17.9.11

Soft Silly Music: Meaningful or Magical? Beauty and Narrative at a Jeff Mangum show

The crowd kept clapping. Minutes after the encore, a lesser-known b-side from the artist that many fans didn’t recognize, the crowd’s needs persisted. 1,500 people, more or less united as one, stood and clapped and whistled and yelled, their rhythm fluctuating between cacophony and a focused monorhythm of quickening beats. The house lights were up. Their cause felt slated for sure disappointment; once the house lights go up, it’s over.

Five minutes into the ovation, I had already left my second floor seat. Ostensibly in the states for the wedding of a friend from high school, I texted Ben, who was waiting for me in Harvard Square to begin the 90-minute drive to the house on the Cape where we and our friends were staying. I told him that I would surely be there in a couple minutes, that the crowd would give up.

All the same, I ducked into the first floor, in the hall behind the seats. This was not an unsavvy crowd; they knew how unlikely they were to prevail against the Rule of the House Lights. They kept on anyway. Maybe it’s because the show was in and of itself so unlikely, one that for years none of us imagined would ever happen. Jeff Mangum had played for us that night, giving us 13 songs from the two albums that made up the Neutral Milk Hotel discography, and then he played us “Engine,” the aforementioned B-side. On the one hand, we could not ask for anymore; on the other hand, if we’d reached this far, how could we stop before reaching our limit, before finding if we could get one real encore out of the beloved, prodigal musician? The crowd, as such, kept clapping.

And then I had occasion to amend my previous text message, the one stating that you should always take the house lights against the crowd. I wrote, “except this time.” Mangum had returned to play. Again.

***

Those familiar with Jeff Mangum – those who can identify him by name, without his band attached to it – probably already understand the hoopla, and understand how the announcement of his concert was what pushed me to fly over the Atlantic Ocean for the weekend rather than anything else. For those who don’t, a brief explanation:

Jeff Mangum is an American musician, probably close to the age of 40 if not there yet, who wrote and performed music in the 1990s. A member of the amorphous Elephant 6 collective – essentially a group of friends, many of them from Ruston, LA, who lived in Athens, GA and played music together in a variety of bands and songwriting vehicles, eventually garnering notoriety and popularity on a national scale, though I can’t really say how great that scale was at the time. The collective became known for making great music in a generally throwback manner, with nods to 60s pop, the Beach Boys Pet Sounds, that sort of thing. The three most well-known groups or artists from the Elephant 6 collective, I believe, were Olivia Tremor Control, The Apples in Stereo, and Neutral Milk Hotel. Each project had a Ruston native at its core – The Apples, still active, revolved around Robert Schneider in making their 60’s inspired power pop; Olivia Tremor Control, who have in the past couple years started playing shows again and even recorded a new song, had Will Cullen Hart and Bill Doss at the center of their psychedelic pop masterpieces; and Neutral Milk Hotel was the name of Mangum’s longtime project.

If the Apples made the easiest to understand music of the original E6 group, and if Olivia Tremor Control tossed off two records consisting of brilliant pop but also long tracks of tape loops and “experiments,” (and if, for that matter, the younger affiliate Of Montreal actually found the most success in their second, post-2004 recording period), Neutral Milk Hotel are probably the most loved of the E6 bands. I have little grounds for affirming this beyond internet browsing and sharing a love of NMH with friends in college and through 30music, but it is the only band in the group to be enshrined into the 33 1/3 canon, which stands as at least one strong piece of evidence (Kim Cooper’s fabulously reported book serves as the major source for the info in this article, by the by).

In any case, the short story goes that Mangum made two full length albums. The first, On Avery Island, was essentially a solo record that Schneider produced and a bunch of other people played on as necessary. The second, In the Aeroplane Over the Sea, is the one everybody remembers, featuring a full four-piece band (Mangum on guitar and vocals, Scott Spillane on trumpet, Jeremy Barnes on drums, Julian Koster on just about everything else). After that album, released in February 1998, the band toured for much of the year, and then Mangum didn’t want to do it anymore. He stopped playing shows, broke up the band, disappeared from the indie scene, and didn’t do much publicly for about a decade. Then he started making random appearances at his friends’ shows (including the Olivia Tremor Control reunion shows), and then he played a random show in Brooklyn last winter, and finally this year it was announced he would play a few shows on the east coast and a festival in England. That catches you up as far as the quick and dirty goes.

As for my attendance, the story is as follows: upon learning about the shows, I first thought about going to the festival (I’m still considering it), but then realized that his dates in the Boston area coincided with the wedding I was invited to. And since it would have been impractical to go to Boston on a Saturday night when I was meant to be in Harwich, I fixed my eyes on making the show at Sanders Theater on a Friday night.

This was the first show I have ever gone to that involved buying tickets immediately, on the day of. Never have I had to deal with the frustrating process of queuing up online and calling repeatedly in hopes of getting through for one or two seats. I tried on a Thursday when pre-ticket sales were supposedly on sale, but they “sold out” in minutes. The next day, I geared up for the gates to open, clicked and clicked and called and called, varying between requesting one or two seats (in case I could find an interested +1), despairing that despite total preparation, I would be left in the cold. So long to the wedding as well, I thought, it wouldn’t be worth the $700 flight.

And then, at last, I got through. One seat, in the balcony, for September 9th, 2011, at Sanders Theater in Cambridge, MA. I had my ticket to see Jeff Mangum.

***

Whether instituted at Mangum’s suggestion, by Wordless Music, or by the Sanders Theater management, the controls on the tickets were stricter than for normal shows. Due to great concern about scalping, ticket holders, all of whom had to pick up at will call, were required not only to show ID but a print out of their ticket receipt or confirmation. I was not alone in not reading the fine print on the email detailing the process we ticket holders got the week before. I thought perhaps to tell the uptight dude running said process that we lived in 2011 and not 2004; he might have easily countered that most people have a smart phone in 2011, which could have shown the confirmation as well. Foiled in my mind, I found a Staples, printed out my ticket confirmation, and returned armed for music.

Sanders Theater, home to Memorial Hall, is a church-like building on the western edge of Harvard’s campus. Brick and stately, with busts of significant people on each side, and a tall-roofed hall that held 1,500 people, mostly in wooden benches, it’s a theater my grandmother comes often with her Russian-language community of elderly folks to see classical performances. The theater was the perfect setting for Mangum to play; it could have been the source of the images depicted on NMH posters like what they were selling at the show, with old-fashioned victrolas and society dames in the balcony and the general love of old and lost that in this scene, in the hall of Sanders Theater before Mangum’s 6th official show of his return, almost felt pornographically kitschy and attuned to the NMH aesthetic. What I mostly mean to say, though, is that Sanders Theater was a good place to see this performance.

I began milling around the building just after 7, waiting for doors to open at 7:30 – concert literature boasted of a prompt 8:00pm start. Also, seeing as I had pre-wedding buffoonery to join as soon as possible on the Cape, I thought I could help encourage an on-time start by setting the example and arriving in my seat early. Outside, a small crowd walked around the grassy plot in front of the building. A few stray fans walked around either asking if someone needed a ticket or, more commonly, if someone was selling a ticket. Hanging to our north was a soon to be full moon, not shining in the late daylight but nevertheless impressive, ominous. Amongst the crowd I saw a larger percentage of flannel shirts worn than I’ve seen since middle school, probably – whether the guys sporting the checkered look did it as a conscious homage to Mangum’s preferred form of outerwear or because that’s just how they roll, I quietly thanked the universe that my girlfriend’s taste do not include that style.

The doors opened at 7:30, I entered, found my seat, and began reading. Slowly, the hall filled with spectators, and by the time the show unpromptly began at 8:17pm, it was about two-thirds full, and a diverse mix – the tattooed, dads with their sons (I wonder who dragged whom to the show), college bros, and indie types like the couple next to me who spoke of not wanting to seem all “anti lo-fi” but really preferring the earlier Mountain Goats records. Of course, diverse in a relative sense; most of the crowd appeared to be middle-class white, with a few Asian, Latino, and other minorities breaking up the monochromaticity. The gender divide was fairly even however, which for a nominally “indie rock” show speaks of Neutral Milk Hotel’s broad appeal. In the background, the sound system piped in recordings of chanting that sounded African, Asian, or in between (i.e. Arabic).

The gentleman running Wordless Music, a man possibly so excited by the monumental nature of this show that he awkwardly quizzed people about whether they were coming or going in the ticket collection process, appeared to applause and introduced the show. He explained why photos and recording devices were barred; not just, as I guessed, because Mangum might have asked for this restriction but because, as I realized when he said it, it’s really annoying when everybody is recording the show and taking pictures with the phone and everything else. When we live through our handheld devices, we’re not living as much, and a live performance from Jeff Mangum was a place deserving of living as much as anything else.

Without further ado, a classical string quartet going by Acme came on. Four girls dressed casually in jeans and what not, they sat and played three pieces by Erik Satie that I noted only for the long bowstrokes that featured heavily, in the first two pieces especially. Meanwhile, the crowd seeped in during the 3rd piece and grew closer to capacity. The new arrivals, ignoring restrictions, used technology rampantly; at least, one guy in the row in front of me posted “Jeff Mangum” on his facebook status. Inescapable.

Similarly inescapable was the last song of Acme’s set, a 20-minute or so rendition of a Gavin Bryars piece called, “Jesus Blood Never Failed Me Yet.” Over a tape loop of an English homeless man singing the titular refrain a few times, Acme gradually built up an elaborate backing, took over the lead melodic role, and then faded into support and then nothingness. Interesting conceptually, the piece wore out the patience of the crowd, at least based on my section and some comments I saw on a web board afterward.

The song and the set ended around 9:00pm. A few last stragglers joined the crowd, a few others stepped out for a cigarette, a breath of fresh air, or, paradoxically, both. I’d be lying if I said there was a great tension in the crowd, necessarily, but I certainly felt eager, and as the break extended to 15 minutes and then 20, that excitement surely built in other parts of the now-packed hall. At about 9:20pm, a fan in the balcony whistled loudly, exhortatively.

On cue, the house lights dimmed. Seconds later, Jeff Mangum, clad in trademark flannel, emerged from the back of the stage, sat down in a chair between four guitars and two microphones, picked up the guitar, and began to strum In the Aeroplane Over the Sea’s epic centerpiece, “Oh Comely.”

***

As a person with spiritual aspirations but an overly rational mind, I allow myself very few speculations about life “finding” me in any ineffable way. One of those speculations regards music. I believe that in my life music has frequently entered at just the right moment, just the time when I was ready for it. I’m aware that as I tout my examples they could be easily ripped apart as spurious, but all the same, I have a feeling of serendipity regarding the music in my life.

The first example was finally getting into Saves the Day and the rest of the brand of emo my friends listened to in high school not long after my first and only high school break up. This example becomes all the more laughable when you consider I dated the girl for, really, three weeks, and that I had no real excuse for feeling so sad, just as most high school boys from upper-middle class backgrounds who listened to emo had no real excuse for feeling so sad, but there it was. Similarly, Nirvana, The Beatles, and Dylan hit me in college at all the right points, when I was finally ready for them. I remember listening to Blonde on Blonde for the first time on a Delta/Song Airlines flight home from Fort Lauderdale after wrecking my engine of the first car I ever owned by driving it for 5.5K miles and 8-9 months without ever getting the oil changed. Go ahead and tell me that wasn’t an appropriate time to hear about everybody getting stoned.

Few records found me at a more appropriate time than In the Aeroplane Over the Sea. I’m not sure how long I had heard about it before I received it, or when it first came on my radar; between hearing of Of Montreal in early 2004 as the first aural introduction to Elephant 6, listening to Pet Sounds in May of 2004 for the first time and knowing that Brian Wilson was a big influence on E6, and maybe falling in love with Saturday Looks Good to Me’s Every Night over the summer of 2004, a band All Music Guide shamelessly linked to NMH (shamelessly because there’s not much relation between the two, but AMG, personal friends of Fred Thomas, SLGTM’s front man, have supported him in every way possible, which is great by the way), as well as writing for 30music where a few people touted the album as indeed worth it, I became aware that I needed to try it out. Still, I was skeptical; besides not wanting to join the proverbial gang, I thought about the new comic someone had designed for 30music with a girl protesting that she was into NMH before everybody knew them, the joke being that everybody knew them already.

Without directly resisting or seeking out the album, I skated by until mid-September 2004. Home for my mother’s funeral, delayed by the unfortunate timing of Rosh Hashanah that year and the unavailability of a rabbi, I was on my AIM at the kitchen table in my dad’s house when one of the writers for 30music, a girl named Marisha, started talking to me. I’m sure I didn’t tell her about what was going on, being as I only knew her through online correspondence and not all that well but, perhaps because I had requested it from her earlier or, more likely, she told me she would send it to me at some earlier time, she sent me In the Aeroplane Over the Sea.

Again, those who have heard the album understand why it was appropriate at that time. Simple harmonically and melodically, but with a grab bag of weird and interesting sounds (accordions, singing saws, horns, fuzz on the guitars, and so on), the album had the immediate hooks to draw me in to its songs and its lyrics, which in their classic melodies and vivid themes spoke to the heart, to beauty and sadness and joy and pain and revelry and exhaustion. In large part inspired by reading Anne Frank’s diary, Mangum concocted a gritty and sparkling tribute to music and life, revolving around nine basic songs and two instrumental interludes. It was a song cycle, with two pairs of tracks explicitly tied together, a series of intersecting lyrical themes, and very basic chord changes. Weird and at the same time immediately accessible, direct and loud and soft and naked, always honest, the album creates its listening audience, such that almost anybody who is thoughtful and patient enough to put it on two or three times will fall in love with it.

Clearly, it didn’t take me long to join the NMH orthodoxy. Still a newcomer to the guitar, I learned almost all of the songs on the album. The first two tracks are in F; 3, 4, 6, and 8 are in G; 11 in G#; 9 in E; 5 and 10 instrumentals; and I never learned 7. Also, just about the only thing Mangum does with his chord structure out of the norm is to make the 3 or the 6 chord major instead of minor; he plays a B major instead of minor on track 4, “Two-Headed Boy Pt. 1”; a C major instead of minor on track 11, “Two-Headed Boy Pt. 2”; and a E major instead of minor on “Oh Comely”. In the spring of 2005, I performed an open mic on my college campus where I played a song I wrote about my mom and covered “Two-Headed Boy Pt. 1,” enjoying the rickety liberation that Mangum’s vocal encouraged me to sing with.

***

Mangum began this show, as mentioned, with “Oh Comely”, that E major to C major progression that, in its dissonance, sounds significantly sadder and more weighty than it would if he just stuck with the E minor (these chords, reversed, are how the Kinks get the shimmering effect on the initial strum of “Lola”). The crowd, unsure what Mangum’s tone would be on the night and afraid to spoil anything, stayed silent as he boomed through the 8-minute song, humming the horn parts that enter in the last section of the song, and then ending the song suddenly, without the ritardando of the album version. The crowd erupted, Mangum thanked them, and settled in for the night.

In terms of a concert, it was pretty straightforward. I’ll post the set list below, but it mostly conformed to expectations – every major In the Aeroplane… song was played, as were the best cuts off On Avery Island: “Song Against Sex” especially, but also “Naomi,” “Gardenhead/Leave Me Alone,” and “Baby For Pree/Where You’ll Find Me Now.” Mangum played a Roky Erickson cover that he had played at previous shows on this tour, a simple lyric about love that fit in well.

Mangum also had an easy grip of the crowd. He changed a lyric in “Naomi” to refer to Cambridge and then, almost like a nervous newcomer on the scene, asked if the crowd heard the reference. He invited everybody to sing along to “In the Aeroplane over the Sea”, and then again on the last verse of “Ghost.” I never sing along at shows, a habit I must have gleaned from reading some clever bastard’s writing about why it’s lame to sing at shows instead of listening to the artist – I don’t claim originality – and while that’s a fair point for many shows, this one had the feeling of a reunion between Mangum and his fans, of a community; I joined in on “Ghost”, and later on “Holland, 1945,” and I felt the chill of union with others washing over me as I sang about the girl falling from 14 stories high.

The communal aspect played a huge role in this concert, which was as much a gathering as an artistic performance. The crowd reminded me of two other concerts I’ve been to: the first is a Jonathan Richman show I went to earlier this year, whose crowd was similar to this in their eagerness to lap up everything the performer said and then encourage him to come up with more. Some in the crowd shouted for “Little Birds”, a song mentioned in Cooper’s book as a dark, harrowing, disturbing song, the only post-In the Aeroplane… song Mangum has performed in public, and that only once 12-13 years ago. This knowledge of the artist corresponded with folks at the JR show who knew Richman’s trademark leg kick dance by heart and hoped to see it come out every other song.

The other show it reminded me of was a Cat Power show in Greensboro the summer of 2006, shortly after she had declared her sobriety, and just before she hit into the fullest boom of her career, it seems, in performing cover songs with sultry Southern swagger. There she stopped many of her songs in the middle out of frustration with the sound in the monitors, shared the news about her sobriety to great cheers, and finally ended the set only to light a cigarette and hold an impromptu Q&A. There as at the Mangum show, the crowd understood that they were dealing with a delicate artist, and so coaxed her along, supporting her at every stumble and wobble, hoping she could ride that bike on her own and amaze us with her talents therein.

This eager support did indeed coax some singular moments out of the shared Mangum/Sanders Theater crowd performance. During “Baby for Pree/Where You’ll Find Me Now,” the sound system cut off, and Mangum, losing the sound in the monitors, stood up and walked to the front of the stage without breaking his rhythm, sitting down and continuing to play, his booming voice still reaching us in the nosebleeds, everybody leaning on the edge of their seat to join in the intimacy. In an interlude between songs a few minutes later, somebody from the balcony shouted, “Now I can die happy!”, leading to a funny exchange where Mangum thanked the guy without knowing what he said, then finally nodded his understanding and said he could die happy too, to great cheers. Finally, before his last pre-encore song, as the shouts for “Little Birds” and “Communist Daughter” and others, he interrupted to ask, “Ok, do you guys want to sing Holland now?” For all the stories of damaged genius and reluctant performer, Mangum had a fair share of self-awareness and detachment about the show.

***

Anybody who’s made it this far is more than forgiven for wondering what the big deal is, then. If Mangum played songs not as a crazy savant but as a normal, centered man, if the crowd enjoyed it and supported it, isn’t that enough? Can’t we just go home happy? Can’t I just die happy without writing all of this?

There’s still something to explore. There’s the issue of the museum and the battle between narrative and beauty.

In another 33 1/3 book, one about the Kinks’ Village Green Preservation Society album, Andy Miller writes about the fifth track, “Last of the Steam-Powered Trains.” The whole song is a joke on the Kinks still playing R&B, and on a deeper level about, as Miller writes, “How do you reconcile your past and present?” The lyric talks about the last rebel, locked up in a museum, and Miller later compares that quixotic lyric to the Kinks’ fate, especially regarding this album, a failure at the time but enshrined in the museum of rock after the fact.

Attending any rock show, especially for non-social people like myself, is something of a strange phenomenon. Often, shows are just live performances of what you can hear on the album from the comfort of your home. It’s a vehicle for supporting the museum artifacts that are modern musicians, but unless the band itself is notorious for putting on a great or special show, there is often little extra benefit to the spectator beyond the social experience and that feeling of altruism.

Further, any reunion or comeback tour becomes immediately an exercise in nostalgia. Especially the first time around, no one wants to hear anything new. So an older band or artist is reviving material from 5, 10, 15, 20 years ago, playing it in a new context, but also owing great fidelity to the original. The spontaneity and improvisation that often serves as the key selling point of a live performance is not only unlikely but not desired in this case. Which leads us to narrative and beauty.

Before Jeff Mangum returned from his self-imposed hiatus to appear at shows again and then play them on his own, he existed as a narrative for his fans. We watch sports and consume art, I’d argue, for two main reasons: narrative and beauty (in sports there’s also identification, a cruder if more essential concept that, for this essay, I’m not interested in). Sports, for example, offers endless narrative, as various plot lines are shaped, erased, altered, changed, renewed, and grafted on to men hitting, throwing, or bouncing a ball at or past one another. These narratives are largely meaningless, and also rather arbitrary, but they are enjoyable, and life too is largely meaningless and arbitrary when we dare think about it.

On the beauty side of the occasion, sports suffer compared to art. In all my years of passionate and then casual fandom, I can think of only one athlete I witnessed in person who consistently performed beautifully: Pedro Martinez, pitcher for the Boston Red Sox during my high school and college years, time of my passionate fandom. Otherwise, due to us taking for granted the unbelievable athleticism of modern athletes, and the competition level that somehow renders most athletes on an equal plane with one another, I haven’t witnessed anybody else at that level.

Art, of course, provides a great deal of beauty, as well as a great deal of thought into how we live our lives and what it’s all about. On the macro scale, however, art rarely provides us with easy narrative. Everybody is accessible in our time, on facebook and twitter and all the rest of it, and it becomes hard to idolize or glorify artists, never mind construct back stories about them. I’ve been lucky enough, through my time with 30music, to meet a lot of my favorite musicians, and I understand that they’re just normal men and women who are good at music and who have gone on their own path, not heroes or idols or anything else. I could make a narrative up about them, but it wouldn’t be any more special than making up a narrative about you, or about the guy who records their sound, or who serves the drink, or anyone else.

That said, Mangum offered us one of the few time-tested narratives in art: that of the damaged artist who burned out rather than fade away. He became the Internet Age’s Salinger, its Cobain, its Greta Garbo, a feat all the harder because it’s the Internet Age, where no one can disappear and none are forgotten. A myth rose around him, a sense that in some way He was not like us, whether for ill or for good or, as it is with most chosen ones, for both.

Which of course is in some way ridiculous, as most narratives are when deconstructed. Mangum wrote a couple great records, went on tour, got tired, and stopped playing and talking to people in public. It wasn’t really that big of a deal. When pulling out that 33 1/3 book about In the Aeroplane…, I was surprised to see it was written in 2005. Of course, I must have read it as soon as it came out. In 2005, Mangum had been gone for seven years. Seven years, when observed from a few steps back, should hardly be long enough to build up a legend, no matter how good the album was. And yet, the rumor mill had long been churning, with brief reports flaring against the dark backdrop of mystery enveloping Mangum, a Pitchfork interview and the quest to find him from Creative Loafing most notable. Never mind that Mangum made it reasonably clear, as much as he could, that he just didn’t want to play music anymore, for reasons that included the grind of being a popular touring musician, sadness and depression over his friends’ continued suffering despite his own success, his desire to remain himself at a time when people overreacted to the depth of his music, and just because he didn’t want to play anymore. It sounds strange for him to stop doing what he loved to do, but it also makes sense for his mood to change, if we allow people freedom to decide the course of their own life. Mangum obviously either had that innate sense of freedom or acquired it through the success or struggle that In the Aeroplane Over the Sea’s reception brought him. He changed.

Then why come back? What changed between 2003, say, and now? Did he need the money (unlikely)? Did he just finally realize how much people out there cared about him as a musician and as a person? Did he just get over it? We as consumers of culture and as thinkers and as people also have the freedom to come up with our answer to that first question.

For example, I constructed a narrative that makes sense to me – Mangum hit on a raw nerve with In the Aeroplane…, both with listeners and himself. Cooper often posits that Mangum may have “channeled” his songs rather than write them, and while the idea comes off as overly hippie-dippy, there is something to it: many of Mangum’s melodies are simple and effective in a way that makes them appear timeless, more discovered than written – a more common example of the eternal melody that blends into what came before and yet stands out on its own is Dylan’s “Mr. Tambourine Man.” Neutral Milk Hotel songs have that feeling. “Two-headed Boy Pt. 2” would sound brilliant covered by a professional church-type choir, especially the last bridge, the “When we break, we all wait for our miracle,” section, where a perfect harmony/counter-melody offers itself a register above the main melody.

So there’s something fully-formed about the songs on this album, eternal. The lyrics trade in ugliness, death, rebirth, pain, joy, and similar weighty themes. For this reason, the album becomes a hit with everyone who really listens to it. Those listeners react to it in a deep way, and expect something out of Mangum. Mangum meanwhile has to perform these songs over and over, songs that came out of a personal lode of creativity but also emotion and energy; he tapped into a source inside himself that maybe was hidden, maybe was painful to reach, maybe opened up other difficult thoughts and flows. Performing these things might have challenged Mangum, might have physically or emotionally or spiritually have hurt him and drained him night after night. Add that to his new obligations to the press and his fans, and to his disappointment upon coming home and seeing others don’t have it the way he does, and we can imagine the beginnings of his funk.

From there, it’s not a huge step to the end of the funk. Love and support from those dear to him; understanding (which he flexed several times in this concert) that his songs are loved and he is loved as well by strangers out there; and time and distance that allows him to process the energy released in writing these songs, to detach himself from the creative process and to wholly embrace these songs as now formed entities, as something he can perform for others without giving a piece of himself from that dark place, and all of a sudden playing music for strangers doesn’t become as hard.

That’s my theory, at least. Like most plausible narratives about other human beings, especially strangers, people we can’t really imagine or know beyond superficial levels, it’s probably total bullshit. Just like Mangum’s level-headed control of the crowd ruined every narrative of damaged genius. That’s the thing about narratives about people: they’re highly contingent on facts we don’t know and feelings that often change, and memory besides.

Which leaves us with beauty. On a night where all we wanted was the museum versions of the song, where the early bootlegs from a Mangum comeback show suggested he was playing his songs straight up, with little nuance compared to the album versions except some added sweetness in his voice, where we all knew what we were getting, and where the chance of improvisation and narrative spectacle was minimal, all we were left with was beauty. Which may be the ultimate reason Mangum came back: to perform his songs that many of us find beautiful, to allow us to reconnect to songs we’ve heard so many times we know them front and back, to hear them for the first time live (I assume), to join a community for an hour and unite in something bigger than ourselves. In something beautiful.

***

“Except this time,” I texted to Ben, as Mangum reappeared and the crowd roared and the house lights came down again. I, out of my seat, settled into a spot in the aisles. Now I was closer to the stage, anyway. Mangum wanted added closeness too, apparently – after picking up the fourth guitar, the nicest looking one, a red and white one he hadn’t used yet, he walked out to the front of the stage again, away from the microphones, and began strumming vigorously. There were only two songs he really hadn’t played yet, “Communist Daughter” and “Two-Headed Boy Pt. 1,” and the latter, one of the clear highlights of an album and career chock full of highlights, was the obvious choice, both from context and the vigorous strum.

So Mangum ended the night with his spookiest, most unfettered hit. His unamplified voice still rang out in rickety liberation, but there was the triumph of the return in the air, not a chauvinistic triumph but a communal one. In Cooper’s book, E6 member and contemporaneous Mangum girlfriend Laura Carter suggested, prophetically, that what Mangum wanted to do was, “be a recluse and then come out with an album in ten years and shock everybody.” While little can shock or surprise us in the Internet Age, and we’re still waiting on the album, a couple of years after the decade Carter suggested, Mangum has returned. Locked up in a museum, but returning to his songs and their beauty.


***

Jeff Mangum show setlist for Sanders Theater on 9th September, 2011:

1. Oh Comely
2. Two-Headed Boy Pt. 2
3. I Love the Living You (Roxy Erickson cover)
4. In The Aeroplane Over the Sea
5. Song Against Sex
6/7. A Baby for Pree/Where You’ll Find Me Now
8. Naomi
9. Ghost
10. Gardenhead/Leave Me Alone
11/12. King of Carrot Flowers Pts. 1-3
13. Holland, 1945

Encore
14. Engine

2nd Encore
15. Two-Headed Boy Pt. 1

Source: My memory and this website.


8.9.11

After Their Falls, or the Lack of Listening


This Sunday, September 11th, returning from a weekend in Massachusetts for a wedding and a concert, I will take an overnight plane back to Europe from Logan Airport in Boston. Logan was the origin for American Airlines Flight 11 and United Airlines Flight 175, both to Los Angeles, both hijacked and flown into the World Trade Center Towers.

I can remember where I was for several of the 9/11 anniversaries, if only because the date’s significance made me more attentive. The 3rd anniversary, a Saturday in 2004, marked the last time, one of the last times, or the day after the last time, that I talked to my mother on the phone, from her hospital bed, before cancer killed her on Tuesday three days later. The following year, at home for the fall, I went with my younger brother and sister to an Of Montreal concert that Sunday night, the band just about to hit the inflection point of their rise to success and relative fame, my siblings and I nearing a similar inflection point in our mutual bond through music, self-forged rather than handed down from above. Last year, I was in Copenhagen with Ben and Amy, where we came upon a rally, a small one, in a main square, calling on the U.S. to reveal the truth about 9/11 being an inside job. Lastly, if not chronologically so, on the 5th anniversary in 2006, I was also on a plane, flying a couple hours from Tallinn to Moscow as I ended my initial European jaunt and began a 2 ½ month stay in the city of my parents, of my mother. Somewhere I have my journal from that trip, where during that flight I wrote down the things one could live for, that I could live for, which basically came down to love – of another person or of what one does in life – art, and serving others, as well as some combination of these elements. At the time, I thought I had neither the fortune nor the constitution to succeed at anything but art, cynically, naively, pathetically believing the romantic love that had yet to reach me in 21 years never would. I’ve been wrong, occasionally. In any case, it makes me wonder whence and whither I will be flying on September 11, 2016, and how my worldview will have changed.

***

I’m not making too strong a political statement in saying that we as a country have, at best, struggled in our response to the attacks over the last decade and, at worst, failed. Economically, politically, militarily, and in terms of safety, we are no better off than we were a decade ago and, in most of these and other measures, worse off. While no one at the time expected the brief sense of unity that emerged in the aftermath of the twin towers falling to last, no one expected irony to disappear, no one expected our culture to reinvent itself, it still strikes me how much our unity has deteriorated, how much our culture eats itself into paradoxical irrelevance, how guarded and ironic and snarky we’ve become, we’ve had to become.

(I will insert here because I don’t think I have a chance later – having visited New York City again this summer, I’m reminded that the city, more than anywhere else in the country probably, has internalized the lessons of 9/11, has reacted appropriately, and has grown from the experience, exceptions like the Ground Zero mosque controversy notwithstanding. Whatever else I’ve said about the city, it is clearly our greatest city, and best represents our hope and dream in 2011.)

Living abroad, I have had experience with both sides of the “telescope effect”. I’m not sure if that’s the technical term, or if anybody has conceived of this idea (though surely someone has; also, what I’m talking about differs slightly from the “CNN effect”, which has certainly been coined), but the idea is that when we hear about news from another place, some place faraway, we are inevitably going to hear only about the most important events or stories, and the most important events or stories are inevitably going to be bad. Israel is a good example of this, I think – when in the U.S., in Europe, one only hears about Israel through the prism of the Israeli-Palestinian/Arab conflict, or in this summer’s exception, about social upheaval in the country over the price of housing. Living there, I found a sense of normality, a sense of the mundane, and while the newspapers ran a conflict-related headline on their front page almost every day, there was more to life than the news. But living away from Israel, as I am now, I fear for the latest violence, fret about the situation, and freak out just as much as the next interested observer, and forget that life goes on there.

The same goes for living outside the U.S.A. From afar, from the news, the U.S. appears to be crazy. The healthcare “debate” especially hit me – the raucous town hall meetings, the vulgar insults, the Nazi comparisons (usually thrown in hand in hand with “socialist” cries, which reminds me that my saddest moment teaching high school history last spring was when I had to convince a senior that no, Hitler was not a Communist. Those Americans who confused the two may not have had such corrections in their schooling). It seemed like the country was going mad, and since this was the only decade in which I have been something of an adult, since I had no true grounds for comparison, it startled me. It scared me.

Last year, mostly living in the States, I found things calmer on the day to day, of course, and many of the most vitriolic debates were stowed away until the debt ceiling clash of last month, but news remained full of crazy events. Politicians certainly seemed incapable of talking to or with another, rather than past one another, and I felt like normal Americans, citizens, continued to exist in their own circles, talking about politics, for example, only with people they agreed with, supporting themselves with their own online sourced arguments that all of the group in the circle had read and shared, refusing to talk to the other side because they wouldn’t listen. Neither side listens. Even a circle-closing, uniting event like the killing of Osama Bin Laden led to several inane political arguments, though fortunately short-lived ones.

Then again, perhaps it’s always been this way. Maybe it’s inevitable that any democracy of our size will become irreversibly fissured, if they didn’t start out that way (which makes watching India and, if the Communist Party ever loosens their grip, China fascinating as we move forward). Look at U.S. history. We had to make several great compromises to put the Constitution together, the two-chambered legislature that has the anachronistic Senate, the Electoral College, and the Bill of Rights chief among the results. Under John Adams, the government tried to outlaw dissent. The antebellum period included a series of last-minute, crisis-averting compromises and violent incidents and crises nevertheless, leading up at last to the Civil War. Slavery and its legacy continue to stain our nation, as does the legacy of gender inequality. Immigrants were controversial and discriminated against every time a new wave hit land, with the previous group of immigrants often the ones to conduct the train of spite against the latest arrivals. The Cold War brought with it a series of near-apocalypses, its fair share of reductive “us vs. them” thinking and grandiose vilification of the them (see: President Reagan), and the frequent sense that we were falling behind, even when we weren’t. The 90s, the decade of my childhood, was a calm one in the U.S., maybe an exceptional decade, a beautiful decade to grow up in if one is interested in peace, prosperity, and happiness as an American, though not if one wants exciting big picture events – then again, the persecution of President Clinton for his wandering libido, while ultimately not consummated, was as much an example of craziness as anything we’ve seen since, though now we look back at it comically.

Or, perhaps, the issue is that we are weak for the first time. Really weak. In the 20th century, the turn of which saw the U.S. become the world’s largest economy, the U.S. was seriously shaken from its eternal, beautiful optimism, its dream and its self-belief, by four events, I would argue – the Great Depression, the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, the Cold War, and the Vietnam War. The first struck us economically on a level theretofore unseen; Pearl Harbor was the only instance of a military attack on the U.S. in the 20th century, I believe (though even then, Hawaii was not yet a state); the Cold War was our first encounter with the paranoia and competitive urge that comes from trying to be the world’s leader and superpower; and the Vietnam War proved our leaders utterly fallible, our government’s intentions not always clear and noble, our world leadership not necessarily a blessing to others or ourselves.

Through all of those traumas, our nation emerged. We emerged due to the blessings of geography, of isolation and natural resources, of demographics, but also due to the attraction America held and holds for other peoples in other nations, free or not, the principles of religious freedom and personal freedom and everything else, due to the power of our dream and due to our nation’s strength, especially that much vaunted greatest generation which, forged through the hardship of the Great Depression, perhaps the last time the middle class lived on the basis of need rather than want, served in our time of greatest need, when indeed our goals were clear and noble, World War II, and paved the way for the 50 years of mostly uninterrupted prosperity that followed. While I am one of those who would likely be tarred as an apologist, as someone who denies America’s exceptionalism, if I ever got into a conversation on the topic with someone of a certain political bearing, or if I wrote for a publication with more than five readers, and while I believe that indeed every country is in their way exceptional, for better or for worse, and that chauvinism is not a necessary ingredient of national pride and patriotism, I will state that America is indeed exceptional, and that has led to good things. I will always be grateful for growing up in the U.S.A., and even more so for the country accepting my immigrant family and providing them a climate of opportunity and freedom they wouldn’t have had elsewhere.

(Bad things too – the U.S. WWII museum in New Orleans, a fine museum, does indeed have a section on the internment of Japanese nationals and Japanese-Americans living in the states, as well as a series of awfully racist posters teaching citizens and soldiers how to distinguish between Chinese (our friends) and Japanese (our enemies) through physical and racial characteristics. No matter how much one is inured to the biases of the past, it still shocks to see in actual print. Or in other words, no matter how far we have to come in racial equality, anybody who has seen Gone with the Wind can acknowledge the great strides we have made in that area, thank God.)

In the first decade of the 21st century, however, we’ve been suffered almost as many traumas as in the 100 years previous. Iraq and Afghanistan combined loom as something similar to Vietnam in its impact on our nation’s psyche, public coffers, and image abroad; the 2008 financial crisis and subsequent recession that we struggle with today is not quite the Great Depression, but the situation doesn’t look much more promising; China already looms impatiently as the next world power and the greatest threat to our global preeminence since the Soviet Union, and indeed a greater threat at that; and of course the World Trade Center and Pentagon attacks of 10 years ago, the yet to be replicated second time we have suffered an attack on American soil since the Civil War.

(I could change the typology slightly and claim the war on terror is the parallel to the Cold War, but I think this works better.)

The combination of these events instills a self-fulfilling quality in our national spirit. These events or situations suggest that we are not what we once were, that we are indeed in decline, that we need to change direction. Hence, incumbents get voted out of office quickly, the winning side presumes a huge mandate instead of accepting that we live in a divided country and that one has to govern either brilliantly or carefully, not foolhardily or timidly, leading to another cycle of new politicians, new overstated mandate, and new disillusionment. Hence, people grasp to further and further extremes in the hope of finding an answer to the nation’s problems, which leaves a widening gap between the two sides, even if one side or the other manages to pull the whole conversation in a direction they prefer (as the Right did in the debt-ceiling debate – I suppose you could argue the Left did this in the healthcare debate or, even better, gay rights, but I don’t know enough about it. I think I can objectively state that the Right is currently better at shifting the conversation). Hence, at a time where to solve our problems and show our strength amid this typhoon of challenges we need to come to greater consensus on a national level, a greater agreement of what sort of sacrifice we should share, what sort of country we want in the big picture, and what we are willing to give to that country, we pull at one another’s hair and allow the recession to persist, the war to continue without clear direction, and China to go past savoring our struggles and into scolding us for threatening their economy and vision of their slower rise to preeminence.

Hence, dead or not, Bin Laden did pretty well in fucking America up.

***

September 11th, 2001 was the first day of the school year, of my senior year in high school. It was a sunny day. As tradition demanded (and probably still demands), after the three lower classes had been seated in the chapel for the All School Meeting that would begin the school year, we seniors marched in with great pomp and cheer, holding up two fingers for the class of 2002, yelling a lot, and acting out a sense of naïve chauvinism that can only belong to high school seniors. I’m sure I participated in the revelry less than most of my classmates, not because I have a disinclination to naïve chauvinism, though I’d like to think I do, but because I have always had a bit of the contrarian asshole in me, and felt it was silly to whoop it up the way everybody else did.

The All School Meeting must have ended by 8:30. We had a day of abbreviated classes, as befits the first day of school. I think I had Physics first period, and then a free period that started somewhere in the 9:00am hour. With nothing productive to do, I went down to the Ryley Room, the “hangout” area below our dining hall. They had TVs there, and I watched a rerun of SportsCenter.

This is the part that always embarrasses me upon recollection. As I was watching ESPN, sitting on a stool on the elevated platform area in the first back corner of the room, unconcerned with the world outside, as it were, my friend Tom O. came down. He had a free period too, obviously. After standing by me for a second, he went over to the far end of the room, towards the other back corner, to buy a snack or a drink and watch the big screen TV they had put in Ryley Room that summer (not a big screen TV, actually, but a big screen on which a projector projected TV programming).

A few minutes later, he called out to me. “Shvarts, you gotta check this out! A plane crashed into the World Trade Center.”
“Oh,” I said. I didn’t move. I might have said I wasn’t interested. It just seemed like news to me, and I was not yet a news reader.

Some twenty minutes after that, towards the end of our free period, I still at my small TV watching my small picture sports news, Tom yelled again. This was when the second plane crashed, I think. At the time, I think the significance had yet to sink in. I collected my things and went to English class.

It was at that point, walking over to the English building, that I was aware that the news had traveled. Students were talking about skipping class to watch the news. Teachers in our classrooms talked about what was going on, about what the school’s response would be. News was happening, the world was changing, and we shouldn’t be made to sit there and wait for it ignorantly. In my International Relations class, as we talked about what was going on and who might be behind it, appropriate a discussion as it was for that class, I thought in a very Jewish, which is to say provincial way, that it might be Palestinians, but that that would be crazy, it wasn’t like they weren’t doing anything in Israel now, it wasn’t like they were silent (at the Rosh Hashana service I attended at my temple a few days later, the Rabbi’s sermon tied 9/11 to the recent Jerusalem Sbarro bombing).

Later that day we had another All School Meeting, less celebratory than the morning’s. Gathered on the grass in front of Samuel Phillips Hall, we heard our Head of School and Associate Head of School tell us about the gravity of the day’s events, about what connections it had to our school, and about our response. I don’t remember what they said, really.

I remember checking with my roommate Matt, a Manhattan native, to see that everyone he knew was ok. I remember waiting twenty feet away from my friend Derrick, an African-American from Brooklyn, a guy who as a freshman we dubbed “Grandpa Warrior” because he seemed so much older than us, tougher than us, a friend on whom I happened to walk in once a year or two before at an inconveniently romantic and personal time with a lady friend, a friend who more than any from high school I am not in touch with and wish I could be in some way, even though time and distance and experience has rendered that unlikely (Facebook does not help in this effort, by the way), as this strong kid waited for a response on his cell phone with a worried look on his face before finally finding out, around 3:00 pm, that everything was ok.

That night, I remember thinking how awful it all was. I still thought out nightly prayers back then, whispered them even sometimes, prayers to God for my mother’s health and happiness, for the happiness of those I cared about, for things that would lead to my happiness, though I tried to avoid asking for that directly. That night, I prayed for all affected by the attacks, those who died and those who lost someone and those missing and those hurt and so on. I don’t think I directly prayed for the lands from which those who killed themselves came, for their neighbors and peers and countrymen in poverty and oppression, for relief from whatever could drive people to such madness and hatred (even though, yes, many of the terrorists involved and Bin Laden himself were middle class or wealthy), but I thought about it. I tried to understand where it came from. I couldn’t. I fell asleep, eventually.

***

This trying to understand is at the center of what I think has been missing from our decade since the attacks. Understanding, seeking understanding of the other is the only way forward in a problem with two or more sides (in a problem with one side, the way forward is understanding oneself, which is harder). Understanding does not mean acceptance, condonement, or even that dreaded buzzword of political correctness, tolerance. It means tying together at least a plausible background story that led our enemies to become our enemies, in the hopes of defeating them or changing them or knowing what comes next or improving ourselves or growing or living in the middle of these options or all of the above, as ultimately the solution will always be.

For example, trying to understand the terrorists could lead to the following thoughts: anybody who harms civilians is a bad person. The attackers on 9/11 chose to attack America. Why? Partly because of the American military presence in the Middle East and America’s support of Israel. Some might jump off here and say let’s end both of these things. I would encourage continued thought (Israel on its own is a topic that requires great effort to understand all sides involved, and a place where they do that more than in the U.S., but where all sides need to reach understanding more urgently).

I would suggest that we think about how unique America is or isn’t in suffering a terrorist attack. I can remember off the top of my head major terrorist attacks occurring in Madrid, London, several places in Russia, Israel of course, India, and Norway since the attacks on the U.S. The scale may not be the same, but the frequency is much higher. When I lived in Russia five years ago, I remember having dinner with my uncle and talking to a friend of his. I was telling him about how I was writing a novel, largely autobiographical, centered on the traumas a young girl (not autobiographical) faces growing up when I did. Two of the main three traumas were the death of her mother and the events of 9/11. This man, hardly a Russian patriot, Jewish and hence disinclined to trust Russia in fact, but also possessing that old world elitist view towards America that, say, my father so well embodies, asked me if I thought 9/11 was really significant enough to base a novel on. “One attack and you want the world to cry for you?” Later, I dated a Russian woman who, in part referring to our response, described America as a child.

(Note to prospective literary agents reading this: that novel is finished and sitting on my hard drive, shockingly not yet picked up by any major publishing houses! Inquire within.)

I don’t think their criticism, especially its barbed tone, is wholly legitimate, but we would do well to remember the traumas that we, or our leaders and government at least, have visited upon other places, whether through action or passivity (Cambodia, for example, suffered from both). If we want to view ourselves as exceptional, as the preeminent power in the world, if we think Pax Americana is a good thing for the world, if we want to believe in ourselves and our manifest destiny this way, we need to try to understand, or indeed to understand how the world views us, and why. It’s not enough to just say that America is the best and if you don’t like it, you can get out. It’s not enough to make French jokes and wonder why they forgot about World War II, just as we forget about the American Revolution. It’s not enough to fight the terrorists and fear China. It’s not enough to call the Right batshit crazy or the Left liberal communist apologists (or, yes, Nazis). If we want to be exceptional, great, we have to try to live up to it, to what made us great: our openness, our attraction for immigrants, our ability to revive ourselves, and perhaps our newfound ability to understand one another and those beyond.

***

My 9/11 this year will be festive. High school friends and I will wake up in a house rented on Cape Cod for the wedding, amidst empty alcohol containers, strewn about clothes, and the vague silliness that memories the morning after a wedding consist of. We might watch the beginning of that day’s football games, many of us in a fantasy football league together, before Ben and I drive in his rented car up to Logan, possibly stopping by my dad’s house to pick up some things I could use in my Luxembourg apartment. We’ll hang out in the international lounge, then he’ll go to Madrid, I’ll go to Luxembourg via Paris, and somewhere over the Atlantic, hopefully asleep, I will pass that arbitrary day of significance, arbitrary in the way all measurements of time are, and awake on September 12th, 2011.

I would be mildly surprised if, amidst our revelry, any of us bring up what day it is (hopefully they don’t read this before that weekend, or else I will have spoiled my experiment and hypothesis). I would be more surprised if, even amidst our revelry, we don’t talk at least a little, indirectly, about the effects September 11th has had on us, individually or collectively. About the economy, about jobs, about the recession, about politics, and so on. It may be lazy to draw a direct line between all of those things and September 11th, but it would be foolish to deny that they are part of the same web.

On the plane, I will not pray. My belief is vaguer than it was ten years ago, more of an agnostic-tinged Jewish-Universalist view that I’m sure you’re not interested in hearing described. What I will do is what I have done since I was in high school, if not earlier, which is to tap my forehead with the first two fingers and thumb of my right hand in the shape of a triangle, first pointing up and then down, forming the outline of the Star of David. I cribbed it from Catholics crossing themselves, obviously, and I’ve stuck to it through years of spiritual wandering and wondering.

Were I to pray on the plane, I would not pray for my and my fellow passengers’ safety: I fly frequently and well, with little concern, and whatever fears I’ve had on planes came only after I started having someone to come home to, someone I would be afraid of losing and who would be afraid of losing me. I would not pray for my happiness, for the happiness of those who matter to me, for my mother to rest in peace, or anything that I prayed for before (which included, often, praying for the Patriots and the Red Sox, hardly noble subjects). My experience suggests that goal-driven prayers are not very effective, and that actions taken to achieve those things are more valuable.

Were I to pray on the plane, I’d pray for our country, and the world, prayers not meant to be mutually exclusive. I’d pray for us to continue to try to understand one another. I’d pray for us to listen more and browbeat less. I’d pray for America and the world to show renewed strength, to enter a new era of cohesion, of prosperity and growth and happiness. And I’d pray for us to understand one another, again.

I would have no illusions about these prayers being fulfilled.

15.8.11

Luxembourg after eight days, in ten words or in 2,000

A few possible mottos for Luxembourg, the capital of the country of Luxembourg:

“Luxembourg: Always Take an Umbrella”

“Luxembourg: Everything’s Smaller Here”

“I don’t need to look like a Luxembourger to know how to say, ‘I’m a bad mofo’ in Luxembourgish”

“Luxembourg: Notre grisaille est notre beauté“  (Our grayness is our beauty) 

“Luxembourg: Come for the Eurail Connections, stay for the view”

“Luxembourg: Non, we are not a city in Germany.”

***

The first impression one has on Luxembourg, before one arrives, is a collective “Really?” The relatively non-EU exposed will say, “Luxembourg is its own country? Really?” The geographically curious will say, “Luxembourg is smaller than Rhode Island and a sovereign country? Really?” The young man moving to the city and looking for a job will say, “I might have to learn Luxembourgish? Luxembourgish is a language? Really?” Luxembourg is something of the fairy tale on which the hopes and dreams of modern Western Europe are built, and much of it challenges credulity.

Luxembourg is the world’s only Grand Duchy, meaning the only place ceremonially ruled by a Grand Duke. They have pictures of the current Grand Duke, a tall and handsome man named Henri right out of “Choose your Royal Figure!” casting books, everywhere in the city, a degree of admiration and worship I’ve only seen surpassed in less politically balanced countries; I saw about as many pictures of Paul Kagame in Rwanda as I have of Henri here.

Luxembourg is a tiny country, one that not surprisingly suffered from invaders and changing rulers for much of its history. It gained its independence in the mid 19th century, discovered a deep iron ore shortly thereafter, and managed to maintain some wealth for the rest of the century. In the 20th century, twice the country suffered under German invasion and occupation. It makes sense from that perspective, then, that the country would be one of the founding members and driving forces of the EU, which in its first form was the European Economic Community, if my memory of undergraduate history serves me correctly, and that community may have well been based around the trading of iron and steel, at the time a cornerstone of Luxembourg’s economy. In the 21st century the country serves as one of Europe’s financial capitals, holds the European Court of Justice to boost its claim to being Europe’s 3rd capital (behind Brussels and The Hague, I believe? Or Paris?), and due to a relatively low tax rate also hosts a number of multinational companies (Amazon and Skype (pre-Microsoft at least) are two examples that come to mind).

Luxembourg is a tiny country and host to a tiny population. The capital, where we live, boasts of 100,000 or so residents. The country as a whole has a population of 500,000. Meaning Boston’s official population is about 100K people more. Like Boston, however, Luxembourg has a huge commuting population during the regular working day. According to our relocation agent, that 500K swells to two million people on a given weekday as workers stream in from Belgium, Germany, and France (the three surrounding countries) to take advantage of Luxembourg’s strong economy and generous worker benefits. Even in the height of the August vacances, every other car I’ve seen seems to have a D or F license plate for Deutschland and France, respectively.

Which leads to one of the major benefits of this tiny ‘burg (any city that makes Tel Aviv look big, well…): the multitude of languages and peoples that make up that 500,000 population (never mind the two million). I’ve seen and heard various quotes for the immigrant percentage of the population, anywhere from 37% to 49.9%. Many of the people who live here are not from here: that much is apparent. Among the largest groups represented here are Portuguese and, more historically, the Italians. The Portuguese are the largest group, weighing in at about 20% of that 37-49% of the immigrant population, which makes them just under a tenth of the total population. Of course, that means there are about 50,000 Portuguese natives living in Luxembourg, hardly a grand wave of migration, but everything is smaller here. Amy and I have also been impressed, walking around, by the evident diversity of the city, both in its restaurants (in 8 days we’ve eaten at Luxembourgish, German, Italian, French, Indian, and mediocre Middle Eastern) and the people walking the streets, with Africans, Russians (Eastern Europe, what what!), and Indians, among others, offering a pleasant blend in the city.

That human diversity leads to linguistic. The official languages of the country are French, German, and, yes, Luxembourgish, a Dutch/German patois with a bit of French sprinkled in. The order in that previous sentence marks the order in which we’d like to learn the languages if we stay here long enough, though Amy reports that Luxembourgish has a charming sound to it: their word for ok, it appears, is “Tiptop.” Beyond those official languages, one hears of course the omnipresent English, in its British, American, and International varietals, one hears the Portuguese of that community, one hears a fair deal of Italian and then Spanish from tourists, one hears Dutch that is vaguely distinguishable from German, one hears when he strains his ear some Russian, some Arabic, and even the barest snatch of Hebrew. For language whores like us, it’s hard to imagine a better place than Luxembourg for the size.

(One interesting footnote to this linguistic diversity, for me, is as follows: I asked J, our main relocation agent, how the hell he knows what language to use with a given person. He, a handsome man of about my age, with a skin complexion that suggests Mediterranean, South American, or even African heritage somewhere down the line, who claims Belgian as his nationality but has lived in Luxembourg all his life, and who of course speaks all the languages needed, recalled, “It’s interesting. If someone looks foreign, I would probably speak French to them first, unless I hear them speak German or English or something else. If it is a setting where I know they’ll speak Luxembourgish, I speak Luxembourgish. Sometimes, people, like just now at the bank, will begin speaking to me in French because I don’t look Luxembourgish, and I’ll say, ‘it’s ok, we can speak Luxembourgish if you want,’ and they’ll say, ‘sorry,’ and we’ll speak Luxembourgish. So it’s hard to say. Sometimes you just know, sometimes you don’t.”)

***

It’s August here in Luxembourg, and in some ways you’d know it, while in others you wouldn’t. You’d know it because there is a lack of bustle during the week, because many of the restaurants are on their congé, because it’s doubtful that any recruiter or company is going to respond to my desperate pleas for another month. You wouldn’t know it because, well, it’s not that warm. On a warm day like yesterday, the temperature bleeds into the mid 20’s Celsius, or low to mid 70s Fahrenheit. Mostly though, I’ve been wearing long sleeves and jeans (though by golly, I’ve actually seen Europeans wearing shorts: the glorious benefits of globalization!).

Beyond that, the fate of the day’s sky never reaches surety or permanence. Any day might start of cloudy, break into a bit of blue and sun, and then fall back into showers or drab overcast, before cycling through again. Even today, looking out on a mostly clear blue sky out our living room window, I expect that there will be rain at some point, and that our umbrellas will again serve us well. (N.b.: posting this a few hours after writing it, I find myself proven wrong – it has been sunny and gorgeous, hitting 30 degrees Celsius, or about 85 Fahrenheit.)

August sentiments do reign over the city’s mood though, in all senses. While much of the rest of the continent and indeed the world may be rife in protest, worry, and fear of debt (despite being in Israel for the better part of three years, including during a war and some seemingly monumental political moments, I feel like I missed out on the action there, for example), here our second Sunday was marked by a concert in one of the town centre fairs, along with a large collection of mimes dressed In different costumes – clock heads, instruments, butterflies, Enlightenment-era bewigged royals – walking around to mug for photos with children and families, some on stilts, other at ground level. Today is a Catholic holiday and, Luxembourg being ostensibly a Catholic country, the city is mostly shut down and quiet. On the whole, Luxembourg holds a nice mix of French flair for life and German industriousness, I say on first glance, but in August the French side is winning.

***

Lastly, on the physical nature of the city.

The Centre on the Left, the Rest on the Right.
Luxembourg owes its existence in large part to its physical nature. The main city was once a fortress; that fortress rested on a rocky formation surrounded by river valleys; as such, the city is something of a land island, surrounded by natural moats. This did little to slow the 20th Century Germans, or many of the foreign rulers from earlier history, but nevertheless, Luxembourg stood out, in a literal sense.

Grund from above.
What that means for our cozy town is that the centre locks onto the olden fortress area; a largely pedestrian shopping area occupies the heart of the city, streaming shoppers past the landmark squares in front of the Grand Ducal Palace (one of five in the country, I hear). Then, surrounding the city are the valleys of the Petrusse and Alzette rivers, as well as les Villes basses. The rivers are hardly impressive, the Petrusse hardly a stream, less than a meter wide, the Alzette a staid stew of a river bearing that grungy green that many city rivers boast of, though without the size or import of those other rivers. The low cities, Grund, Clausen, and Pfaffenthal, offer the classic Old Europe feel, narrow cobblestone paved roads next to a river, replete with Michelin-starred restaurants and a famous church (the Abbaye of Neumunster). We have so far only made it to Grund, home to many of the Portuguese in town, as well as a pair of Scottish or Irish pubs. It was indeed scenic strolling down to the low town on a Saturday night, twilight upon us and the black roofed buildings of the old city towering above.

A Grund street. Ok, a slight incline.
The city is not hilly in the way I often think of European cities as being hilly. In the main part of the city there are mild undulations, but nothing significant. What of the high versus low cities, you might ask. It is of course true that there are different altitudes in the city, but it is better to think of the city height as a discrete rather than continuous functions – to get to the bottom, one descends on a steep decline, whether towards Grund et al. or one of the outer neighborhoods, Cents for example. To get back, one takes a cab or a bus. The high city is mostly flat, the low cities are mostly flat. No, hills are not part of the scenery.
For all that, we do live on something of an incline, and from our 3rd floor apartment (4th floor by American counting), we have a slightly elevated view of the center and of the old town, and a peering glance to the train tracks and villes basses below. The contrast between that high and low, along with the contrast between the more traditional center and the modern surrounding neighborhoods (to our northeast, we can spot the beginning of Kirchberg, where the EU institutions are housed), and the ever-present contrast between sun and clouds, blue and gray, lends Luxembourg its beauty, a beauty it can boast of.

At that, I leave you with a picture of the view I have from my desk, as well as a standing invitation, presuming I actually know you, to come visit. And if I don’t know you, just visit this site for more writing on Luxembourg, travel in and near the country, and any other adventures that merit the time. Tiptop? Tiptop. Et Merci.


5.7.11

Convenience, Childishness, Yard Sales, Marches, and Driving Ranges - America, in other words


Defining one thing makes complete sense only when contrasted to alternatives. For example, a child doesn't realize they belong to a certain nationality or race, or rather they don't appreciate the fact that they are different from others in that sense until they meet people from other nationalities or races. I didn't realize my sense of fashion was poor until I spent time with people who knew how to match their shirt, shorts, and shoes. (Ok, I still didn't realize for a while after that. Years and years. Regardless.)

With that said, yesterday was the 4th of July, and that means a celebration of America and being American. I've traveled a bunch and lived abroad for a decent amount of time. I've noticed some things that, at least in contrast with the places I've been and the people from those places, help define how I and my countrymen act as Americans. Character traits that have both positive and negative aspects, but traits that I think many Americans, those who were born here and those who have come here and adopted the culture, display in their daily behavior.

Herewith I will dispense with three of these traits, and then a brief anecdote about three very American activities I took part in over the past ten days.


The Charm of Convenience - Americans expect things to work.

This may seem as self-evident as the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, but it is, I think, uniquely American. We expect to find a system in life to which we can conform (or else a system we can outmaneuver and beat), a set of rules that, if followed, affords us a job, a decent life, and ON Demand cable TV. That might be one of the most earthshaking effects of the current economic crisis/limited recovery, the questions that have been raised for that faith, the hint of a new American agnosticism.

But I lose myself in the big picture. It's more on the daily level that our belief in things working manifests itself. We expect that if we need to get a driver's license that we can go to the DMV, fill out a form, stand in line, pass a test or two, pay about $100 (the total cost for permit, road test, and driver's license in Massachusetts), and launch ourselves on the glorious path to SUVs and dads' old minivans. We might complain about this process, but in comparison to most places, we have little grounds for moaning. When I explained this process to a friend of mine who had just immigrated to NYC from Russia, he expressed shock: shock that the process was so orderly, shock there was no one to pay off, and especially shock that the cost was so little - he was used to the idea that he had to pay some guy around $1000 to get a license, and that he had to go to the relatively lawless southern part of the country (the Caucasus in Russia, not Alabama) to take care of all of this.

I can draw on examples from other places. When talking with friend Ben, he of past trips and Madrid residence, about the joys and challenges of life abroad and in the U.S. (the latter from what we can fathom and remember), he mentioned having to accept the slowness of the Spanish bureaucracy. I never wrote about the aborted attempt I made to get citizenship in Israel but it involved many hoops, failed efforts, laws passed just as I was on the verge of handing in all the necessary documents that required a new document, and many opportunities to practice my Hebrew, especially my angry language Hebrew.

These are small examples. I think it would not be hard to find or recall or report others. The end result is that many other cultures adopt a "oh, it'll get done when it gets done" attitude, a blasé approach towards life's minutiae and unpleasantness. Which is healthy to a degree, but also unproductive to a degree. In any case, it's different from the attitude I think most Americans have.


Where there's a Will... - Americans expect there to be answers to most if not all problems. (You'll notice that the three traits I mention are related to one another). There is nothing that can't be reduced, via analysis or gut instinct, into a square peg to be filled, whether quickly or sequentially.


I can't think of any day-to-day life examples to support this statement, but it's easy to draw on Americans' approach to foreign policy and politics in general. We expect any given problem, whether an intractable conflict between two peoples or a trade-off between taxes and government cuts, to have an answer. Increasingly, we feel that the answer will not be found, but we sense that it's there. And why not? For 235 years we've been finding answers, and there should be no reason to think that won't continue to be the case. Again, all of these traits have their positive and negative implications; here, the belief in an answer propels Americans to achieve and to find solutions where otherwise deemed improbable or impossible, but at the same time we shear problems of their intricacy and detail, trimming them into a square peg that might not necessarily fit the needs of the situation.


We're just a bunch of big kids - Americans, on a global scale, are childish.


In some ways, we are too nice to be anything but children. We are, Northeast corridor excepting, more gregarious and polite in public than most other places I've been. We're not necessarily as warm or friendly after the initial layer of an interaction slinks off, but we are generally pleasant at first blush.

(One thing I did notice for the first time on this trip home, however, is that, outside of Christmas season, we don't wish one another happy holidays in commercial interactions the way I've noticed especially in Israel but also elsewhere. Yesterday was the 4th of July, but when going to Market Basket (bison and chicken), the highway to New Hampshire (tolls), and the New Hampshire Liquor Store (Cîroc vodka), I didn't hear one "Happy Holiday" or "Have a good 4th of July" from any of the workers. Now, you could argue they were upset they were working on the holiday - I didn't hear anything while shopping on the 2nd of July either. It's just interesting.)

We also like to make everything a competition. Competition as a means for encouraging people to achieve beyond their own limits, or to find solutions for difficult problems? Sure, that's good. Competitive eating? Just sort of childish.

We like our entertainment to be the best in the world, and it is. No other country can, I think, compare to the size and bombast of American movies, TV, music, and so forth. Even within America, there is competition to see who has the most spectacular entertainment, as witnessed by the hosts of the Boston Pops Fireworks Spectacular reiterating over and over that Boston has the "Premier" celebration in the country. It's quite a claim.


Then there is our nation's citizens mastery of languages, or lack thereof. At some point, many or most Americans will be bilingual Spanish/English speakers and both will be official languages of the country. Until that point, we will be the ones who stick out in the world for our unilingualism (not a word). Never mind the "ugly Americans" idea. I get more hung up on the treatment I receive as someone who does speak a language or two beyond English. Non-Americans will praise me for my language skills in whatever language, especially in an insecure moment where I fish for compliments about my accent. Then I'll remember that they speak, say, Russian/German/English all fluently and could pick up either Hebrew or French easily enough, or else they combine Portuguese, Spanish, French, and English with little effort, or they'll be an African basketball player shrugging off all the stereotypes they might encounter to point out the fact that they speak five languages. That compliment I got for speaking one or two other languages well? Feels like I'm the little boy who gets great applause for playing a Bb major scale on my trombone without dropping the instrument. "And you know the arpeggio at the end too? Wow, good job!"


Lastly, and somewhat more profoundly, is the nation's trauma of a decade ago. I hope to write on the 10th anniversary of 9/11, but I can anticipate the date a little bit. I remember several Russians, for example, terming Americans as childish for how we dealt with the aftermath of the two towers falling (namely, launching two wars for a war/tower ratio of 1).This is something of a snooty old world attitude, but it's not altogether wrong: America suffered a large attack of any sort for the first time in 60 years. We stood as the clear power of the world, and while still sundered from most threats by two oceans, our technology and culture were in the process of overtaking the globe. The event could be nothing less than shocking, and America's response was different from other nations' responses to similar events as much because America could do more than other nations, fair or not. 


Still, there came a sense from many of us that this was the only major attack, that America's grief was worse, that there was an outrage attached to our wound. Which is silly of course; without getting into proportions of loss, statistics, or anything else, many countries in the world suffer from war, terrorism, natural disasters, and other unplanned traumas. This was the first time in a while for us, and it could have jolted us out of our childhood. Somehow, I don't think that's quite how it shook out.

***
Now to the three recent American activities I took part in. The first is...

Yard Sale - I have been to plenty of yard sales. At various times in his life, my dad has been something of a yard sale/flea market connoisseur; I remember looking forward to going to the flea market out by Wellfleet or Truro when we vacationed on Cape Cod every summer in my childhood.

I had never taken part in hosting a yard sale as I did weekend before last in Michigan. What I found interesting and worth sharing was the nature of our clientele. To advertise for the yard sale, we put up two signs on either side of our street and put an ad in the Ludington newspaper. I thought more and earlier signage - we only put up the signs the night before the yard sale - might be needed, but Amy said rest assured, "the people who come to yard sales will be here."

The people who come to yard sales; men and women of all races, ages, and types, though skewing towards the older demographics. Folks who happen to drive by and stop anywhere they see a couple tables set up strewn with clothes, jewelry, and DVDs (many men slowed down as they drove past in their cars, looked at our tables, realized that this was a largely women's oriented yard sale, and sped off). Immigrant families that emerge from large green-striped vans, three generations represented, the children running next door to check out the sports supplies put out, the parents to look at the DVDs and books, grandparents who wonder if there are any pieces of jewelry their spouses might like. Haggard singles, men and ladies, stop by looking for the super cheap stuff, turning down a pair of shorts and a shirt because they didn't come together, meaning it cost $2 not $1.

And then there are the lifers. Two older women stood in front of one table while another woman, more in her 40s than older, noticed them and said hello. (Note: Michigan is in the Midwest.)

First Older Woman: "Oh, hi Maaggie, how are ya?"
Younger Woman: "Hi there Claarice, hi Maary."
Second Older Woman: "Say, did you go to the Jensens' yard sale yet?"
YW: Not yet, I was checking over the sales on Pere Marquette Ave.
FOW: Oh, we saw those, didn't we Maary?
SOW: Good selection of baags at those.
YW: You been over to the one on Haight?
FOW: Over by the lake?
YW: Yeah, the one by the lake. I thought I would've seen you guys there when I went, I went there first.
SOW: We're going there next. I guess we just forgot about that one.
FOW: Oh no, I didn't forget about, just wanted to get to this one first.
YW: Yeah, there's a lawt out here.
SOW: Well, good luck with your shawping.
YW: Thanks, girls, same to you.

(Note: that was slightly paraphrased. Ahh, Michigan.)

That seemed to me to be a uniquely American experience. After the yard sale, I joined Amy's father for a bit of...

Up, right, in the ground, totally missed, one time straight, but especially right - ...hitting golf balls at a driving range. I had never done this before. I've always been skeptical of golf. Despite going to (essentially) a rich man's high school and a rich man's college, or perhaps because of these things, I always viewed golf as a rich man's game. Amy's father is far from a rich man, and so I figured if he golfs a lot, it can't be so bad. I, in my eagerness, offered to go play 18 with him some day. He, in his wisdom, suggested we go to the driving range first.

Imagining it proper to swing with a big backswing, full hip gyration, and good power - in other words, all the lessons one takes from playing Mario Golf, my only education in golf beyond mini golf - I began taking healthy cuts. Amy's father stood aside and suggested some alterations and downsizes in my swing so as to help me hit the ball properly. While each of his shots went more or less straight and 200 yards long, my shots rarely if ever touched the 100 yard mark. Further, I peppered the wall of trees to the right of the range, to the point where the game was really to see if I would hit one of the tall pines on the fly or on the hop.

Those pushed slices to the right were when I hit the ball well. When I didn't hit the ball well, I think I ran through every possible bad drive possible. I aimed to hit the ball left to compensate for pushing it right...and still pushed it right. I duffed the ball (hit the grass under or before the tee instead of the ball flush). I popped the ball almost straight up in the air a few times. I hit on top of the ball, knocking it in a straight line or into the ground. Most embarrassingly, I swung at the ball and missed. Several times. Like four. In a row.

And then, as if provided for a story, on my last shot, making adjustments I in no way can recall or replicate, I managed, while aiming straight, to hit the ball roughly 100 yards right down the middle. A decent golf shot to end on for the first time on the range. I left not exactly hooked, but definitely appreciative of why people play, and interested in going again. And I guess I'm over the rich man's game idea. Or else rich.

If you think driving golf balls does not qualify as significantly American, allow me to add that we drove to the range in a souped-up convertible Ford Mustang. Pretty damn American, if you ask me.

Marching for a March in July - Lastly, yesterday, for the 4th of July, Ben and I visited our friend Jack in New Hampshire. There we swam in the pool, hid from the thunderstorms, ate meat and smores, and watched the aforementioned Fireworks Spectacular on TV. And to that Spectacular, at the right time, we marched.

Jack's family has a special tradition for the 4th of July. When the Boston Pops finally plays John Philip Sousa's "Stars and Stripes Forever", usually right after the "1812 Overture" that celebrates America's liberation from Napoleon or something (note to future employers: I'm kidding! I taught history a couple months ago! I know America threw off Napoleon's reign in 1803 with a bunch of money!), though last night "SaSF" came later, but to return to the initial dependent clause, when this song finally airs on TV, the family marches through their living room holding American flags (or American flag napkins). I was familiar with this tradition, having done this two years ago with Jack and family and another friend. This time around, once the national broadcast rolled over to the Sousa festivities around 10:30, we lined up, prepared for the final triumphal coda to the song, and then marched around the living room, onto the balcony, and into each other, a two-generational group of Americans (and a dog named Liberty) celebrating an important holiday in silly, American fashion.

Which, at the end of the day, is perfectly OK with me, as childish, convenient, poorly hit, regularly sold, and inevitably answered as the occasion is.

(And since this would make three straight posts without a photo, I now post a photo from the 4th of July at Jack's two years ago, or rather the 5th of July, the morning after, when I got a little cosy with ol' Liberty.)


3.7.11

Traveling through our 20s, right before the crash

(Technically, this post has little to do with travel. More like time travel. I'll explain.)

As an introduction, I offer two lists to sum up the last year of my life, from say 12th June 2010 to 11th June 2011.

List 1: Israel (Tel Aviv, Even Yehuda, Herzliya), New England (Burlington, Boston, Nantucket, Cape Cod, Hampton Beach), Michigan (Ludington), Israel (Tel Aviv, Herzliya), Europe (Amsterdam, Hamburg, Denmark), Israel (Tel Aviv, Jerusalem), Africa (Rwanda), the broader U.S. (Burlington, New York, DC, Durham, Nashville, San Diego, Los Angeles, San Francisco), the North American North (Ludington, Grand Blanc, Sarnia, Toronto), Massachusetts (Burlington, Boston), the Midwest (Chicago, Ludington), Massachusetts (Burlington, the Berkshires), New Orleans, Burlington, Michigan (Ludington, Ann Arbor), Israel (Herzliya, Even Yehuda), the Midwest (Ludington, Charlevoix, Petoskey, Chicago), Israel (Herzliya, Even Yehuda, Jerusalem, Tel Aviv), Michigan (Ludington).

And a possibly less obnoxious list.

List 2: Library Aide, Model United Nations co-coordinator, M.A. Student, online journalist, tourist, volunteer with genocide survivors, Greyhound bus customer, job-seeker, construction volunteer, job-seeker, cat-sitter, long-term substitute teacher.

The former list includes all the places I either spent significant time in (a full day) or slept a night in over the aforementioned timeline. The latter provides an order of the various positions I filled over that year. It's been some year.

While finishing my time in the final role, as long-term substitute teacher, I had the privilege (read: obligation) to attend a high school graduation. As the bright and hopeful valedictorian and salutatorian read fine speeches about the future and all the possibilities that awaited them in this ever-changing world, I sat staring into the flat chicken fields that served as a staging for the ceremony, wondering whether we are ever presented limitless opportunity, and wondering if that limitless opportunity evaporates at some point, whether that window closes, and lastly wondering whether I have taken advantage of that opportunity or squandered it, and whether that window remains open for me.

Excuse the excessive wondering and pondering and spiritual blundering. 26 is not old. I'm not sure what 26 is. I'm not sure what the normal position for someone of my age is, nor how I measure up, which makes it excessively difficult for an eternally competitive person (if one developing a sense of Buddhistic-esque acceptance) like me to assess my life and whether it is on the rails or wandering in the wilderness that are the 20s. I know that, coming from a pedigree of top high school and top college, my circle of acquaintances and friends, as it were, is successful and forming themselves into what they want to be. Perhaps that's why I'm not so close to most of them, the lucky bastards.

I should clarify. In the new economy or the 21st century or whatever excuse there is to tag onto our condition, working immediately after college is not a foregone conclusion, and finding out who you want to be takes longer than it might have 20 or 30 years ago, or in other countries like the Soviet Union my parents grew up in. We are faced with the paradox of choice, where more options impede our decision-making and ultimately make us less happy because we can weigh many more alternatives to the life we chose. This is related to the concept discussed in one of my undergrad economics classes, the idea that Person X is happier making $70K a year when his neighbor (or co-worker or brother or whoever he compares himself with) makes $70K as well than when Person X is making $75K a year and Comparison X is making $80K a year.

Here stands I, a competitive person but one who, I'd like to think, has never begrudged my friend his/her due. One of my favorite parables comes from the New Testament of the Bible:


Matthew 20.1 For the kingdom of heaven is like unto a man that is an householder, which went out early in the morning to hire labourers into his vineyard. 20.2 And when he had agreed with the labourers for a penny a day, he sent them into his vineyard. 20.3 And he went out about the third hour, and saw others standing idle in the marketplace, 20.4 And said unto them; Go ye also into the vineyard, and whatsoever is right I will give you. And they went their way. 20.5 Again he went out about the sixth and ninth hour, and did likewise. 20.6 And about the eleventh hour he went out, and found others standing idle, and saith unto them, Why stand ye here all the day idle? 20.7 They say unto him, Because no man hath hired us. He saith unto them, Go ye also into the vineyard; and whatsoever is right, that shall ye receive. 20.8 So when even was come, the lord of the vineyard saith unto his steward, Call the labourers, and give them their hire, beginning from the last unto the first. 20.9 And when they came that were hired about the eleventh hour, they received every man a penny. 20.10 But when the first came, they supposed that they should have received more; and they likewise received every man a penny. 20.11 And when they had received it, they murmured against the goodman of the house, 20.12 Saying, These last have wrought but one hour, and thou hast made them equal unto us, which have borne the burden and heat of the day. 20.13 But he answered one of them, and said, Friend, I do thee no wrong: didst not thou agree with me for a penny? 20.14 Take that thine is, and go thy way: I will give unto this last, even as unto thee. 20.15 Is it not lawful for me to do what I will with mine own? Is thine eye evil, because I am good? 20.16 So the last shall be first, and the first last: for many be called, but few chosen.

The essence of the parable is that one should honor their agreements, but even more that one who has reached satisfaction in some way should not allow that satisfaction to be tarnished by viewing others' conditions as a sign of what one could achieve instead. In other words, I am not only a jerk for comparing myself constantly to others, but failing at life and at happiness by not staying in my lane and worrying about how I can do right by myself and those who matter, rather than other people. Or as a friend puts it (and I swear I've quoted it here before, but I can't find it), one should win at life based on the rules of their own game; and as I amend it, one should not judge others by the rules of their own game. If eating peanut butter daily is what makes me happy and successful, that shouldn't mean that you are failing because you don't eat peanut butter daily. (Though you are. I mean, come on.)

This is a long way of saying that this whole essay rests on treacherous ground: the art of finding out where one (read: I) should be at the age of 26, and what is the appropriate path to lead to this point and to extend from this point. The answer of course, is that there is little or no exact answer to those queries, and looking at other people's paths will only add misery and doubt to the pondering process. And yet, here I go.

Last fall on my road trip through much of the continental U.S.A., I visited many of my friends from high school and college. Most of those friends were in my age category, i.e. second half of their 20s. I did not do some sort of list-check to compare the pros of cons of their lives vs. my life, no matter how much I enjoy making lists (very much), but I did listen with interest to the plight of the mid-20 something.

Again, I come from a privileged background and am mostly friends with similarly privileged types. I met few friends who were in dire circumstances: one had the misfortune of moving cross-country to follow a girl who promptly broke up with him upon his arrival; another told me about her parents' struggles to achieve a tenable retiree status due to pension cuts and disqualifications after a lifetime of working as educators; a couple either just had or would shortly thereafter break up with reasonably long-term girlfriends at times where they were, while independent, thrashing about for a direction or a mission in life. Not even the National can spin real sob stories out of those situations. (Well, maybe...)

What impressed me about my visiting and traveling was the number of peers who had undertaken the process of consolidating their self-definition and had launched themselves on a path towards who they wanted to be. 26 is apparently the age for grad school - the number of friends or acquaintances I know in law school, business school, PhD programs, or other MA programs (if not MD programs) has increased tremendously. Even further, I saw friends pursuing dreams with a passion and a focus that thrilled me; two had gone, on separate paths, to LA to pursue Hollywood style dreams; two were invested in their research and academic goals; my brother was in his favorite place of the world and doing all he could to achieve his dreams of making music or movies, whichever came first. And then those who weren't necessarily pursuing dreams were still making life work on their terms: one was a cop and happy about it; another had the next four years of his life planned out and still managed to sound like the same wild-eyed kid who used to try to get lost driving in his hometown in high school.

There are caveats to this pursuit of dreams or this acceptance of the now, of course, in either direction. One of the Hollywood success seekers ended up getting screwed over by his boss, a Mr. Paulie Shore. The cop is on the verge of (if not already having been) getting laid off. Hearts, or at least relationships, have been broken. So the 20-something world turns.


On the one hand, I can 'fess up to feeling pretty good about who I am at 26, amidst the whirlwind observation I have taken of my peers on that trip and otherwise, constantly. I came away from college realizing that I love music, reading, writing, and traveling. I would say my efforts in three of those four fields have been very successful, and I'm still figuring out how and why and in what form I should be writing to feel best about it - I don't think I've achieved the "success" I want as a writer, but I haven't failed either. I have long thought it would be cool to be multilingual, and now I can set a reasonable goal of knowing six languages with decent proficiency and four fluently by the age of 30. Further, I think I continue to plumb the process of becoming the person I want to be, and beyond that I've been blessed to find the person I want to undertake that process with. Shed no tears for me, in other words, and worry not about my whining.

There are sacrifices and tradeoffs everyone makes when blazing through life, one way or the other. For example, as part of sharing in that process of becoming, I will find myself a month from now in Luxembourg. I'm sure Luxembourg will be great. Under no condition, however, would I be choose to live in Luxembourg, a place largely unsuitable to any of my ambitions, whether career-oriented or artistic or otherwise. C'est la vie, as they'll say there, and perhaps the strictures and sacrifices will create new opportunities.

But in contrast to my friends who are carving out a relatively clearer path, who are pursuing dreams, who are having "career" success, I still haven't really figured out what I want to do, never mind how to get there. Another thing I picked up, among the few, in my economics education was the idea that people must feel useful to feel fulfilled. Yes, like most of the useful things I learned in economics, it is a bit of common sense backed with some theory and empirical evidence. Still, it sheds light on the reason I beach on the shore of confusion, of wondering, of the need to defend myself, and not just at home (though, not coincidentally, I'm finally putting this together while sitting in my father's house. Hmm...).

While hardly claiming all trades, I've become a jack of many things, and it's very true that it's hard to do many things well. The idea of a renaissance man is nice, but in practice the well-rounded ideal means many of one's edges are blunted. My resume boasts of a nice variety of positions, but I'm not sure any are strong enough to get a decent job, to get my foot in the door somewhere, to get me on any sort of path. And then there's the problem that I'm not sure I want to be on a path - there's a liberating sensation to not being tied down to a career, to existing as more than a worker. Liberty does little to pay for a room in the hot Luxembourg real estate market, though.

What is 26? Has all this dithering brought us anywhere?

Let's argue that the essay you are now reading is mimetic. That it models itself on the process of living through one's 27th year in the year 2011. The process wanders, it strikes upon a few general themes, it pushes forward in some directions or for some "users" quickly, and in other users' hands and other directions aimlessly. And here we stand, wondering what the point is.

I'm left to make two cultural references that I believe bring this feeling all together. The first is to Calvin & Hobbes. There's a Sunday strip where Calvin goads Hobbes into taking off on his wagon, where they aim to go so fast they will eclipse the speed of light and travel through time. They race past various obstacles, discuss the theory and what they might see in the future, and ultimately crash-land. Upon arrival, dusty and bruised but still enthused, they find that they've moved forward two minutes from the time they took off. That's what 26 is.

Or there's this: "And here I sit so patiently, waiting to find out what price you have to pay to get out of going through all these things twice."

Bob Dylan said that. He was 25 at the time. He's 70 now. I'm 26. I'm still figuring out what I have to say.

4.6.11

Shalom to Israel for now, Attempt #2

It's probably a cliched place to begin dealing with a country, but the flight into Israel distills much of the country's good and bad parts into a 20-30 minute window, and it's as good a place as anywhere to start, so there I go.

The flight into Israel, however one times it, features a few common elements. First, everybody is usually awake, as a half-hour before the flight lands the flight crew warns everybody over the sound system, repeatedly, that they are not allowed to get out of their seats due to Israeli regulations. Second, passengers feel the anticipation for glimpsing the shoreline, the first view of the Holy Land in all its glory, as it were. Israel is not unique for having its main airport situated a few miles from water. Israel stands unique in the fact that one flies over half the width of the country in about seven minutes from the first sight of the shore to Ben Gurion airport.

So there, all of a sudden, whether in bright sunlight or the eternal electrical illumination of Tel Aviv nightlife, appears the famed Mediterranean beaches, the ever multiplying Tel Aviv skyscrapers, the barren Kikar Ha Medina, and the White City. Two minutes after, the plane is descending over highways and plains, the flat, quiet middle ground between Tel Aviv and Jerusalem. Three minutes or so later, the plane touches down, and the speed of one's journey through Israel slows, at least.

Which leads to the next special moment of the flight into Israel: the inevitable applause. Most flights I have taken into Israel have, not surprisingly, been filled in the majority by Israelis. Politics, existential issues, complaints, and all the negativity aside, the generalization must be asserted that Israelis love their country. It is easy to be cynical or caustic about this, and I confess that too much patriotism, nationalism, or any ism makes me uneasy, but on the surface, the applause is charming, a throwback to the early excitement of intercontinental air travel and also a testament to the genuine excitement that people, both Israelis and those visitors who join in, eager for their visit, feel for this country. Too much excitement? Yes, but still.

The downside of that excitement is felt 15-20 minutes later or so, once off the plane, through the long lines in passport control, and face to face with the border control agent.

Before I proceed, let me make clear that I'm aware the U.S. is harder to get into than Israel. Many other countries surely are just as stringent on their border policies. Stringency is not the issue with Israel, especially since I've never actually been rejected or really threatened with rejection at the border.

Instead, there is the inevitable unpleasantness that greets a passport that is a little bent, features a ton of stamps, especially many stamps to and from Israel, and no active visa. I restrict the tale to my experiences, though I know others hit trouble either at this same point or at the airport trying to leave, and I've written about that before.

But I have tried speaking Hebrew and English at passport control. I have tried being cheerful and confrontational (though my sense of the impending confrontation always drags on my cheerful efforts). I have entered with and without an active visa. I have told my story unflinchingly, never with inconsistencies or things I would think constitute red flags. And considering Israel has tourist visas available for 3-months anyway, I get confused at the reason for the tough questioning.

The tough questioning comes nevertheless.
"Why don't you have a visa?
"Because our school gets us the visa after we enter the country. That's how we did it the last two years.
"So you're telling me how things are done in Israel?"
Hands up in self-abnegation. 
"Tell me, do you think I could show up to the United States without a visa to work, and they'd let me in?"
"I don't know," thinking that I've gotten into Israel without a visa plenty of times, and that maybe she couldn't in the U.S., but at least they wouldn't be total assholes about the process, and yes, politeness does count for something.
"Well, the answer is no, they wouldn't." Stamp on the passport anyway.

Or the time I came back from Rwanda last fall, where I planned to fly out a couple days later from Israel, but didn't have a ticket yet and as such no clear plan. I had no visa that time around.

"Do you have a ticket to leave?"
"Not yet, but I can get one."
"Can you show it to me?"
"I could if you let me use a computer, do you want me to use your computer? Or pull out my laptop?"
"Why should we let you in without a visa?" with a harrumph.
"Why are you not polite? Why can't you be polite?"
In comes the supervising officer in the booth one over. "Polite? This isn't kindergarten, this is border control! We don't have to be polite, this is the border!"
Oh.

Fitting that on that occasion, for the only time in my three years entering Israel, I got sent for a time-out in the back room. Where, ever so maddeningly, all they did was make me wait for ten minutes, then beckon me to follow an adviser to another room, where he had me wait outside, went in with my passport, stamped it, and handed it to me with nary a word. Nothing like a meaningless, no follow-through instance of intimidation to welcome one to a country.

Such are the highs and lows of Israel. The intense joy and pride couples with an aggressively defensive treatment of others from formal agents. There is no distance between private behavior and public-political action. There is little distinction between brother and stranger, for better or worse. All are part of a family, all are treated like family. Family welcomes and opens arms; it also criticizes and smacks harder than anybody else.

***

I do not want to dwell on the negatives. For whatever it's worth, I do love Israel. One's life bristles here, charges with energy and excitement and intensity. Every day poses a fight, a struggle on the streets or the bus or at the market, but the more we fight for something, the more valuable victory feels. It's not for nothing that several different non-native Israelis told me, after a string of complaints about the various things they disliked or even hated about Israel, that they wouldn't want to live anywhere else, that Israel gave them a feeling of truly living, a feeling they thought was not replicable elsewhere.  

I also do not want to dwell on politics, though that's one aspect of the fight that exhausts me here. Caring about the future and actively following the present in the papers leaves me in an inescapable state of frustration, confusion, and doubt, one that may trail me wherever I go but that is also specific to my life in Israel. I make no political comment here except to say that I find it a constant irritant that when I discuss the situation with somebody who holds a different political view, especially Russians whom I speak with about this, I hear the response, "But I worry about Israel, I really love Israel," as if my stance on the left means I have no love or worry for Israel. Though I guess my desire to leave is, perhaps, proof that I don't love or worry about Israel, somehow. In any case, I returned for this shorter stint refreshed and thinking I would be able to steer clear of the politics, only to thrust myself back into it after the series of speeches and rebuttals and standing ovations from a couple weeks ago. I suppose it's an early sign of madness to hear voices in your head, but one morning I biked to work and argued with myself in three languages. Such is the life and the madness that Israel can drive one to.

Again, it looks like I dwell on negatives, and I am trying to avoid that. Or in another sense, I'm trying to avoid the sort of reflection that my Hebrew class gave after my first year in Israel. The four of us sat in class with our teacher, a colleague at the school we all worked at, as she asked us what we would miss about Israel. The other three were all leaving after two years there, and I was to imagine what I would miss. The list sounded like this:

Weather.

Beach.

Hummus. And falafel.

Fresh vegetables.

Weather.

Naomi, our teacher.


In other words, not the most positive collection of views about the people of Israel, about the country in its substance, just its dumb luck natural attributes.

But underlying the intensity I harp on is a warmth, a feeling of togetherness and acceptance that quickly veers to anger or harshness if things go wrong. The willingness of the Arab guys to accept my presence in their football game but to fall into confusion or anger when I play the game my way, physical and all elbows and knees (as with any game I play besides wrestling). (Last political aside: my main man in the group was no happier with President Obama than many Jewish Israelis, calling him better than Bush but still "an asshole.") The aid I received on the streets of Jerusalem last week near the government buildings when I asked for directions to Yad Vashem, ("It's a long walk," he said once he realized I was doing the extra kilometer to the Holocaust museum's campus) and the streets of Even Yehuda when going to a party yesterday. The kindness of the local bike shop guy, a religious Jew who knocked his price down 10 shekels for my most recent repair when he realized I didn't have the necessary small change and didn't want to break my big bill, or the local shoe store attendants, one a classic Israeli well-styled macho guy and the other a nice middle-aged woman from Argentina, as I blundered through a second and third attempt to buy a pair of woman's shoes. I bemoaned the lack of American-style politeness at Ben Gurion Airport, and I still don't understand often why Israel and Israelis don't make a tiny bit more of an effort to put on a good face despite things, in the day to day and in the larger picture, but the freshness of daily interactions, the frank quality that avoids idle superficiality, also cuts out some of the social fat from life and leaves a leaner, more power-packed routine. Even when Israelis fall to pleasantries, as when two men will start a conversation that involves three to four phrases each that are all iterations of "what's up"*, there's a sharpness  or a humor to them which rescues the conversation from banality. Whatever Israel's problems, banality is not one of them.

*(For example, recently I heard a conversation on the street that went something like this:
"Ma nishma?"
"Ma nishma?"
"Ma itcha, ahi?"
"Klum, ma hadash?"
"Ma inyanim?"
"Ma kore, gever?"
"Ani besder, toda, v attah?"
"Gam tov, toda. Y'allah, ani holech."
"Y'allah, tov, bye."
Translated: "What's up (literally, what will we hear)?" "What's up?" "What's up, my brother (literally, what's with you)?" "Nothing, what's new?" "What's going on?" (What are the issues, literally) "What's happening, man?" "I'm good, thanks, and you?" "Also good, thanks. Ok, I'm going." "Ok, good, bye.")

***

Israel exists sui generis, and with contradictory feelings about its unique qualities. On the one hand, many here would like nothing more than to be an ordinary, if warmer, European country, not isolated in the world, not expected to do anything more than any other country, free to establish their bonds with the west. On the other hand, there is the pride of place, the attachment to history and narrative, and the self belief that emerges from 63 years of existence that many feel has been achieved in spite of the world, not with its help. The frank nature of Israeli life, the aggressive defensiveness, and the intensity of the country can all be attributed, I think, in part to the belief imbued among regular Jewish Israelis that we have done what we have done with no help, and things have worked out; those things could all go to hell in a short time anyway, so why bother with the niceties?

As much as many would like to think of Israel as just like Europe, that framing crops out too much. Israel's Middle East location isn't just a question of politics and weather; the influence of Arab neighbors and the minority percolate Israeli society (as a trivial example, the "y'allah" of the above conversation is an Arabic interjection that is used in both Arabic and Hebrew to mean something like "let's go" (though literally meaning "to Allah"). Ahi, "my brother", also may be derived from Arabic culture. Again, something like the influence black culture has on white America). Israel also treats religion differently than Western nations; this too is a fault line in Israeli life, between the secular and the religious, between Tel Aviv and Jerusalem, between the modern and the traditional or, horrors, ultra-Orthodox. I don't mean to claim Israel is more religious than Western Europe, for example, but the deadness of Saturdays everywhere but Tel Aviv, the moratorium on work and commerce on most major holidays, and the actual and enforced solemnity of Yom Kippur is definitely a different approach to religion than what I grew up with in the U.S.A. Not that it's a bad thing, necessarily - I like the solemnity of Yom Kippur, and there's something wise about taking Saturday to pause and do less in and out of the house than on any other day - but it is a fact of life here, and another aspect of Israel's special status.

***

The world is either full of places that are sui generis, or else rapidly losing those unique spots on the map as globalization wraps us all up into its stultifying, intoxicating, all-encompassing, ultimately Westernizing bosom. Either way, I am still at the point where I want to move on to new places. Luxembourg, not necessarily my envisioned wildest frontier, represents a chance to savor Europe's fruits definitively, fully, to luxuriate for a few more years in the West before the possibility of renewed adventures and new discoveries, new at least for me. When we look back on our journeys, everything is given a linear logic, and I'm sure Luxembourg will fall into that. After all, learning French would open a few doors in Africa.

As pertains to Israel, I mean to say that I view this departure not as an abandonment of one place but as a chance to go somewhere else. Mired in the haze of my mid-20s, wondering if jack of all trades really is so admirable after all, I should maybe begin to settle a little bit more, develop more of a clear plan for where I'm going or, at least, what I'm doing. And if I had to settle somewhere, Israel would probably attract me as much or more than my home, for example, or most of the United States.

All of which is to say that my time in Israel, spanning at first 26 months and then another 2+ this time around, totaling about 2 full years of time on the ground here, was a success and a thrill and tiring and complete. The perfect introduction to life abroad, in many ways. Never boring. Full of friends from many walks in life, of interesting opportunities and learning experiences and jobs and fun nights on the beach and concerts and various senses of communities, or various communities with their own sense of belonging, of four apartments in three towns/cities, of three bikes (one stolen, one still for sale on craigslist!), of one p.o.s. car, of blessed health and love, of growing pains and mid-20s angst, of (too few) guests and hosts, of learning a great deal of one language (Hebrew) and a few nice morsels of another (Arabic), of speaking another language almost every day (Russian), of visiting Europe and the Caucasus and Jordan and Bethlehem (but sadly, never Egypt or other parts of the West Bank), of arguments and existential debates, of parties and lines on a resume and old acquaintances and new friends and Shabbat dinners and muezzin calls and quiet Saturdays and frazzled Fridays (though never late nights in Tel Aviv), of Tel Aviv the city that will spoil me forever on the convenience of a small city you can walk through, of late nights last summer where I biked home past midnight and Rotschild Boulevard was buzzing with people and warm air and the feeling that as hard as people try to compare Tel Aviv to New York or to Barcelona it doesn't work and doesn't have to, for Tel Aviv is its own beast, and Israel is its own beast, and my destroyed syntax lets me say nothing more except that I am glad for second chances in life: I meant to write this essay the first time I left for what I thought to be "good", for the near term, last fall, but never got around to it, and so when I received the offer to leave my cat-sitting and go work at my old school for the end of the school year, plenty of good came with it, not the least of which is the chance to write my good bye again, one more time, with feeling.

In Hebrew there's a saying, "anachnu lo omrim shalom, anachnu omrim lehitraot." "We don't say goodbye, we say see you." Sayings can be corny, as can eulogistic writing like this, but my second stint is proof of the ever revolving circles of life and the necessity of saying "see you," rather than "goodbye."

In less than a week, I will be at Ben Gurion again, going through a much easier process (I never have problem with security exiting Israel), and getting on a plane to leave Israel again for a while, though I don't know how long. There will be no applause when the plane touches down in NYC, from me or anybody else.

And I will say as I leave, not shalom, but lehitraot, yisrael.