Showing posts with label Aida Edemariam. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Aida Edemariam. Show all posts

Tuesday, February 27, 2024

Simon Armitage / Making poetry pay



Simon Armitage. Photograph: Gareth Phillips for the Guardian

THE LONG READ

Simon Armitage: Making poetry pay


In a culture that has consigned poetry to the margins, Armitage has become something very rare: a genuinely popular British poet. Aida Edemariam hits the road with the busiest man in verse

Aida Edemarian
Tuesday 26 May 2015


One Indian summer evening last September, off a busy slip road not far from the Tower of London, Simon Armitage took to the stage of the world’s oldest surviving music hall and, after a short introduction from the broadcaster Melvyn Bragg, started to read. “It begins with a house, an end terrace / in this case …” The hall was full, generous with silence and later with laughter: young couples in careful retro outfits, men in suits dropping by after work, students, and older women; audience and performers held beneath a glowing tent of wobbly fairy lights that rose from the balconies to a bright apex in the roof. “But it will not stop there. Soon it is / an avenue / which cambers arrogantly past the Mechanics’ Institute …” Armitage’s reading voice is light; not exactly monotonal, but strung on a more delicate, questioning skein than his conversational voice. The poem, Zoom!, the title piece in his very first collection, in 1989, turns left at the main road, leads to a town, “city, nation, hemisphere, universe, … [is] bulleted into a neighbouring galaxy”, before finally coming to rest in the checkout queue at the local supermarket.

Tuesday, February 2, 2021

Little by Edward Carey review / Vivid tale of Madame Tussaud


 


Little by Edward Carey review – vivid tale of Madame Tussaud


This rich, engrossing novel explores how a penniless Swiss orphan caught up in the French Revolution came to found the famous waxworks museum


Aida Edemariam
Sat 10 Nov 2018 07.30 GMT

At one point in Edward Carey’s rich, engrossing novel, a young French princess hires an art teacher. It is 1778 and the teacher, who works at a popular new wax museum in Paris, has never seen anything like Versailles, with its vast rooms “filled with expensive, distinguished, furious objects”; the princess, now 14, has clearly never been properly taught. At their first lesson she throws open a room festooned with bad drawings. “They’re mine!” she exclaims. “I drew them.” The teacher, nicknamed Little because she is so small, real name Marie Grosholtz, eventually Madame Tussaud, weighs up her options. Then she says, “You do not … look, really, do you?”

Tuesday, December 8, 2020

Agoraphobia and an unhappy marriage / The real horror behind The Haunting of Hill House

 


Agoraphobia and an unhappy marriage: the real horror behind The Haunting of Hill House

Stephen King says The Haunting of Hill House is ‘nearly perfect’. But can a Netflix TV adaptation capture Shirley Jackson’s dark visions of duty and domesticity?

Aida Edemariam
Mon 22 Oct 2018 07.00 BST

A

nyone who has read Shirley Jackson’s The Haunting of Hill House will find a couple of details of its 1959 reception almost too neat to be true. Jackson had been writing novels and stories for nearly two decades before embarking on her tale of Hill House, a mansion set under a hill where visitors can turn up any time they like but find it rather harder to leave. These earlier works were striking, wrote Jackson’s biographer Ruth Franklin a couple of years ago, not only because they were such accomplished contributions to the strain of American gothic that includes Nathaniel HawthorneEdgar Allan Poe and Henry James, but because they foregrounded women – single women desperate for the social acceptance of marriage, or married women trapped in domestic situations so stifling they were (often malevolent) characters in their own right. Jackson herself was increasingly desperate in her marriage and in the imposed role of homemaker.

Sunday, March 26, 2017

Patti Smith / The Saturday interview

Patti Smith


The Saturday interview: Patti Smith


Patti Smith became a rock star by accident – it made her an icon. She wrote a book – it won a major award. Now, with an album on the way and a UK tour, she's as driven as ever

Aida Edemariam
Saturday 22 January 2011 00.10 GMT


W
hen, in the late 60s and early 70s, Patti Smith was working in bookstores in New York, often having to choose between art supplies and lunch, she stacked National Book Award-winning books on shelves, wrapped them up for customers, sold them. And as she did so, she told a rapt audience last November, choking up with tears, "I dreamed of having a book of my own, of writing one that I could put on a shelf"; she hardly dreamed of having a National Book award of her own as well.

There were wet eyes in the house, too, and more than one person listening to her must have thought that there was a kind of rightness about the fact that the book with which she won the award last year, Just Kids, was about that time, and about the person, Robert Mapplethorpe, who experienced it along with her. He was the person who refused to "listen to me falter, question myself, question my abilities"; who held her fast to the idea that her art and her dreams mattered, and if she only could only hang on to them, they would win out.
He was, it must be said, working with willing material, in that she had outsize bravado, and despite their extreme poverty (when she first arrived in New York, she slept on benches in Central Park), an instinctive integrity: when she was still stacking books a couple of people "saw potential in me and offered me quite a bit of money to do records as early as 1971, '72, but not in my own way. They would have a vision of me – a pop vision, or how they could transform me, and the money didn't tempt me." Was there ever a moment when that was quite a hard choice? "No." The answer is sharp, immediate. "If somebody said I'll give you a million dollars, but you have to go against your own grain, you just have to do what I say – it would take me one second. I've never been tortured by something like that. Tormented more about what line to use in a poem, or the right word to use in a sentence. All I've ever wanted, since I was a child, was to do something wonderful."
This is, in part, what gives her her singular presence. Her appearance, of course – the strong, masculine face and honey hair, all crags and straw, the dark toque and oversize coat somewhat incongruous in a boutique hotel in central Paris – but more her sense of wonder, her openness to the possibility of wonder in herself and others. It underlines in her an unexpected warmth and delicacy. The openness has always been a kind of survival strategy too: for all its fierceness – and after she recorded her debut album, Horses, in 1975 and found herself on the path to being a rock star, defiance – her career has been one of reverences, of chasing and collecting icons and relics and friends from whom she could learn the things she needed to proceed. It's a pleasingly unironic predeliction: "I'm not an ironic person," she once said. "I'm not always articulate, and sometimes I'm just crap, but I'm never ironic."

So, famously, Rimbaud, whose Illuminations she stole from a second-hand book stall when she was a teenager, and whose incantatory poetry and rackety life have compelled her ever since; Blake, whose everyday visions of angels, whose merging of language with "drawlings" (as she says the word) in a pale gold palette both she and Mapplethorpe loved and emulated; Jim Morrison, whom she saw on stage, and, watching him turn poetry into performance, thought simply: "I could do that." Her new album, which will be finished within the next month, was inspired by her reading of Bulgakov's The Master and Margarita – but also by St Francis of Assisi, and by a visit to Dylan Thomas's home in Laugharne.
Or Sam Shepard, whom she met when he was in a band, who became her lover and taught her: "When you hit a wall" – of your own imagined limitations – "just kick it in." William Burroughs, whom she encountered when she and Mapplethorpe were living at the Chelsea Hotel; from him "I learned more about how to conduct myself, how to make the right choices in terms of – keeping your name clean. William said, 'If you keep your name clean, your name will be worth more someday. If you keep your name clean, it will always be of use.' And even though my name's only Smith, I have found it useful." It is instructive that when she fell in love and settled down, she did so with a man, guitarist Fred "Sonic" Smith, who she believed was cleverer than herself, who had things to teach her.
When he died, in 1994, leaving her a widow with two young children, it was one of the few times she felt properly lost. "That was a very difficult time in my life, when I had to decide what I was going to do, without him. But you know, when I have these moments, I just go all the way back to being 11 years old, when I knew who I was. Seven, 11 – I go all the way back there and then begin again, in my mind."
Smith grew up in straitened economic circumstances – her mother was a waitress and her father worked in a factory, assembling thermostats, jobs that provided just enough, and sometimes not enough, to feed four children. But there were always books, music, and as much art as they could afford. Her father "would take Socrates to the factory with him" and read Plato aloud over dinner, while her mother made meatball sandwiches; her mother had sung in nightclubs in the 30s, and loved opera, and the emerging glimmerings of rock'n'roll.

Smith, who was often ill – scarlet fever gave her hallucinations and, for a long time, double vision – daydreamed about being an opera singer. Not the swooning, romantic women's parts, but "the tenor parts, the young Gypsy-boy parts. Being in Verdi, Il Trovatore, being Manrico or something." Or she wanted to travel to the Great Wall of China or join the Foreign Legion; she was unimpressed to discover she was expected to be a girl, and especially a girl in the 50s in rural America, where you became a hairdresser or a housewife, "and the boys went to Vietnam or became policemen. A girl had these few choices, and the boys had these few choices. And I wasn't interested in any of their choices. I was interested in the whole world, that was not even spoken about. I had more communication with my dog than I had with my surroundings."
Increasingly, books became her world, and by extension, wanting to write them. "Everything else grew out of that. More than anything that's been the thread through my life – the desire to write, the impulse to write. I mean, it's taken me other places, but it was the impulse to write that led me to singing. I'm not a musician. I never thought of performing in a rock'n'roll band. I was just drawn in. It was like being called to duty – I was called to duty, and I did my duty as best as I could."
At 20 she discovered she was pregnant; the way she speaks about it now, eyes nearly closed, reveals more about the climate for discussing such things in America than anything about herself. "Well, it's, you know – that's a huge decision for any person, especially a young person. It was not a sacrifice, and it was not a decision I took lightly, and I didn't have the emotional or financial stability, or even the motive – or even what it took to raise a child. I had a good upbringing, and a strong understanding of the value of human life, but it still was … I just did the best I could, that's all. Who can say?" What is clear from her memoir, though, was that it dragged her out of childhood and gave her focus and direction: sitting on her bed working up the courage to tell her family that she was pregnant, and that she had found an educated, childless couple to take the baby, "an overwhelming sense of mission eclipsed my fears … I would be an artist. I would prove my worth." She was dismissed from college; when she went into labour the nurses called her Dracula's Daughter and, almost fatally, as the child was in a breech position, ignored her. She will not say whether or not they have since been in touch.
Horses, as well as regularly being cited as one of the best debut albums ever, had a cover photo taken by Mapplethorpe that became an instant classic. "It was the most electrifying image I'd ever seen of a woman of my generation," Camille Paglia once said. It "immediately went up on my wall, as if it were a holy icon. It symbolised for me not only women's new liberation but the fusion of high art and popular culture." The trouble was, Smith's motivations were never to stand for anything but herself, particularly not any political movement, however worthy. She continued to explore wordscapes and the soundscapes that might make them live; her accidental career gave her choices, and the freedom to travel. But it didn't give her, eventually, the satisfaction or integrity she craved. So she left – she met Fred Smith, married him, and moved to suburban Detroit, becoming a non-driver (she is too dyslexic) stranded in a land of cars. "That's where he wanted to live," she told an interviewer some years ago. "He was the man."
Those who looked to her as a feminist pathfinder felt betrayed. They accused her of selling out, called her a "domestic cow", a phrase that clearly still stings. "I was still a worker. Some people said, 'Oh, well, you didn't do anything in the 80s – first of all, to be a mother and a wife is probably the hardest job one can have. But I always wrote. I wrote every day. I don't think I could have written Just Kids had I not spent all of the 80s developing my craft as a writer." She wrote for three hours every day, from 5am to 8, when her baby woke; having two children, and a husband, "I had to learn, really, how to rein in my energies and discipline myself. And I found it very very useful. I rebelled against it at first, but it's a good thing to have." They recorded an album together, which didn't sell; as well as publishing books of poetry, she has produced "many unfinished books, a few books that I finished in the 80s but never published, a crime book, a character study, a book of travels"; right now she is writing, simultaneously, "an extension of the book I wrote for Robert, and working on a detective story, and a sort of fairytale. I'm always working."
After her husband's death, she had to perform again, to support her children – and many people rallied to help her: her lawyer found her children a place at a progressive private school, Michael Stipe, who credits Horses with beginning his career, found her a house, Bob Dylan asked her to play with him, Ann Demeulemeester gave her clothes. Now, increasingly, she works with her children – her son is a guitarist and married to Meg White of the White Stripes; the evening before we met she did a gig with her daughter, a composer. They will do more of these gigs in the UK next week, one in St Giles Church, which she likes because they do good things for the homeless, and another at Aldeburgh, where she will improvise work based on WG Sebald's poem After Nature. She has spent the morning reading him, and "listening to Polly Harvey's new song – she has this new song, The Words That Maketh Murder – what a great song. It just makes me happy to exist. Whenever anyone does something of worth, including myself, it just makes me happy to be alive. So I listened to that song all morning, totally happy." Her face lights up, her eyes shine. And I think that the joy she finds in these things, the searching for them, the openness to them, the wanting to do them herself, are, finally, so much more interesting than being held to any creed; more interesting, more inspiring, and far more profound.
Just Kids is published by Bloomsbury £8.99. Patti Smith will be in conversation with Geoff Dyer on Tuesday at the Royal Geographical Society, 7pm. See intelligencesquared.com/events
 This article was amended on 24 January 2011. The original said Patti Smith would perform at the Aldeburgh festival. This has been corrected.



Saturday, February 14, 2009

A life in writing / Amos Oz

Amos Oz
Photo by Kobi Kalmanovitz


A life in writing: Amos Oz



'If every last Palestinian refugee was settled in the West Bank and Gaza, it would still be less crowded than Belgium'


Interview by Aida Edemariam
Saturday 14 February 2009 00.01 GMT



A
mos Oz works in a study that has the subterranean feel of the basement flat in which he grew up in 1940s Jerusalem - except that up the stairs and outside there are no narrow streets full of refugees fleeing the pogroms of eastern Europe, but blue sky and rocky ochre desert and the clearest air, through which the sound of fighter jets resonates for miles. He was a bookish child, wanted to grow up to be a book; here in Arad, where the Judaean desert meets the Negev and drops towards the Dead Sea, he has created a burrow lined with books, most in Hebrew, a good number by him.

Oz has often protested that his novels - experiments in verse, in epistolary narrative; meditations on family, on, in the case of his novel Rhyming Love and Death, published this week in the UK, how the creative imagination works, the devious way it feeds on reality - are not crude allegory: or, as he has rather impatiently said, a father is not necessarily the government, the mother not necessarily the old values, the daughter not necessarily a symbol of the shattered economy. But when we meet, the Gaza offensive is only just over, Israeli elections are two weeks away (Oz is campaigning for Meretz, a Zionist-left, social democratic party), and it isn't long before politics obtrudes. "I am outraged with both Hamas and the Israelis in this war," he says. "I feel an anger I find difficult to express because it's an anger in both directions."

Do many people feel that way? "I'm not sure. Israelis were genuinely infuriated, as was I, about the harassment and bombardment and rocket attacks on Israeli towns and villages for years and years by Hamas from Gaza. And the public mood was 'Let's teach them a lesson'. Trouble is, this so-called lesson" - which Oz supported - "went completely out of proportion. There is no comparison between the suffering and devastation and death that Gaza inflicted on Israel for eight years, and the suffering, devastation and death Israel inflicted on Gaza in 20 days. No proportion at all." He is appalled by the numbers - "300 dead children. Hundreds of innocent civilians. Thousands of homes demolished" - and while he would like to think that bombing UN structures was accidental, he is also appalled by reports that white phosphorus may have been used, and Dime bombs: "There is no justification. No way this could be justified. If this is true, it's a war crime and it should be treated as a war crime."
Some have suggested that the two-state solution is now dead, but for all his anger, Oz refuses to go that far. "It is the only possible solution. There is no other possible solution. And I would say more than that. Down below, the majority of Israeli Jews and the majority of Palestinian Arabs know that at the end of the day there will be two states. Are they happy about it? No they are not. Will they be dancing in the streets in Israel and in Palestine when the two-state solution is implemented? No they will not. But they know it."

Oz, 70 in May and thus nine years older than his country, remembers when there was dancing in the streets of Jerusalem - on 29 November 1947, when the UN voted to create two states on the territory of the British mandate. Oz's memoir A Tale of Love and Darkness (2003), as well as being the story of a family disintegrating, is a vivid account of the birth of a state; of how necessary it felt to Jews at that time, the utter relief of it, just a couple of years after the extent of the Nazi genocide became known. It also offers a clear-eyed observation of the fault lines in the nascent state, often filtered through his parents: the beautiful mother whose romantic longing curdled into depression and finally suicide when Amos was 12; the revisionist Zionist father, overqualified for professorships yet denied them because Jerusalem contained so many more scholars than students; both pouring the weight of their disappointment and hope on to the shoulders of their one, precocious child.
"In those days," Oz writes, "I was not so much a child as a bundle of self-righteous arguments, a little chauvinist dressed up as a peace-lover, a sanctimonious, honey-tongued nationalist, a nine-year-old Zionist propagandist." When, half a century later, he came to write his memoir, that the Israeli novelist David Grossman calls "his masterpiece", he was a very different person: he tried to imagine how the Arabs felt at those shouts of joy, and he made much of the couple of encounters with Arabs he did have pre-1947. Yet those brief encounters are required to carry too much baggage, and are, as David Remnick later remarked in the New Yorker, the only false notes in a great book.
There were all sorts of internal divisions, too: as highly educated, first-generation immigrants, his parents spoke, between them, 16 languages, and read nine more, "but the only language they taught me was Hebrew" - even though Hebrew, for them, was still very far from a language in which to live an intimate life. "It was necessary," Oz says, "because nobody could talk to each other when they arrived. The only common language they had was prayerbook Hebrew. So if they had to ask directions to the Wailing Wall, or rent a business, or buy bread, or sell a pair of shoes, they had to resort to prayerbook language." The distance between ancient Hebrew and modern is not large: "It's easier for a six-year-old Israeli boy to read the Bible in the original," as Oz puts it, "than it is for a six-year-old English boy to read Chaucer." The Israeli connection to the biblical lands is likewise telescoped, and so Hebrew both grew with the state and consolidated it. No one is more aware of this than Oz, on the level of both the literature ("writing in modern Hebrew is a bit like playing chamber music inside a huge empty cathedral. If you are not very careful with the echoes, you may evoke some monstrosities") and the state: "Whenever war is called peace," he once wrote, "where oppression and persecution are referred to as security, and assassination is called liberation, the defilement of language precedes and prepares for the defilement of life and dignity."
At 14, he rebelled against everything by changing his surname - from Klausner, which claimed him for Jerusalem's intellectual aristocracy, to Oz, meaning "strength" - and going to live on a kibbutz. He stayed on Kibbutz Hulda for 31 years, marrying Nily, daughter of the kibbutz librarian, and raising three children. Initially he tried to erase his hyper-articulate self by trying not to talk much; he tried not to write, too, but soon found himself sitting on the toilet seat in their small house in the dead of night, smoking and writing fiction. The kibbutz gave up on him ever being a useful labourer, and sent him to study literature so that he could teach it; his first book, Where the Jackals Howl, was published in 1965, and he has since published 25 books, both fiction and non-fiction.
His novels can sell 70,000 in hardback, and he has been known to sell 10,000 copies of a new book in a single day; Grossman ascribes this to "the way he manages both to describe the most intimate aspects of our lives and to place them in the Israeli echo-box, with all the voices that are sounded here. Especially if you read his memoir, you see how Amos is the offspring of all the contradictory urges and pains within the Israeli psyche."
"He has also been brave," believes Jacqueline Rose, professor of English at Queen Mary, University of London, and co-founder of Independent Jewish Voices. "There's a very early short story called 'Nomad and Viper', in which Jews on a kibbutz decide to lynch a group of nomads who are, it is implied, unfairly accused of theft. It's a very strong exploration of the dehumanising of the Arab in the mind of the kibbutzim." She refers, too, to his first major novel, My Michael (1968), and argues that it is, "in some ways, his most revolutionary novel. The central character is a woman, Hannah, who goes mad, haunted by two boys who disappeared from Jerusalem after the establishment of the state of Israel. It was a way of writing about the devastating effect of Zionism on the minds of Israelis who can't acknowledge what Zionism did, and expresses the dilemma of what it means to be Israeli incredibly powerfully. The problem is that the dilemma of the Israeli seems to be the only thing that matters. The damage is done to the Israeli soul rather than to the Palestinians as a people."
Oz fought in the 1967 war, then in the Yom Kippur war in 1973, and both gave him a "gut hatred of war and fighting" - but not, he clarifies, any shame for having done it. "I am not a pacifist in terms of turning the other cheek. There is a difference between myself and some of the peace people in Europe: whereas they think that the ultimate evil in the world is war, I think the ultimate evil in the world is aggression, and aggression sometimes must be repelled by force. I will never forget the words of a relative of mine, who spent the years of the Holocaust in Theresienstadt concentration camp. Although she was a peace activist, she said to me, 'You know, we were liberated from the concentration camp not by peace demonstrators carrying placards, but by American soldiers carrying submachine guns.'"

Twenty years ago, Oz wrote an essay in which he asked: "What is one justified in dying for and what is it permissible to kill for?" "If I am not mistaken," he says, when I put it to him again, "my answer was life itself, and freedom. And nothing else. Not holy places, not national interests, not resources. But life and freedom." Never popular with the increasingly powerful Israeli right and disenchanted with Labour ("bankrupt ... it made itself available for any coalition at all, including potentially a Netanyahu coalition"), Oz is also not of what he calls the "radical left". He gave self-defence as his reason for supporting Israel's initial bombing of Lebanon in 2006 (although, when Israel expanded its operations, he held a press conference with Grossman and AB Yehoshua to demand a ceasefire). Self-defence is why he argued for the Gaza offensive, even though friends such as Grossman disagreed. Commentators further to the left than Oz argue that blaming Hamas for the war, as he has done, ignores the economic blockade and siege of Gaza, and underplays the sharp increase in Jewish settlement of the West Bank that accompanied the Gaza pullout of 2005.
This last is not entirely fair, because Oz considered that expansion "atrocious. I think all those settlements, or most of those settlements, will have to go", to fit his vision of an Israel within pre-1967 borders; and because he has never been silent on the matter of settlement and occupation. A couple of months after the 1967 war, he wrote a letter to the newspaper Davar calling for the government to begin immediate negotiations about the West Bank and Gaza, because "even unavoidable occupation is corrupting occupation". As a result of his views, often trenchantly expressed (in 1994, he described extremist Jewish settlers as "Hezbollah in a skullcap"), he has been called a traitor, been assaulted and received death threats.
Over the years, he has developed a formulation that he repeats like a refrain: the situation in the Middle East is "a clash between right and right - the Palestinians are in Palestine because they have no other place in the world. The Israeli Jews are in Israel for the same reason - they have no other place in the world. This provides for a perfect understanding and a terrible tragedy." Hence, for him, the requirement for a two-state solution, land for peace, advocated first through Peace Now, which he co-founded in 1978, and now through Meretz.
"My precondition for peace," he says, "is a comprehensive solution for the Palestinian refugee problem, on the soil of the future Palestine" - which he sees as being the West Bank and Gaza, linked by a corridor, or underground tunnel, and cleared of almost all Israeli settlements. "And I would insist that this is my primary requirement for selfish reasons - for Israeli security reasons. As long as those people are rotting in dehumanising conditions in refugee camps, Israel will have no security, peace contract or no peace contract."
Palestinians such as the novelist Samir el-Youssef, who grew up in a refugee camp, see things slightly differently. "Oz sees Palestinians as a problem which the Israelis ought to get rid of as soon as possible," he says. "His ridiculous suggestion that all Palestinians could be heaped up in the tiny space of the West Bank and Gaza shows that he sees Palestinians as nothing but old furniture which should be stored away." Oz's answer is short: "If every last Palestinian refugee was settled in the West Bank and Gaza, it would still be less crowded than Belgium."
Oz believes that Palestinian Israelis should "become full-scale Israeli citizens, which they are not right now" - but he would rule out any right of return, "because if they return, there will be two Palestinian states and no home for the Jewish people. They have to be resettled in Palestine. After all, they are Palestinians." He doesn't object to the security wall, in principle, except that "they are building the wall in the middle of Palestine" - if there has to be one, it should trace the pre-1967 border. He would talk to Hamas, though only if it recognises Israel.

This week's elections, and the rapid rise of the far-right leader Avigdor Lieberman, who now finds himself able to dictate terms, have proved that the Israeli public is in distinctly hawkish mood. Labour came in fourth with an unprecedentedly few 13 seats, Meretz only just survived, with 3. Oz sees this as a direct result of Ariel Sharon's Gaza pullout and the Hamas rockets that followed it. "They hardened Israelis and brought about both the military offensive in Gaza and the result of this election." On a technical level, "Meretz will have to think hard about how many leftwing voters wasted their votes on irrelevant parties that didn't even get a seat. Our system is outdated." As for the future, "it is hard to be a prophet in the land of the prophets," he says, "but we have seen the right make great concessions in the name of peace before" - Menachem Begin gave up Sinai, and Sharon gave up Gaza, he can only hope it happens again.
Because although Oz shares with many Israelis a primal fear for "the existence of Israel", he insists that "anything is possible here. Nobody ever predicted, a week before President Sadat came to Jerusalem in 1977, that his arrival would be the beginning of a peace process that would end up in an - unhappy - Israeli-Egyptian peace. We have seen peace with Egypt, we have seen peace with Jordan, we have seen the handshake between Rabin and Arafat - things are possible. And moreover, they can happen quite swiftly, and quite unexpectedly."

Oz on Oz

"Once in a while it is worth turning on the light to clarify what is going on ..."
(From the closing paragraph of Rhyming Life and Death, translated by Nicholas de Lange, published by Chatto & Windus)
If I had to describe in the simplest of words the purpose of my writing, these will be the words.

Tuesday, January 13, 2009

The Saturday Interview / Hilary Mantel / 'I accumulated an anger that would rip a roof off'




 

Hilary Mantel is the clear bookies' favourite to win the 2009 Booker prize 
Photograph: Eamonn McCabe/Eamonn McCabe



The Saturday Interview
Hilary Mantel

'I accumulated an anger that would rip a roof off'


Author Hilary Mantel has resisted shallow interpretations of her macabre work as domestic novels. Now her latest pitch-dark novel is the favourite to win the Booker prize
Aida Edemariam
Saturday 12 September 2009
T
here is an anecdote Hilary Mantel tells, about herself at six, and "a little girl in my class putting her hand up and saying, 'Miss! My mother says there's no such person as the devil.' And I remember thinking through all sides of the question. I thought: her mother's told her that because she's having nightmares. And Miss doesn't know what to say! Because how can she say, 'Your mother was wrong'? It was the most delicious moment."

Her large pale eyes look intent, and mischievous. "But of course, I did myself believe in the devil. I just thought I was made of stronger stuff than that little girl."
She tells it because she is trying to illustrate how her writing mind works, the ambivalences, the watching and weighing – but it also says much about her: about her Catholic upbringing, her tar-black sense of humour, her role, always, as the marginal watcher, the defiance and will to survive that she has imparted to her most recent character.
Wolf Hall, which has been shortlisted for the Booker prize, follows Henry VIII's machinations from the point of view of Thomas Cromwell, son of an alehouse-keeper and blacksmith, lawyer-turned first Earl of Essex and architect of the split from Rome. Even though she is running in a very strong field (JM Coetzee, AS Byatt, Sarah Waters, Adam Foulds and Simon Mawer) the bookies make her the clear favourite: according to Ladbrokes, Wolf Hall is apparently most popular novel in Booker betting history.

Her husband brings in a tray – cups, teapot, a plate of delicate biscuits. Their large flat, on the top floor of a converted asylum ("the neighbours report oddities," she once wrote. "One has seen a disembodied arm floating around") is flooded with sunshine, and we sit in chairs overlooking miles of woodland; the city of Guildford is, apparently, hidden in one of the dips. Her books, 10 novels and a memoir, are full of dark shadows, frightening corners, but here it's all pale: cream carpets, cream chairs, peach or pale green walls; Mantel herself wears a long sky-blue dress, covered in flowers. Her eyes, with their thin outer rim of darker blue, miss nothing; her voice, with its northern consonants, is slightly breathy, slightly hoarse, both girlish and very much not at the same time: it carries a great freight of complicated wryness; wields flippancy, as she once put it, like a weapon. She is generally still, except for her hands, which are actorly, almost melodramatic. Illness has encased her in unwanted weight, but somehow the impression is of angles everywhere.

Wolf Hall is supple, vivid, and warm; particularly striking is the natural way it absorbs now-alien levels of casual brutality and understands, implicitly, how real a force religion was in daily life, how close were death and eternal damnation. It's true that she has form: "Many of my novels," she has said, "whatever their theme, have a supernatural tinge. Paranoia is their climate, the macabre is always lurking. If there is no actual ghost, there are powerful fears of the unknown. There are houses with no-go areas, an 'empty' flat from which footsteps are heard; or there is a psychic no-go area, a long-buried secret, a Bluebeard's room." But 1527, with England on the cusp of rejecting Rome, seems particularly suited to her.
"If you were brought up in a religious setting, like Catholicism," she says – her parents were Irish Catholics who had fetched up near Glossop, in Derbyshire – "you believe in magic, but you were also told there was something more powerful than magic, and that is the invisible world created by God. And the fact is that the visible world is only the tip. I still believe that. I have a very strong sense of the world of our senses being – how can I put it – not the whole story."
By the time she was 12 she had rejected religion, but it had already left another indelible mark, the "real cliche, the sense of guilt. You grow up believing that you're wrong and bad. And for me, because I took what I was told really seriously, it bred a very intense habit of introspection and self-examination and a terrible severity with myself. So that nothing was ever good enough. It's like installing a policeman, and one moreover who keeps changing the law."

It did not help that by the time she was four, in 1956, her parents' marriage was in trouble; a lodger had moved into their ghost-riddled house and gradually supplanted her father, who would sit in the front room with his chess board while his wife and her new partner occupied the kitchen; after a few years of this they moved, and the children were given their stepfather's name. Mantel never saw her father again, though after her memoir Giving Up the Ghost was published in 2003 a stepsister she had never heard of wrote and told her of his remarriage, and death. Also that he once saw her on television, in "1990, the Booker Prize dinner; the year of AS Byatt's Possession. And what did he say? He said, 'I think that's my daughter.'"
A spiky girl, ill-suited to childhood, she was the first in her family to get into grammar school ("Passed. So I can have a life, I thought"), where she did well, and then the first into higher education, reading law at the London School of Economics. Her mother could perhaps have done something similar, but a clerical error meant she was never entered for her 11-plus. "My mother's never sat an exam in her life, so she has no appreciation of what that was like, but she did her very best to make sure I got what she had missed, even though she wasn't perfectly sure what that was." Mantel wanted to be a barrister, and impressed her teachers, but "the facts of life pressed in on me. I was female, northern and poor." She was also in love, and after her first year she moved to the law department at Sheffield, where her boyfriend was studying geology; they married when they were 20.
She had always been rather sickly, racked by fevers, migraines interfering with her hearing and vision; her stepfather, impatient, had nicknamed her Miss Neverwell, but the year after she left university her afflictions suddenly became debilitating. Pain, she writes, "sliced through me … It stole my life." She went to doctors, but prejudice coloured their diagnoses. "It was assumed[the symptoms] were psychosomatic, and that you were under some sort of strain owing to the fact that you were trying to operate in a man's world. This is what I was told: I was told my symptoms were caused by ambition."
She is appalled by those who have forgotten what her generation, and her mother's generation, encountered. "very annoyingly, you get women nowadays who are educated and have got on in their professions, saying, 'Oh, but I'm not a feminist.'" Anger suffuses her face, an intensity almost indecent. "The only reason they can say that is that they're standing on the shoulders of their mothers, who fought these battles, I think for a woman to say 'I'm not a feminist' is [like] a lamb joining the slaughterer's guild. It's just empty-headed and stupid."
Perhaps they're trying to distance themselves from a particular caricature of feminism?
"Yeah. Well, they need to inform themselves. Women now take a great deal for granted, but of course the fact is that only a part of the feminist agenda has ever been worked through."
Assumptions about women's writing coloured how her early novels were read. "My first two novels were very black comedies. The second one, Vacant Possession (1986), was a state-of-the-nation novel. It was set in 1984! It's a bit of a clue! But they were read as domestic black comedies. Eight Months on Ghazzah Street (1988), tells you a great deal about the wellsprings of [Islamist] fundamentalism. But it was read as a domestic story.
"When A Place of Greater Safety (1992), came out, one critic said (suddenly she sounds like Alan Bennett, or Eeyore), 'There's a lot in it about wallpaper.' There's one reference to wallpaper. A new wife says to her husband, shall we have treillage? And he says, 'Ask me a real question'. And that's the reference to wallpaper. I think it's the fact that if a man wrote a book about a family, it was understood to have wider repercussions, to be a metaphorical representation, perhaps of the political process. If a woman wrote the same text, it would just be … a domestic novel."
How did that make you feel? A pause. "It amuses me." She could not sound less amused. "And it saddens me, as well." Though she does think the world has changed, and "actually, with Wolf Hall, I think I've passed that barrier … but you'd have to ask me in a few years."
And assumptions about women nearly killed her. She was prescribed antidepressants, and when they didn't work, sent to a psychiatrist, who prescribed Valium ("it worked to damage me"), Fentazine, which gave her akathisia, "the worst single, defined episode of my entire life," as she wrote in her memoir. "No physical pain has ever matched that morning's uprush of killing fear, the hammering heart. You are impelled to move, to pace in a small room. You force yourself down into a chair, only to rise out of it. You choke; pressure rises inside your skull. You hands pull at your clothing and tear at your arms …" The answer was Largactil, a heavy-duty anti-psychotic, "which knocked me into insensibility."
If they didn't listen much at first, they listened less now. "Once you're labelled as mentally ill, and that's in your medical notes, then anything you say can be discounted as an artefact of your mental illness. So you are trapped in a cycle of invalidation. Obviously this still happens to people, and it happens to men, I'm sure. ... But it's very dangerous, when what the person actually has is a physical illness, for which no investigation has been undertaken."
By this point she was working as a social worker in a geriatric hospital, "and it seemed as if the avenues were blocked". So she read, biographies and histories of the French Revolution, making notes she would take with her when her husband, Gerald, got a job at the geological survey in Botswana. "I just went on and on researching, until I came to the point where the facts had run out and I realised I must make things up. And so I began inventing in a very wary sort of way." (The Booker traditionally needs some sort of controversy to keep it afloat; so far this has been provided by AS Byatt attacking the use of real people in fiction, and thus, it was felt, her rival Mantel. "I don't for a moment think … [her] remarks were directed at me or Wolf Hall," says Mantel. "Indeed I have been told that she is upset at the thought they might be interpreted in that way.")
Pain spread and deepened, and she searched, desperately, through medical textbooks to find out what was wrong, eventually diagnosing herself with endometriosis, in which cells normally found in the lining of the womb crop up elsewhere in the body. Returning to England on leave, she went to have it treated and at St George's Hospital, then on Hyde Park, "my fertility [was] confiscated, and my insides rearranged." Her novel was rejected, and, when she and Gerald returned to Botswana, their marriage fell apart.
She had been told endometriosis did not recur; she was proof that it did: three years after her operation she was overwhelmed by resurgent pain. This time hormones were prescribed. She had been seven and a half stone, "thin and pale, with long legs and a long fall of colourless hair"; within a year she was size 14. Her husband came back from Botswana, and they remarried. She followed him to a job in Saudi Arabia, where the confinement, the treatment of women, the inability to go anywhere by herself, enraged her. And she kept growing, size 20, weight exacerbated by steroids, which gave her hair-loss and "a steroid moon-face". She became strange to herself, and "accumulated an anger that would rip a roof off."
She wrote another book. "I was always driven, it's just that I looked like a person who was driven. And now I don't look like what I am." Which is differently driven, perhaps. "I run, a lot of the time, on mental energy, which is my alternative fuel. My body's always screaming for a rest, and my mind's always screaming, 'Go, go, go!' And I need – I get a lot of my impetus from the fact that I've got so much to write. I've got so many ideas, and sometimes the more exhausted my body gets, the more active my mind gets." Health is an ongoing struggle; every year, it seems, something new is wrong. "What you have to do is not be at war with your body. Somehow you have to accommodate your body's weaknesses, quirks, and nasty surprises. Though it's very hard not to feel as if you're chained to a saboteur."
She has wanted to write a novel about Thomas Cromwell since the 70s, but it took her years to feel she had the strength. "You know, you get these periods when the sun breaks through" – her hands and voice lift in benediction – "every few years. And you have to take advantage of them." But when she began the book, "I began to feel so strong. And I thought, 'why didn't you meet Thomas Cromwell years ago? He's so robust! You can't knock him down.' I spent all those years with Robespierre and his asthma. If I could go back and give myself one piece of advice, it would be, 'Choose healthier characters'."

Wolf Hall extract 'His left eye is blinded'

"So now get up."
Felled, dazed, silent, he has fallen; knocked full-length on the cobbles of the yard. His head turns sideways; his eyes are turned towards the gate, as if someone might arrive to help him out. One blow, properly placed, could kill him now.
Blood from the gash on his head – which was his father's first effort – is trickling across his face. Add to this, his left eye is blinded; but if he squints sideways, with his right eye he can see that the stitching of his father's boot is unravelling. The twine has sprung clear of the leather, and a hard knot in it has caught his eyebrow and opened another cut.
"So now get up!" Walter is roaring down at him, working out where to kick him next. He lifts his head an inch or two, and moves forward, on his belly, trying to do it without exposing his hands, on which Walter enjoys stamping. "What are you, an eel?" his parent asks. He trots backwards, gathers pace, and aims another kick.
It knocks the last breath out of him; he thinks it may be his last. His forehead returns to the ground; he lies waiting, for Walter to jump on him. The dog, Bella, is barking, shut away in an outhouse. I'll miss my dog, he thinks. The yard smells of beer and blood. Someone is shouting, down on the riverbank. Nothing hurts, or perhaps it's that everything hurts, because there is no separate pain that he can pick out. But the cold strikes him, just in one place: just through his cheekbone as it rests on the cobbles.
"Look now, look now," Walter bellows. He hops on one foot, as if he's dancing. "Look what I've done. Burst my boot, kicking your head."