LINES OF THE DAY

". . . But the past does not exist independently from the present. Indeed, the past is only past because there is a present, just as I can point to something over there only because I am here. But nothing is inherently over there or here. In that sense, the past has no content. The past -- or more accurately, pastness -- is a position. Thus, in no way can we identify the past as past." p. 15

". . . But we may want to keep in mind that deeds and words are not as distinguishable as often we presume. History does not belong only to its narrators, professional or amateur. While some of us debate what history is or was, others take it into their own hands." p. 153

Silencing the Past: Power and the Production of History (1995) by Michel-Rolph Trouillot

Saturday, December 26, 2009

Post Christmas, Ante New Year's

Because of the bug I remain chronologically challenged. It's not that I don't know what day of the week it is, I don't know if it's day or night. None of the daily and weekly markers have been in effect since I went down with it, and then, it being winter solstice and the national holiday glaze, coupled with weather so many places that have shut down travel or even doing errands, no wonder I wonder, "Where and when are we?" It rained most of last night, and is raining now. Cold and dark it remains, midnight or noon.

With this frequent coughing I'm still unfit for company, mostly (our friends were spectacularly kind and generous in their refusal to be annoyed by it, I must say!). However, upon finally arising after 11 AM today I am feeling the first glimmers in 11 days of something like focus. I've started writing the essay for da List's annual feature, "The Books We're Reading." We're also working on the course we're teaching starting in February at Baruch.

I have two lovely Christmas gift books to read, one of which I happily read half through yesterday. Georges (1843), is Alexander Dumas's single novel of slavery, though it focuses upon rich, free mulattos and white prejudice on Mauritius, in the Napoleonic era -- with one of Jamaica Kinkaid's characteristic Forewards (Modern Library, trans. 2007). There are several aspects of oddness in this narrative. One notes immediately that Dumas chose to locate this novel in the Indian Ocean, rather than in the Caribbean, or Haiti, even, where his grandmother was a slave. It feels extremely odd that the eponymous hero utters grand sentiments against color prejudice, frees two slaves, and the buys two boatloads of slaves from his brother, who is the slave trader. Perhaps this perplexity will be resolved in the second half of the narrative?

The other gift book is Anthony Everitt's Hadrian And The Triumph of Rome (2009). This is less a biography of Hadrian a portrait of Rome's empire at its peak of power and efficiency, because there is little primary material for a biographer to work with. As an era portrait, to my personal pleasure the work begins in Spain, where European history begins. Hadrian's forefather was one of the wounded legionnaires who was left to pacify and romanize the Iberian coast post the defeat of Hannibal. The reviews state many know less about this peak era of Rome than of ithe empire's beginning and end; I certainly am among those. What I'm not going to like much though, is that so much narrative that deals with Hadrian himself as biography is written in that speculative mode -- paragraphs describing what he 'might have done,' 'may have thought,' 'where he may have gone,' etc. This is an unfortunate mode for any text, but particularly, one may think, for biography. That it is fallen into because there is so little written by Hadrian to go on, one understands. But maybe there is a different rhetorical strategy to deal with this?  One thing, however, the book has accomplished is to convince me that those who say there was an Alexandrine empire post Alexander are right. This from reading the pp. listed in the index under "Alexander."


Now, back to Sienkiewicz, snake handling and the church of signs.

6 comments:

K. said...

I got The Age of Wonder: How the Romantic Generation Discovered the Beauty and Terror of Science (Holmes). It tells of some of the early breakthroughs by 18th C. British scientists and the early conflicts between science and religion.

Right now, I'm reading Zeitoun, Dave Eggers account of the Syrian contractor who rescued many New Orleanians after The Flood via a canoe. Until, that is, he was arrested and accused of being a member of Al Qaeda.

Foxessa said...

I've always admired and enjoyed Holmes's works. I still haven't managed to read this latest one -- whch should be right up my alley.

I'm imagining all the things this biographer of Shelley says about Mary Shelley and Frankenstein Of course, he's said quite a bit already in various of his other books.

Love, C.

K. said...

I haven't read him (yet!). The New Yorker gave a favorable review to The Age of Wonder. I'm really interested in the history of science and ideas, and of the relationship between science and the arts. Have you heard of or read a book called Proust Was a Neuroscientist?

Foxessa said...

I'm fairly anti anything to do with Proust.

One might think otherwise, and it puzzles me, but there it is: I have an antipathy for anything dealing with Proust.

Love, c.

T. said...

Glad to hear the brain is beginning to clear, but that coughing must be miserable.

I'm nearly finished with Barbara Kingsolver's newest, which I have found to be plodding and lacking spark. Of course, K. feels just the opposite! Go figure. Our wildly opposing tastes in fiction lead to some lively discussions, and all in good humor.

Foxessa said...

T. -- You're in the larger company, though, who feel that Kingsolver overdid the 'documents' in this novel, and that it isn't as good as some of her others.

As I haven't yet read it, I can't say one way or the other, but that so many feel the way you do, and they are generally opinions I trust, hasn't given me any oooph to get a copy. But then, I generally trust K's opinions too ....

Love, C.