Monday, April 24, 2023

"Desert Solitaire" by Edward Abbey

I finished Desert Solitaire before Tomorrow, and Tomorrow, and Tomorrow, but with some unexpected free time on my hands, I thought I'd take a stab at Abbey's most well-known work.

I recently borrowed a stack of books from a good friend who teaches environmental science at a local university. I forget sometimes that there are entire genres of books that I never touch, and environmental nonfiction is one of them. Actually, "never" isn't the right word, as one of the first English classes I took in college was Literature of the American Environment. I was a freshman amidst a small group of senior English majors, I was terrified, and I loved the class. I wrote a lot that semester, but my culminating assignment was (what I remember to be) a cool paper on the American West in Thelma and Louise. But that class was almost twenty years ago, so I've plenty of additional reading to do.

Desert Solitaire has a lot in common with Wendell Berry's essays (I wasn't surprised to learn later that they were friends), even though Abbey's focused on the wilderness and Berry with responsible farming. Still, both men are deeply concerned with man's relationship with the land, and in particular, the way capitalism demands destruction of and separation from the land. The Berry essays I read last fall were far more didactic overall than Abbey's, though the latter in no way buries or obscures his point of view and his scathing indictment of wilderness development. There's something unnerving about reading about his concerns with development in the National Parks (Arches specifically, where he spends two summers) in a book published in 1968. Fifty years later, and we're in even worse shape with our National Parks. The most popular sections are overrun with tourists (I'm not exempt, I've certainly been one) and are under constant danger because of it. By seeking to "appreciate" nature by visiting it, we're also destroying it.

Berry and Abbey also share a similar tone--that of grumpy curmudgeon. I found myself of two minds with the tone. On the on hand, Abbey's frustrations with naïve tourists are always funny. On the other hand, Abbey's indictments reflect both arrogance and privilege. Abbey was in a position to explore Arches and other wild locations in their primitive forms. He rails against others accessing them yes, to protect the environment, but also to protect the isolated experience he enjoys. He can enjoy them the right way; others (in his view) can't.

But ultimately Abbey is not concerned only with selfishly keeping others out and criticizing development. Instead, he seeks to evokes the wilderness' power, beauty, indifference, and fragility. That means plenty of the essays are stories of Abbey's experiences, whether his near-death hike in Havasupai or his time kayaking down the Colorado River. In such stories, Abbey is bold, sometimes a little foolish, and always ready to be awed. I had a student write recently about whether we're losing our sense of wonder, but that's something Abbey never lacks. It's infectious--and no doubt the reason so many people, including myself, have been taken with the book.

I started Desert Solitaire in Ohio but finished it while on spring break in Texas. Though not quite the land Abbey's describing, I still felt that I was imbibing some of that desert spirit as I looked out over gentle, vast hills. In some ways, his advice seems more doable than Berry's. I know I'm never going to start a farm, but I can choose to explore what wilderness remains by foot rather than by car; by the challenging path rather than the quick scenic overlook. I can appreciate that there's something to be gained by staring up at the star-filled sky while in the middle of nowhere--and it's something that I can't get inside an air-conditioned hotel.

Wednesday, April 19, 2023

"Tomorrow, and Tomorrow, and Tomorrow" by Gabrielle Zevin

I'm not a writer for a lot of reasons, including all the obvious ones: talent, skill, ideas, practice, time. Still there's a minor issue that's haunted me for years and that perhaps has also interfered with any writerly aspirations. A fear that leads me to doubt the legitimacy of most anything I write. The fear of being sentimental.

Professionals have reinforced the idea that to be sentimental is an insult. Popular books are "sentimental." Serious books are "unsparing," which is apparently the opposite of "sentimental" and thus a compliment. Think of all the book blurbs claiming such-and-such novel is an "unsparing look at [insert important issue]." In truth, I'm not always completely sure what it means to be "unsparing"--self-deprecation, ungenerous observations, discussion of the taboo?

My fear of sentimentality has not only stalled my writing, but has also meant I'm always on guard for books or movies that are sentimental so that I can rebuff their advances and maintain ironic distance. This is sometimes hard. When I find myself enjoying a book veering into the land of sentimentality, I fear I'm losing credibility as a connoisseur of literature. What is that, a "Live Laugh Love" sign on my wall?! (I do not have one. One has to take some firm stances.)

All of this is a completely unnecessary introduction to Tomorrow, and Tomorrow, and Tomorrow, a shield on the fact that the book is maybe a little sentimental but I mostly liked it anyway. The novel follows the lives of Sam and Sadie, who are drawn together by video games as children and then go on to create video games together as adults. The novel follows the ups and downs of their relationship over several decades, through love and losses; disability and mental illness; trauma and the mundane. It felt very similar to Michael Chabon's The Amazing Adventures of Kavalier & Clay in its style and focus.

I suppose what leads me to call Tomorrow sentimental is that I have little to say about the book itself. It's a sweet story about the power of someone to "play" with--someone who gets the things you get, values the things you value, finds fun in the same activities. I think that's a good message. The novel begins in the '90s, so it has a lot of nostalgic video game callbacks for people from that era. I never gamed, but I still feel a little warmth for the original Donkey Kong. 

There are some elements that irked me. The way it dealt with unexpected death felt cliché and overdone. Zevin titled her book after Shakespeare's most well-known soliloquy, which feels like a bold move, but I'm not sure thematically it did Macbeth justice. 

Still, overall I was drawn to the affection between Sam and Sadie, their admiration for and understanding of each other. Maybe it's not possible to write about deeply loving relationships without being a bit sentimental. I guess that's okay too. I've reached a point in my life where I know I value those more than anything else, so I suppose it's only to be expected that my tastes in literature would reflect it.

Note: This echoes some ideas I brought up in my Verity review, but I chose to plow ahead nonetheless.