User Profile

In this phase of my life, I seem to be fascinated by memoirs, and this, too was not different. I didn't love it, but was captivated and I'm glad I read it.

Various disordered feelings informed my reaction to it. First, Arundhati's life is undoubtedly exciting and inspiring, and she knows it. I am awed by her capacity to achieve such great literary success but not be devoured by the desire for more and more approval, by her political engagement and principledness, and her commitment to think through inequalities and privilege, and act accordingly, which comes across as very genuine. At times, especially in the second half of the book, she got carried away with her own mythology: as if she was more interested projecting this cool, I-don't-give-a-fuck persona instead of exploring her feelings and experiences.

Second, given the title and beginning, I was expecting (and hoping) that the relationship with her mother were more central to the book. I could read a hundred books about this. She managed to portray Mary Roy as a three-dimensional character, without hiding her ugly traits but always recognising her merits. I see pieces of her in the women from my own family: fierce and petty, inspiring, vulnerable and cruel all at once. There were long chunks of the book were Mary Roy disappeared into the background, probably because real-life young Arundhati had to push her there to realise herself as a grown woman. Arguably, this compounded the self-mythologising I mentioned earlier.

Third, I found the writing to be quite uneven, which some pages full of cliches, and other outright poetic. Fourth, is it me or her ex husband comes across as an absolute jerk, even if that's clearly not her intention? Fifth, I went to hear Arundhati Roy speak about the book in the UvA Aula, it was packed with people, many wearing a keffiyeh, all the Indian folks from US4P. It was great to be there but I was so tired I fell asleep.

Highs and lows.

This is a fairly unpleasant read, and, I suspect, deliberately so. Monotone, relatively eventless, without dialogue, the experience reminded me of watching a French film from the seventies, one of those film you know is worth watching even if it's boring.

The story is about a couple of creative freelancers from Southern Europe, Tom and Anna, moving to Berlin in their twenties, feeling very cool for it, but also never cool enough. They wish there was more to life, and struggle to appreciate what they have, which is, objectively speaking, a lot: plenty of free time, enough disposable income, a really nice flat, a lively city around them. Some brief windows of hope open when they get political engaged during the 2015 refugee crisis, or when they put their energy into work in the hope to be able to open their own design agency. Both are short-lived and end with a feeling of failure. As they get older, their friendships, never profound, fade, as does their desire to explore the city, which is also changing, becoming more and more gentrified and generic.

Of course, there were many, too many aspects of the book I related to. Something the book does very well, I think, is to convey the frustration generated by wanting to be 'good' and not knowing how, of striving for a fulfilling life but being stuck in a general lack of meaning, embodying all these 'hateable' cliches (owning monstera plants, playing Catan, hosting elaborated dinner parties) that are objectively completely harmless and fine. Something that I found problematic, however, is that the book veers between the general (the couple comes, generically, from Southern Europe, the friends have no name, time slips by without many orientating landmarks) and the specific (certain Berlin bars and clubs, the refugee crisis as a defining moment, etc.). In this picking and choosing of reality, I thought some important conditions get lost: for example the fact that a large share of our generation either graduated into, or faces as a newly employed person, a major financial crisis; or the fact that middle-class Southern Europeans may well move to Berlin in pursuit of cultural vibrancy and fun, but those left behind do not stay allured by financial stability (permanent contracts and pension? where does Vincenzo live?). And the idea that Berlin hipsters would import back vanguard ideas and taste is a little passé, and, even accounting for the fact that maybe that's the view of Tom and Anna, rather than Vincenzo, I think most Southern European hipsters would be too self-aware to subscribe to it.

This book was such a brick, in the best possible way. Schulman's oral history of Act Up has a precise goal: to show the diversity of the movement in all its facets: the people who participated (not just white gay men, but also women, latinos, sex-workers, addicts, youth, etc), the issues it dealt with (not just drug development, but housing, health care, migration and detention policy, etc), and the tactics it embraced (disrupting mass and marching on the street, but also charity auctions and mail advertising to fund-raise, interrupting TV shows and conferences, sitting down with policy-makers and CEOs of pharmaceutical companies to discuss clinical trials, poster campaigns and political funerals). No doubt, this diversity is what made them so effective, but was also the movement's undoing, as people 'on the inside', who got a place at the table with the powerful, and people 'on the outside', who were left / insisted on stay outside shouting stopped being able to work in tandem and parted ways. To make her points, Schulman tells so many stories about so many different people, because the point she wants to convey is that there were no heroes, and that everyone's contribution was important and awe-inspiring. Which is such a beautiful thing to contemplate! Also: activism made everyone in Act Up really sexy, or at least that was most interviewees' first impression.

Pursuing a humanities degree has left Kate saddled with a huge student debt and the only way she sees to pay it back is to go and work in the Alberta oil fields. Life in the camps is quite miserable: the same grind day in, day out, toxic dust and sludge that irritates the skin and kills ducks, an unsafe work environment with many work victims and, for Kate and the few women in the job, a daily experience of sexual harassment and, not infrequently, sexual violence. The drawings are simple, like a comic strip, and the narrative is very repetitive; intentionally, I think: every day is cold and filled with sexist comments. Something I enjoyed is how Kate is determined to not demonise the men around her, and tries to understand how they can be loving fathers to some distant daughters and absolute creeps to her. Loneliness and alienation are the answers she comes up with.

Something that I found maybe slightly problematic is her handling of indigenous people and their claims to the land that is being destroyed. She explains that, as a just-graduated twenty-something, she was barely aware of this issue, which is fair enough. And to be clear: I believe that we should always be curious and outraged when people are exploited and made to suffer. But the book was published a good 15 years after the end of the story, so possibly it's a shame she didn't wave this more into the stories.

As a child in 1980s Albania, Lea grows up feeling free. She believes in the ideals of socialism and in 'holiness' of Enver Hoxha. She doesn't miss the freedom to consume what she wants, happy to choose between toasted and non-toasted sunflower seeds. She is unaware of the system of political repression of which she is a tiny cog, and that has harmed her direct family in quite brutal ways. Then, the dictatorship falls, and capitalism comes to town. Suddenly, freedom is on everyone's mouth, but Lea starts to notice unfreedom everywhere: people lose their job and have no money for things that used to be provided for free by the state, they are forced to migrate because of unemployment, while not being allowed to migrate because of borders. Money replaces imprisonment as the main engine of coercion, until the dramatic ending when, as the country is torn apart by a quasi civil-war, Lea is not even allowed to leave her house or risks being shot. Alongside Lea, we learn to know her family: first and foremost Lea's dad, Zafo, and her granny, Nini, as well as her more distant mother, and a host of more typified characters that are also braving the same transition: the dogmatic socialist teacher, the ridicolous World Bank consultant, the street bully. I really enjoyed this book!

Another Orlando-inspired novel, straight after Andrea Lawlor's, this time setting out to interrogate what gets lost when one is socialised as female. The protagonist, a slightly uptight university professor of literature, struggles to read Virginia Wolf, which she accuses of being mortally boring. Until the unruly part of her decides to escape, taking the form of a boy. The two half of the selves are gendered in a bit of a conventional, essentialist way, but of course the fact that they are both within her makes it more interesting. To my taste, the writing verged on the erudite-for-erudite sake, but with a hint of self-irony about that too. Often, that humorous touch was provided by the ominiscent narrator, who, unfortunately, had decided it wasn't becoming to describe the sexual encounters of the escapee who, keen to act on decades of repressed desire, loved to cruise (while disappointing while reading, I can see this was probably a reasonably choice on the part of an author who, likely, has never gone cruising). As an aside, this is the straightest book with a gay protagonist I have ever read (not in a bad way).

This was such a great holiday read, I loved it! I know many would understand 'Holiday read' to mean shallow, fun-but-devoid-of-literary-merits. Here, I use it to mean: joyful (though also heartbreaking at times), very queer and very, very horny, with loads of really well-written sex scenes.

It is sold as a queer-er, 1990s Orlando, and I would need to have read Orlando (on my list) to be able to comment on that. What I can say is that Paul is a careless gay boy, a ready-to-fall-in-love-so-hard dyke, a curious gender-queer person, constantly trying to have sex as a way to connect, have a fun, feel alive, deaden the pain, self-destruct, or just while the time away. They can be a sissy boy, a hunky gay man, a soft butch, or a feminine girl flirting with frat boys at parties. Sometimes it goes well, sometimes it goes horribly wrong. Mortality is all around, as the AIDS crisis looms, and then hits. But there is no tragic ending for Paul, nor a happy one either, the book ends, but, I imagine, Paul just keeps at it.

While the book is marketed as an 'AIDS memoir', I would rather describe it as a provocative essay. In the first pages, Sarah professes to hate books that revolve around a single argument, yet I'm tempted to summarise the one at the core of this book as follows:

*Before AIDS, queers in New York (and possibly everywhere) were outcasts and rebels who made edgy art, which sometimes was good, sometimes was not; but it was experimental and meaningful. After AIDS, most gay people are just hipsters and yuppies, who work in the arts but have sold out and/or are concerned with professional success and paying rents, something that admittedly has become a lot harder to do. AIDS was the key event that marked, and possibly even caused, this transition.

I don't buy the causal relation implied here (AIDS having engendered gentrification), although I'm sure it looks that way from Sarah's standpoint. But that's very much secondary. The description of how gays became shallow is absolutely convincing, and the analogy/link between this shift and gentrification really helpful. Sarah manages to critique some personal consumption choices while keeping the focus on the loss of collective organising and political vision. Finally, I feel compelled to mention how strong a ranter Sarah is. She rants about homophobia, she rants about chic restaurants, she rants about lesbians making babies, she rants about MFAs and the publishing industry, she rants about youth these days...and I'm here for it. I hope to stay inspired and keep my inner gentrifier at bay.