repeat for other side; wrist up.)” Her best performances, solo of course, are not attended:
That night, all husbands, wives, long gone, the water was so quiet underneath the little bridge, dark foliage all around, a moon up high, and I was wearing nothing on my body or my head. It was the kind of scene to paint on onion skin, and then to wrap around a lantern, turn it slowly, see the bridge slide into view and out, my naked body coming, going too. p. 94
The “naked body coming, going too” might be the sine qua non of this entire endeavor. The narrator and her stories can’t keep still. She searches, spins and hams her way into a container impervious to other people. Escape, even from such agonies as lovers sleeping with others can never be commensurate with the self-flagellation in its wake:
…I lay there on my bed and wished I had not tried to lift you off my floor and bring you back into the bed…” Don’t tell me that you love me,” you said. He’s already gone, I thought, my gaze up at the ceiling flooded as if by a bucket full of liquid silver pouring down into my eyes and in my mouth. p.71
The last sentence is a Lynchian dissolve, a rainbow shimmer and ungluing of sense that stomps any snaky sentimentality and keeps loss lyrically stifling.
One may wonder what sense this journey into dark sludge has—where is the uplift, where lies redemption? but Unrue has gone into the well many scribblers have spelunked. As in Rilke’s novel The Notebooks of Malte Laurids Brigge, there are mystical childhood encounters, the changing galleries and gardens the narrator wanders through, the bumblebee pillowcase (reminiscent of the mother’s lace), and the concern with how to make prose sing (to be seen shortly). Each also concerns singular narrators who want to be more than they’ve become, but first they must struggle to see the world. Unrue (like Rilke’s directive from the Sonnets to Orpheus) “dances the orange” through a fine needlework of phraseology that takes what is melodrama and heightens it, producing not so much the life of a star, but the scrawl of a poet planting and detonating verbs, adverbs and nouns into sinuous strobes of sound:
No matter how I try to focus motivation, limiting associations, drilling each part of a sentence individually, not too emphatically, it’s always stumped me why so many of my very most tender and authentic memories are tangled up with over-practiced words and stiff, exaggerated moves. For instance, any recollection of a figure standing next to me is so unbearably entwined within the lifting of my hands as if to block the morning light out, that I’m left to pick through words and objects, moments of remembrance, for the slightest hint of anything that I can even begin to recognize as someone close enough to reach. P.104
Her text is the toil that separates her. The narrator is conscious of other ways to communicate but the struggle carries both the singe of the past and the problem of the future. Is there understanding? Is there a way to see truth and breathe into the pain? Unrue’s narrator does plenteous breathwork and the result is a tidy but by no means lean novel wherein the cries to stay private get choked by a willowy wordsmith, a shooting star—shot and fallen.” – Greg Gerke
Jane Unrue, Atlassed, Triple Press, 2005.

“Where does one go after Joyce? This fiction shows the possibility of a way beyond his shadow. Or the possibility of the nutrition that can grow from it. A collection of fictions in Unrue's precise, evocative style with section such as:"Looking Sideways" and "Hands Emerging Out of a Black Background." Perfectbound, with an elegant cover designed by Deron Bauman.”

“Somewhat on the Joyelle McSweeney page maybe, Unrue creates these worlds that exist nowhere but in her books, like little mirrored halls that go on forever, and new new new language mashes, I loved this, 'The Snarl is on the Mask' is one of my new favorite stories.” – Blake Butler

“Jane Unrue's Atlassed has many of the characteristics of a short story sequence, but its carefully composed language recalls the prose poetry of Fred Wah or perhaps Lyn Hejinian. In a sense, Unrue reproduces the peripatetic urban roaming of Paterson or Leaves of Grass—except that the stomping grounds of her metropolitan flaneur is not the city, but the human body itself. The book is composed of a series of prose vignettes, some that are more or less narrative, and others that are more like stylistic improvisations, or prose poems that read like grab-bags of linguistic synergy. The result is both a mapping and an erotics of the body, as indicated by the evocative chapter headings (eg. "Brow and Chin Variations," or "Topmost Portion of the Forehead, a Common Omission"). These headings supply in large part the "unity" of this book, which attempts to nominally fasten these evocative if not necessarily transparent prose pieces to a conceptual map of the body which though present, hovers just beyond our comprehension.
At first, the separate chapters seem thrown together, ill-fitting lyric improvisations, voiced by different speakers on different topics. By the end of the book, what unites these pieces becomes much clearer—a kind of aesthetics of dissection, a discomposition of the elements of the body and a re-rendering of the human form as mosaic. This is elegantly expressed in a phrase that I read as a sort of mission statement for the book, from a section titled "A Neatly Folded Pile of Clothes" (a title at once evocative and ironic):
That same day I'd seen a temporary residence designed by different architects to occupy a plot of land devoted to the exhibition of new works of art. Each architect had been assigned a portion of the residence; they brought their portions in by truck, then everything got put together. That the pieces did not fit and that the residence looked unappealing was, I guessed, supposed to be the beauty of it. (134, emphasis added)
Perhaps this in part explains the continual linkage between love and violence in Atlassed, since one of the questions this book repeatedly asks is whether there is "any sort of line dividing deep-felt pleasure from the icy horror of a white-hot violent encounter?" (110). And this is in a sense, the exact experience of reading Atlassed; it is full of sequences that are at once erotic and horrifying, others that are evocative and enigmatic. Moreover, Atlassed always creates the sense that a greater conceptual unity exists, and that we are doomed to desire it forever. In "Table, Heart, Breasts, Kidneys," Unrue suggests that even a family on a road trip may feel an unrequited desire for a map, to render the events of their life, their stubborn anomie in the face of absolutism, easier to comprehend:
A sense of loss like nothing ever known is passed from family member on to family member in the car, each person holding fast to something: steering wheel, a seatbelt buckle, handle on a door. A slippery drop of rain has hit the windshield, and the father conjures up an image of two massive feet of stone adhered for centuries to the ground. (119)
The family knows that "mapping" is an impossibility, and that any attempt at its broad, totalizing vision will result in an image that is incomplete, disorienting. Unrue goes on to say that
This miracle, this nightmare, this at once so terrifying and enchanting scenic drive—it winds from left to right across the outer portion of the mighty granite wall, diminishing the sense of trust felt by the mother and the children toward the car, the tires, and the ability of the man behind the wheel to keep the car from swerving suddenly and plowing through the railings in the road. (119)
In the end, the book is a sort of revelation in reverse—Unrue brings the veil of language between the reader and the illusion of realism, suggesting dark and frightening possibilities beyond our ken that are at the same time exhilarating. Like the "leafy vines" in "Passion (Asleep)," Atlassed "rocks you in the manner of the darkest pleasures you have yet encountered" (155). Reading Atlassed is at times mystifying; but in the end, its alchemic blend of imminent horror with immanent revelation and its apocalyptic mixture of mystery and desire, create a dark and evocative beauty that is both enigmatic and enlightening.” - Gunnar Benediktsson
Jane Unrue, The House, Burning Deck, 2000.

“A woman wanders from room to room, or ventures outside, and throughout the ensuring procession of locations, ruminations, or dreams, is transported into the past, or to a love affair, or a marriage, or into the future, or to an ending, perhaps her own."

“Jane Unrue's extraordinary prose unfolds within the confines of a mythological house: I used to walk when the moonlight was just enough to make the metallic structural elements (the rest of the house as if missing) appear to be coming at me from all sides. 'I know those door frames and window frames are not really coming at me,' I remember saying, 'but it sure does look as if they are.' In restless, suspended sentences that seem to push closure beyond the horizon, a woman wanders from room to room or ventures outside.”

"Quietly plumbing the intimacies of architecture, landscape, and domesticity, Jane Unrue's debut, The House, develops a muted intensity through serial blocks of meditative prose... Displaying the influence of writers as diverse as Wittgenstein, Bachelard, Charles Olson and Mei-mei Berssenbrugge, Unrue successfully forges an evocative approach that could be seen as metacubist in its dizzying, varied takes of the familiar world." - Publishers Weekly

Peter Markus - No other writer can make from mud and river and fish and moon the luminous world

Peter Markus, Bob, or Man on Boat (Dzanc Books, 2008)

"This is transcendent music, a 133 page song of incredible beauty from America’s preeminent poet of earthly and heavenly matter. No other writer can make from mud and river and fish and moon the luminous world Markus paints here in this story of a father and son fishing on the river. Open the book anywhere and you will find the spare and haunting prose Markus has become renowned for:
I once saw Bob, at dawn, standing up in his boat, facing where the sun was rising, and what Bob was doing, it looked like to me, it sounded like to me, was he was screaming, though what he was saying, what he was hollering, this I could not hear.
When I told this to a friend in town who is no stranger to Bob, what he said was that Bob was yelling at the sun, that he was telling it to stay where it was, for it to go away, because Bob didn’t want the night, and the night’s fishing, to come to an end. Likewise, you will not want to see Bob come to an end, or at least, you will count the days till Peter Markus’ next piece of music." - Robert Lopez

"Markus has a remarkable ability to strip life down to its basics, to the point where the metaphors we manufacture as the looking-glass for our existence end up standing in for existence itself. Fish, mud, night and river come to stand in place of family connections as fathers and sons, by giving themselves to fishing, give themselves over to a lone search and to loss.” -Brian Evenson

"With spare but magical language, Peter Markus weaves a tale with the currents of a river, a family saga that spins through both the depths and the shallows. In Bob, or Man on Boat, recollections rise from the muddy river bed to be illuminated by starshine on the surface, only to be lost once more in the river mists that mingle with the wind-scattered ashes of a dead man, and finally, to sink again to the bottom. Like the voice of the narrator, Markus uses words that “skip across the surface like a stone”, but take the reader to the depths of longing and loss, myth and memory." - Pamela Ryder

"In an unforeseeable counterpoint to Heraclitus’ dictum 'No man steps in the same river twice', Peter Markus offers the opposite wisdom: the river is always the same river, and we who step in it become the river, become the same. Only an innocent eye can see the river so. Only an innocent eye can see that in its muddy depths the river hides a secret whose nature is to be continually revealed. Here, in this river-world, where every character with a name is named Bob, where men turn into fish, where fish turn into men, where magic works darkly in the mud, where boys turn into their fathers, where dreams reveal the world, where the stars swim in the sky’s river, where hands are covered in fish scales, where the river sings to us of our origins and of our ends, to see is to baptize the mind in the river. Markus’ world is not old because it never ceased living in wonder. It is a mythic world and ever-new. When Markus sings his voice is chorus. Melville’s Ahab is in there. So is Hawthorne. So are the Brothers Grimm. So are Faulkner and Jung. But those voices return to, and harmonize with, some deeper, more sonorous Anonymity, that bodiless voice which utters every story, whose voice is itself a river, and who chooses, among countless thousands, one humble mouth to sing its story through. That voice is spoken for us by Peter Markus. And this novel is one of those songs." — Dan Beachy-Quick

Peter Markus, The Singing Fish (Calamari Press, 2005)

"These interwoven tales that make up The Singing Fish are not told, but spun from a primal, almost child-like, source of mythic language - sublimated from the fundamental building blocks of mud, brother, river, girl, moon, fish and a rusted nail."

"Very little occurs in a Peter Markus story that does not involve a fish, mud, a brother, and, usually, a concluding act of brutality. Markus's language is primal, even primitive, but his sentence structure is among the most perplexing and, ultimately, fascinating I have ever encountered. Markus serves up sentence after sentence of startling musicality. These aren't stories in any traditional sense; they are works of a prose stylist with the ear of a poet." - Peter Conners

"They enact over and over a story of death and rebirth, of killing fish, their father and each other, and nailing everything they admire the most to the telephone pole in the back yard." - Dawn McDuffie

"Mud is mystical. Mud is creative. Mud is the primordial ooze, a primitive but generative mixture that signals language, love and violence. At least, this is what Peter Markus' The Singing Fish ultimately seems to suggest; and in the end, mud is the perfect symbol for this deeply odd yet compelling book of short fictions. "Us brothers, we love mud," Markus' narrator tells us. And the reason soon becomes clear:
When the rain stops drumming down, us brothers, we drop down, onto our hands and knees, down in the mud, and we begin to eat. We eat until our bellies are big with mud. We take what is left of the mud and we make Girl. We start at the bottom and make our way up. Girl's knees are especially muddy. They make us want to stay forever kneeling.
Mud both creates and sustains life in The Singing Fish. It may be eaten, or it may be shaped into life, or rendered as language. Given the story's locale, this obsession with the mixture of dirt and water makes perfect sense. After all, Markus' curiously lyrical account of two brothers and one river is ultimately a story about the margin between land and river, that mixed-up liminal space where dirt becomes mud, boy becomes brother, girl becomes cave and father becomes fish.
The Singing Fish is a series of short fictions narrated by one of two "brothers" who live in a house next to a river. The action is in a way governed by the river's affiliation with life, family, violence and creation. In a sense, Markus' short vignettes form an overarching narrative not unlike the river that is at the book's center: always in motion, always in flux, and yet paradoxically static, always returning to the curiously sweet acts of violence that galvanize family relations, and compel the reader into a kind of voyeuristic complicity:
Brother, I said to Brother. You can go first. Brother, I told him, give me your hand. Hold your hand up against this pole. Brother did just what I told. We were brothers—we were each other's voice inside our own heads. This might sting, I warned. And then I raised back that hammer. I drove that rusty nail right through Brother's hand. Brother didn't wince, or flinch with his body, or make with his boy mouth the sound of a brother crying out.
Markus calls on this motif numerous times, almost word for word—and it need hardly be mentioned that "nail through the hand" is a powerful image in the canon of Western culture—but nevertheless, Markus finds ways to grant a new energy to this metaphor, showing how the family relations created in this way can achieve and sustain a deep emotional energy. The two brothers who narrate this story have an emotional, almost telepathic connection that renders them indistinguishable from one another. In "Fish Heads," the brothers tell us that even they are unable to tell:
There was a time when our father, he used to call us brothers Fish Head One and Fish Head Two. Us brothers, we never really knew for sure which of us was which—who was Fish Head One and who was Fish Head Two?
And indeed, this is a question that Markus invites us to consider, but it is ultimately resolved by the sinister yet curiously tender figure of the brothers' father, who in one of many repetitions of this theme, takes both brothers and nails their hands to the telephone pole together, ultimately signaling that there is no hierarchy, no differentiating among them. The pole, perhaps unsurprisingly, is dotted with the heads of fish that the brothers have caught, offering to us the first clue that the river is a margin more mixed-up than we have been led to believe. Later, when the father himself becomes a fish, the boys heave him into the river, where he swims into its depths as they casually cut the heads off his dozens of "fish" young.
Mud is the symbol of the mixed-up taxonomy of The Singing Fish, which resists the kinds of distinctions that conventional narrative insists upon. Man can become fish, and vice versa. People can walk on water and then drown, or drown and then walk on water. Violence has no permanent effect, because time itself seems paradoxically to be on a kind of loop. Each time we return to the moment at which one character "lines up that rusty nail" in preparation to drive it through the hand of another, we sense that The Singing Fish has abandoned the strictly temporal for an oneiric and elliptical repetition that denies that violence has consequences, or that love is impermanent, or that distinctions between land and water, mud and life, fish and man can hold any sway in this curious world. The syncretic potency of the images recalls William Carlos Williams, while the improvisatory and repetitive syntax, like that of Gertrude Stein, reveals that "repetition" is at once inevitable and impossible, like the constantly changing but nevertheless static river that draws the "Brothers" to its margin again and again.
It is true that to read The Singing Fish requires some intestinal fortitude. The graphic scenes of "gutting" fish are rendered curiously more disturbing by the fact that the fish seem to survive the process, able afterwards to escape and "swim across grass and mud". Markus' reminder to the reader ("You, do not think that this is funny") is rendered unnecessary by the disturbing force of images like "the hammer in our father's fist," which reminds us that the violence which constitutes family relations in this book is ominous and disturbing as well as sweet. And the close, telepathic relation between the brothers cannot quite take the edge off of sequences like this one:
Boy, we told Boy. Go fish. Boy took to that muddy river water like he was part dog, part fish. Boy swam back to the river's muddied bank and flopped down dead right there on the shore. Yes, just like a fish. This boy here, Brother said. He is a keeper, Brother said. If you say so, I said to Brother. And then we chopped off this boy's head.
The end result is that Markus has given violence a kind of lyrical energy that feeds on its ability to shock—and the images in this book have marvelously potent staying power as a result. At first glance, The Singing Fish looks intellectual, a kind of "artifice-as-art" postmodernism that distances the reader while engaging with the high-minded sensibilities of the aesthetic avant-garde. But Markus is up to something far more valuable and far more complicated. The Singing Fish is a throwback in the best sense of the word, a book in which symbolic energy and creative force are valued over the empty form and practiced ironic distance that has characterized so much avant-garde work over the past decade. Markus' book is violent, disturbing and at times off-putting. But it is also lovely and compelling, and reminds us that language, like mud, can both create life and sustain it." - Gunnar Benediktsson

"Peter Markus has written an epithalamium to mud, river, fish, moon, and childhood. The voice he has chosen to carry the lyric burden of his song is that of one of two young brothers living in a river-town whose principal features are the river, mud, a steel mill "shipwrecked in the mud," the boys' backyard, and a telephone pole transfigured, by the ritual nailing of fish heads to its creosoted surface, into a totem of boyhood's heroic and mystic passage. It is Markus' genius to have made of his fraternal romance a fabulous drama in which very little occurs, and the little that does recurs in a richly modulated variation on the author's several themes: murder and creation, death and resurrection. What Markus achieves, within his musical composition, is a dramatic enactment of the brutality and magic of which our nascent selves are constituted: the prerogatives of early childhood. The little that does happen in the eighty-seven diminutive pages of The Singing Fish is (we may come to believe by novel's end) enough -- may well be, in fact, all that needs to be written on the subject of childhood considered from the viewpoint of an ethnographer, a cultural anthropologist, or poet.
I say "novel," for the writing possesses the aspects of a novel despite its brevity. The work may be brief; but its interior structures are built of a simple language intensified by reiteration and periphrasis. The resulting rhythmic density and variety beggar the effects of any ordinary literary minimalism. A novel must have characters, and The Singing Fish has eight - chief among them two inseparable brothers, who are almost always referred to as "us brothers" in recognition of their indistinguishable natures. "We were brothers - we were each other's voice inside our own heads." They have names (Jimmy and John), but we are not certain which name applies to which brother; nor does it matter. Markus has seized, in the relation of his protagonist(s), the moment before the delineation of individuality, after which largely unconscious beings separate to become persons. Other than "us brothers," only two characters assume any significant role in the work: a tongueless boy (mutilations are omnipresent, symbolic, perhaps, of the mutation constantly at work in the novel's archetypal world) and a girl made of mud, who, becoming the moon, is transformed into stars. With the exception of us brothers' father and mother, adults are absent from the landscape; and the roles of the father and mother are reduced to a few repeated gestures of radically simplified authority figures. (The mother disappears from the story midway.) An older cousin and his girlfriend appear for the space of a single chapter and serve as a reiteration of the figures of boy and Girl. The novel's central consciousness belongs, equally and powerfully, to the pair of brothers (in spite of the narration having been given to a single one of them). This consciousness is as vast as the universe Markus creates out of mud and stars.
The sixteen chapters may be considered as theatrical stages on which the brothers play the unfolding dramatic action of the precognitive impulse towards transcendence. Here, the naive initiates can walk on water, eat mud and be nourished by it, dive into mud and harrow its bottomlessness for three days, fashion a girl from mud, hear the voice of the river speak, take instruction from talking fish, cut off a boy's head, crucify each other on a pole studded with the emblematic heads of singing fish, and have their own heads cut off - without irreversible effect. The minimal action (action considered as change or movement in character) occurs not in a phenomenological or psychological dimension, but in a mythic one. The Singing Fish is a cosmology of the simultaneously circumscribed and infinite regions of the naďf mind, using the style and tone of creation myths to present its subject. In this style and tone lie the work's interest, at least for this reader.
To return to the aspects of a novel, which The Singing Fish can claim: There is a landscape, however it may be rendered in the most economical of gestures. There is movement, largely in the form of metamorphosis, where the work's iconic notions (river, mud, rust, fish, girl, moon, stars) can be transformed into one another, as in this passage:
Then Girl stepped with both of her girl feet into this bottomless mud. Us brothers, we watched Girl lift up the cottony hem of her girl dress. The mud reached up just barely to kiss Girl's knees. Girl's knees, they are the kind of knees that make us brothers want to stay forever kneeling. When Girl stepped into this mud, it was like dipping the oar of a rower's boat into a muddy puddle. It's true, Girl was that big. Girl was so big, us brothers, we climbed our way up the side of her mud-barked body as if she were a tree. This tree, we knew, we would never get up to the top. Something would stop us - the moon, the stars. Some passing by bird or aeroplane would get in our climbing way. The moon rising up rose, but it stopped rising when it got all tangled up in Girl's hair. Girl thought the moon was just a knot of hair that the wind had twisted up. Girl walked around for a month with the moon sitting on top of her girl's head.
The passage is characteristic of Markus' astonishing fiction-making in The Singing Fish. It combines private (but not esoteric) cosmology, mythology, metaphor (in the wonderful "mud-barked body"), exquisite gesture ("lift up the cottony hem"), and the hyperbole of creation stories. The narrator goes on to describe how the moon comes unfixed, at last, from Girl's hair to splinter into stars. The action of a novel must also be set in a time. Markus sets his at night, which is suitable for magic and murder, for the birth of moon and stars, and for the fires that sometimes ignite the foundries of mythic creation.
Characters, landscape, movement and metamorphosis (change), time - Markus' novel has these. And to them, he adds - as I have noted - a melodial quality that sings throughout the work as surely as do his marvelous fish (which, when the story demands it, also talk). Why should they not when the river "told us what to do"? Why not a river that sings and fish that sing from where they have been nailed by us brothers, on the telephone pole - symbol, perhaps, of the power to communicate the unseen and the unheard voices that nevertheless are all around us? This, I think, is poetry. Ultimately, a novel may be reduced to an obsession with words. In the cosmos that an authentic writer brings into being, it is words that are its elements, objects, and fixtures -- that are, for him, the world. Us brothers - speaking for their author - understand the molecular nature of words:
Us brothers said some words back to our father, words such as moon and mud and river and fish, but even these words, words that were the world to us brothers, these words were sounds that our father did not hear.
Peter Markus has written a novel of amazement and beauty. He might also have written a cantata or work for the musical theater. Perhaps there is one who will read The Singing Fish and fashion for it a musical setting. I can only hope one day to hear Markus' novel sung." - Norman Lock

Peter Markus, Good, Brother (Calamari Press, 2006)

"Peter Markus' Good, Brother is a collection of short-short stories/prose poems that revolve around the lives of two virtually conjoined brothers and the mythical world that they fashion out of fish, mud, stars, the moon and a girl. Through acts of sublimely innocent brutality, they perpetually (and unconsciously) strive to preserve and continually renew their primordial creations—and their own primal child selves—while living in a town, with a dirty river running through it, that is seen by others as being just a shipwrecked sort of place."

"In this spare and simple novel, Markus shapes and reshapes river and mud into a protean world perpetually reasserting itself through rituals that are at once down-home and arcane. There is a whole mythology here, generated privately between two brothers engaged in an always childlike (and for that reason all the more serious) task of creation. Good, Brother is like watching Raymond Roussel and Flannery O'Connor show up to the barn dance wearing hip waders and despite this still managing to outwhirl the best of them." — Brian Evenson

"Very little occurs in a Peter Markus story that does not involve a fish, mud, a brother, and, usually, a concluding act of brutality. Markus's language is primal, even primitive, but his sentence structure is among the most perplexing and, ultimately, fascinating I have ever encountered. Markus serves up sentence after sentence of startling musicality. These aren't stories in any traditional sense; they are works of a prose stylist with the ear of a poet." — Peter Conners

"In some moments like a compact novel and in others like a series of connected stories, Good, Brother uses the most sophisticated, experimental edges of fiction to tell a story about the grittiest, most primal emotions." - Ross Simonini

“In the beginning was the word and the word was mud” (John1:1). This quote prefaces Good Brother, by Peter Markus, detailing characters living and surviving in a particular, diminished landscape. The book is equally plausible as a narrative, about people navigating a bleak environment, and as a particular psychic terrain, with interwoven elements of things real, imagined and symbolic. The deft blend of brutalities, forms of tenderness, outbursts, and discipline, covers complex and convincing ground. With no wish to live in, or even visit such grounds, I am willing, even thankful, to be absorbed in the world they make up. Markus strings together sentences that are astonishing, rhythmic intonations. With them he returns, again and again, to an uncomfortable, unpredictable, yet uncannily familiar sense of symbiosis. His piercing depictions of love, family, survival and grit are presented in ways that underscore the importance of stories themselves as vehicles able to express and connect such primal elements of our existence.
Markus writes like a blues singer; his tools are limited and specific. He employs just a few notes, but oh how those notes ring. They include: brothers, father, mother, river, mud, rust, dirt, girl, and fish. The brothers are actively diligent in their diminished, dirty, scant, physical world, making mud soup, catching fish, cooking them, nailing fish heads, and one another’s hands, to things. As you read the book, the preface quote, particularly the word “beginning”, is called into question. The brothers’ way of life is an adjustment, perhaps a set of responses to something that has happened. And what that thing might be becomes an important subtext. Clearly, it is not just any slight thing, but some big, harsh, unalterable thing that has occurred to generate the conditions of this particular beginning. Why are these people so poor, why is their river so dirty, where does mom go? Throughout the narrative, one wonders what came before the beginning.
Markus lives in Michigan, the lower part of the state, outside of Detroit. I mention this because I believe the work can be looked at as a contemporary parallel to a famous collection set in the woods of Northern Michigan, Ernest Hemingway’s Nick Adams stories. Nick, tall, brawny, appropriately dressed, treks through towering forests, fishes in sparkling rivers, neatly fries his catch over a fire he makes himself, has a doctor father. These brothers, you imagine, have one set of clothes, are thin, and in need of sunlight and vitamin C. They fish in sludge, their family eats the fish that surely tastes of it. Nick is destined for greatness, at least upward mobility. These Good Brothers, in contrast, are fully occupied doing what they need to do to get by." - Lynn Crawford

"Markus, if you don’t know his writing, works in whirlwinds & loops, repetitive cycles something akin to prayer or chant where only a word or two changes from sentence to sentence or carries from one phrase to the next, & somehow this feat of both liquid writing & entrancing rhythms never ceases to surprise me:
‘Girl is all ours.
We made her.
Girl began as mud.
Girl began as mud but became a girl when we gave her her name. We named her Girl because that’s what she looked like: girl. Girl, we said. And the name stuck like a stick stuck in the mud.
We took a stick and spelled Girl’s name in the mud down by the edge of the river.
G-I-R-L.
Girl looked good in the mud.
Girl’s mud body shined like something made brand new in the moonlight.’

& also, if you don’t know Markus, the Boys in GOOD, BROTHER as well as their Father, Mother, their Girl Made of Mud, their Fish & their Moon & their Stars & their Lighthouse, these are all elements that are picked up & laid down meticulously throughout Markus’ other Calamari book THE SINGING FISH as well as in his New Michigan Press title THE MOON IS A LIGHTHOUSE, his Dzanc novel BOB, OR MAN ON BOAT, &, one can safely assume, in his forthcoming Dzanc collection WE MAKE MUD.
But this is not to say that Markus deadens, numbs, tires, or plays-out these relationships, their roles, or the characters. In fact, what GOOD, BROTHER instantly shows the reader is that we can take up & leave down these Boys at their River over & again, always finding a new twist in the narrative, a new picture in the images, or a new doorway in their humble for-sale-by-the-River house. The Boys themselves, not wanting to leave their home, not wanting to go, seek discovery of their world along side the reader, never tiring:
‘And this, making mud, is a thing us brothers can’t never get enough of…Look at the sky. The sky, we say, it is a river. And the stars: the stars are the glowing eyes of fish. And the moon? our mother asks us brothers, catching us, her sons, off guard. The moon, we tell our mother, it is a lighthouse. And we are all of us living inside.’
Part of the wonder for me, is the simplicity of Markus’ language, how it invites a reader in, humbly, & then grows over the pages to a fury of sound, a cacophony, a complex & vibrant noise that we cannot shake from our heads. There is glorious beauty in invading the reader, in taking him or her with you, especially when they don’t even notice they are on the journey until it is nearly at its end.
‘Close your eyes, Girl tells us brothers. Then you’ll see what I mean. Us brothers, we close our eyes just like Girl tells us. Good, Girl whispers. Now hold out your hands in front of your face, your palms facing away. Tell me what you see. We see a river, I say. We see fish. We see moon. Mud, I say. I see Girl. Good, Girl says, to this. Now, open your eyes back up. Look into the palm of your right hand. We look. The star that was in our hand, in its middle, it is now an eye. It is an eyeball as big as a baseball is. It is lid-less, is blink-less, its pupil, it is a wide open sky that is the color of mud. There is this river there, running through it, and a moon floating whitely above.’" - J. A. Tyler

Label