Barrel Fever by David Sedaris

Barrel Fever: Stories and Essays by David Sedaris | Goodreads

I remember falling in love with David Sedaris. I was staying in a Youth Hostel in the Lake District, having gone there to give a talk on ‘the fantastic fringes of the Bloomsbury Group’ to a room of people who couldn’t hear much of what I was saying. My bedroom was under the stairs, so I could hear people walk up and down throughout the night. But it was nice to get away, and of course it meant plenty of uninterrupted reading time.

One of the books I’d brought with me was Sedaris’s book Dress Your Family in Corduroy and Denim, which I’d picked out of my book group’s lucky dip Secret Santa. I didn’t know anything about the book or the author. Indeed, I thought it was a novel, and for some reason had decided the narrator was a young girl. It got confusing when the cast of characters changed in the second chapter, and when the narrator was addressed as ‘David’.

I pieced it together, of course, and now know that Sedaris is one of the most beloved humorists of his generation – sharing tales from his eccentric family’s eccentric life, sparing no details and no blushes. His parents, siblings, and long-term boyfriend come in for the most exposure, but anybody who crosses his path is likely to be dealt with in excruiating, gloriously witty prose.

And Barrel Fever (1994) was Sedaris’s first book. It is the only one of his books which divides into ‘Stories’ and ‘Essays’. The former are clearly fictional – for instance, the male narrator of ‘Parade’ has an energetic sexual relationship with Mike Tyson, having dumped Charlton Heston- but there is an interesting note in the beginning saying ‘This book is a work of fiction. Names, characters, places, and incidents are either the product of the author’s imagination or, if real, are used fictitiously.’ Is this the handiwork of a lawyer? Or do all his books have this disclaimer? Sedaris’s style relies on exaggeration and selection, but I would have assumed that his essays are based in at least some truth.

In my copy, there are only four essays – compared to 12 stories. I started by listening to the audiobook, which confusingly has fewer stories, retitles an essay, adds in one from Me Talk Pretty One Day, and cuts the most famous – ‘SantaLand Diaries’. It also had the cover art for Naked, so maybe I should have been forewarned. Anyway, once I’d compiled the audiobook and the print book, I read everything in Barrel Fever and more – and it is already clear in his first book that Sedaris is much better at the comic personal essay than he is at the short story.

‘Diary of a Smoker’ is a funny, short essay about how Sedaris’s family’s history of smoking, and how annoying it is when well-meaning non-smokers try to get you to quit:

The trouble with aggressive nonsmokers is that they feel they are doing you a favor by not allowing you to smoke. They seem to think that one day you’ll look back and thank them for those precious fifteen seconds they just added to your life. What they don’t understand is that those are just fifteen more seconds you can spend hating their guts and plotting revenge.

‘The SantaLand Diaries’ made Sedaris famous, and is about his exploits and annoyances as an elf for Macy’s department store during the Christmas rush. It is every bit as scathing, self-loathing, and ridiculous as you’d expect from Sedaris writing that scenario – hovering just on the right side of good taste, as there an awful lot of innocent young children who are vulnerable to his sharp tongue.

But my favourite is ‘Giantess’, because it is so sublimely Sedaris. It’s very short, following Sedaris as he works as a painter ande decorator, while simultaneously in talks with the editor of Giantess magazine about submitting erotic fiction about abnormally tall or supernaturally growing women.

The editor of Giantess called to say he’d received my letter and thinks I might have potential. He introduced himsefl as Hank, saying, “I liked your story, Dave, but for Giantess you’ll need to drop the silly business and get straight to the turn-on, if you know what I mean. Do you understand what I’m talking about here, Dave?” Hank told me his readers are interested in women ranging anywhere from ten to seventy-five feet tall, and take their greatest delight in the physical description of a giantess outgrowing her clothing. “Do you know what I’m talking about, Dave? I need to hear those clothes splitting apart. Do you think you can do that for me?”

It’s not exactly the sort of thing I usually read about, but I loved the specificity which Sedaris gives to the absurd. It’s the unasked-for use of ‘Dave’. It’s the exactitude of the height range, and the mundanity of submitting stories to a publication that doesn’t get any less mundane because of the variety of publication. Sedaris looks at the ridiculous face-on and finds a world-weariness in it.

I also enjoyed reading the stories, I should add. My favourite was the satirical ‘Glen’s Homophobia Newsletter’, perhaps because it is the nearest to Sedaris’s voice – albeit through a depth of distortion. For the most part, though, the stories seem an exercise in creating the most unpleasant people possible. Some are cruel, some are so thoughtless that they ruin other people’s lives, and some are evil to the point of absurdity. Individually, they were diverting – but it grows old quite quickly to simply have dreadful characters doing dreadful things. It’s a trick that obscures the more subtle ways that Sedaris can create character and twist scenarios into something special.

There’s no wonder that Sedaris pursued the personal essay for all his subsequent collections. Who knows how much is fiction and how much is genuine autobiography, but the blend is clearly where Sedaris excels. Barrel Fever is most interesting as an author trying his hand at different styles, and he made the right conclusion for his future books.

Life hacks and hand cream! Peas in a Podcast #17

Oh my gosh Peas in a Podcast is BACK! Due to HUGE DEMAND!

For those not in the know, it’s the very occasional podcast I do with my brother Colin, arguably about nothing. You might be able to find it in your podcast app, and I’m trying to add it to Spotify as we speak… edit: it’s there!

Fingers crossed we’ll do them more frequently than once every two years now??

The Clocks by Agatha Christie

The Clocks - Wikipedia

I’ve reached the point where I can’t really remember which Agatha Christie novels I’ve read and which I haven’t. Which I suppose is a good thing, because it means I can go back and re-read them and will have probably forgotten who the murderer is. Or, more likely, think I’m being very clever when it comes back to me.

But I definitely hadn’t read The Clocks before. Published in 1963, that means it falls towards the end of her writing career – but before the books got really bad. It’s also technically a Hercule Poirot but, for reasons we will come onto, it doesn’t really feel like one.

(Btw, I shan’t give away huge spoilers – like the culprit – but there will be some milder spoilers in this review, so you are warned.)

The location of the murder is 19, Wilbraham Crescent. Christie describes the street in a way that I enjoyed:

Wilbraham Crescent was a fantasy executed by a Victorian builder in the 1880’s [sic]. It was a half-moon of double houses and gardens set back to back. This conceit was a source of considerable difficulty to persons unacquainted with the locality. Those who arrived on the outer side were unable to find the lower numbers and those who hit the inner side first were baffled as to the whereabouts of the higher numbers. The houses were neat, prim, artistically balconied and eminently respectable. Modernisation had as yet barely touched them – on the outside, that is to say. Kitchens and bathrooms were the first to feel the wind of change.

I think that’s a lovely observational, about kitchens and bathrooms, and it’s expressed well and elegantly. Christie is often unfairly dismissed an excellent plotter and poor writer, but I disagree. A lot of The Clocks is quietly amusing and she has a good eye for social detail.

Anyway, a young typist called Sheila Webb is called to a new client’s house. Mrs Pebmarsh has requested her by name to 19, Wilbraham Crescent, and off she goes, letting herself in (as instructed). She finds a living room with numerous clocks on the mantlepiece and other places – far more clocks than anybody would normally need. And, more curiously, they are all at 4:13pm – an hour ahead of the current time.

But that’s the strangest thing Sheila finds in the room. The other, behind the sofa, is the body of a dead man.

She runs out screaming, and encounters our narrator for half the novel – Colin Lamb. Christie goes back and forth between third-person narrator and Colin’s perspective, and he is really our detective for the novel. He’s also rather smitten by Sheila.

We gather some facts: Mrs Pebmarsh says she did not request a typist. She does not know who the man in her house is, and she is blind – so he may have been there for a while without her noticing. Colin begins questioning all the various neighbours, who do rather get confusing, as we pretty quickly go to lots of different houses and encounter a large number of people who may or may not have any bearing on the novel. It’s an opportunity for Christie to enjoy herself though – there’s a ‘cat lady’ totally devoted to her cats; there are some rowdy but intelligent young boys; there is a glimpse of a certain type of political discourse in 1963:

“Each of these four clocks represented a time about an hour later than the cuckoo clock and the grandfather clock.”

“Must have been foreign,” said Mrs Curtin. “Me and my old man went on a coach trip to Switzerland and Italy once and it was a whole hour further on there. Must be something to do with the Common Market. I don’t hold with the Common Market and nor does Mr Curtin. England’s good enough for me.”

Plus ça change, if I may.

So, where does Hercule Poirot come into this? Just barely. We know that we are in a Poirot novel because of there are stray mentions of Ariadne Oliver (and Christie has her usual good time poking fun at Oliver for choosing a Finnish detective when she doesn’t know anything about Finland). The man himself enters by way of interview with Colin Lamb, an old friend – or, rather, a younger friend whom Poirot tries to educate, but in a sort of frustrating way where he never says what he means. A few times, Colin Lamb traipses off to Poirot’s residence to lay his new findings at Poirot’s feet and get some sort of enigmatic reply in return. At no point does Poirot himself talk to anybody else involved, or visit the scene of the crime. It’s all rather strange. Why is he there at all?

For much of The Clocks, I thought I was onto a real winner, and wondered why it wasn’t talked about more about Christie’s oeuvre. It was a page-turner with entertaining writing and a fun (if occasionally slightly overwhelming) cast of characters. The sidelining of Poirot was odd, but I went with it. Even the occasional hints of spy rings didn’t put me off – and I find Christie very tedious in spy mode, which she couldn’t resist returning to.

Well – without spoilers – The Clocks did end up being a disappointment to me. I’ll just say that the solution wasn’t at all satisfying, and it felt very anti-climactic compared to her usual cleverness. I feel like the inventive set-up deserved a better pay-off. I’m glad I read it and I enjoyed myself, and from another author I’d be very impressed, but this definitely isn’t one of Christie’s masterpieces.

The Stone Diaries by Carol Shields

When I was in Canada last year (how I miss it and how I want to return!), I met up with Debra and she very kindly gave me a copy of The Stone Diaries (1993) by Canadian literary royalty Carol Shields. I was familiar with Shields but had never read her, and didn’t really know what to expect. As luck would have it, 1993 was proving a tricky year to fill for A Century of Books – and it was very useful to have The Stone Diaries on hand. And what an unusual, and unusually good, book it is.

Towards the end of the novel, its heroine Daisy reflects:

All she’s trying to do is keep things straight in her head. To keep the weight of her memories evenly distributed. To hold the chapters of her life in order. She feels a new tenderness growing for certain moments; they’re like beads on a string, and the string is wearing out. At the same time she knows that what lies ahead of her must be concluded by the efforts of her imagination and not by the straight-faced recital of a thottled and unlit history. Words are more and more required. And the question arises: what is the story of a life? A chronicle of fact or a skillfully wrought impression? The bringing together of what she fears? Or the adding up of what has been off-handedly revealed, those tiny allotted increments of knowledge? She needs a quiet place in which to think about this immensity. And she needs someone — anyone — to listen.

It’s a good question: what is the story of a life? In some ways, Shields’ approach to the question is conventional. The Stone Diaries follows the life of a fairly ordinary Canadian woman from birth through to her death as an octogenarian. The sections are called things like ‘childhood’, ‘marriage’, ‘motherhood’ and so on. Daisy falls in love (not necessarily with the man she marries); she has friends, acquaintances, colleagues. Her one brush with the something that threatens to be extraordinary is becoming a popular gardening columnist, but she doesn’t truly become a celebrity. She has children, grandchildren and great-grandchildren. It is an ordinary life, well-lived.

But The Stone Diaries is not an ordinary novel. Here’s how it starts:

My mother’s name was Mercy Stone Goodwill. She was only thirty years old when she took sick, a boiling hot day, standing there in her back kitchen, making a Malvern pudding for her husband’s supper. A cookery book lay open on the table: “Take some slices of stale bread,” the recipe said, “and one pint of currants; half a pint of raspberries; four ounces of sugar; some sweet cream if available.” Of course she’s divided the recipe in half, there being just the two of them, and what with the scarcity of currents, and Cuyler (my father) being a dainty eater. A pick-and-nibble fellow she calls him, able to take his food or leave it.

You can quickly tell that this is no ordinary narrator. This section is in the first-person – but telling us about an event she can’t have witnessed, down to the detail of the recipe. Throughout the novel, the narrative chops and changes between the third-person and the first-person – sometimes taking us into Daisy’s eyes and sometimes looking at her from a distance. It swirls between the two without pause, giving us a sense of the panoramic.

Add to this that the storytelling sometimes comes with preternatural knowledge, and sometimes more as you’d expect from the more off-the-shelf Bildungsroman. And then there’s a chapter entirely in letters, and another on different characters’ perspectives on what happened to Daisy. In the hands of most authors, this mix could be an awkward technique – but Shields wields it expertly. The tone and the narrative approach really elevate The Stone Diaries above the ordinary. It is handled with such assurance, which is perhaps no surprise as Shields was almost two decades into a revered career. More to the point, it never reads pretentiously – The Stone Diaries manages that exceptional feat: being both narrative experiment and page-turner. I think the only element that didn’t work for me was the inclusion of photographs of the characters, which felt a little bit self-indulgent.

I haven’t told you much about the other characters or the plot, but to be honest they are secondary to the prose and the confidence of the storytelling. You may end up not remembering all the grandchildren, or even quite disentangling the complexities of Daisy’s father, adoptive parents, relatives, lovers and so forth. But you’ll remember how different the novel felt, and how powerfully you are enveloped into one woman’s life.

Treasures of Time by Penelope Lively

One of the things I love about my book group is how varied our book choices are – not just the latest hit novels, but ranging back over a century and more. Somebody suggested we read some Penelope Lively (she was a local, after all) and we landed on her second novel, Treasures of Time (1979).

The concept feels both modern and somehow very old-fashioned: a TV crew is making a documentary about a late archeologist, Hugh Paxton, and we witness what this exploration looks like in the lives of his widow, daughter, sister-in-law and so on. What makes it feel old-fashioned is how unintrusive the documentary crew is – they aren’t trying to sensationalise anything, and any secrets that are dug up will be a byproduct of a fairly earnest attempt to Hugh Paxton’s life. (The resultant documentary, which we see towards the end of the novel, seems laughably slow.)

But the late Hugh Paxton is not the most interesting person in this book, nor is his relationship with anybody paramount. To me, the most fascinating dynamic in this novel is between Hugh’s widow, Laura, and their daughter Kate. (Could Lively have chosen any more stereotypical middle-class white women’s names than Laura and Kate! Endless mid-century novels have one or the other.)

Laura is not a monster. To most of her acquaintance, she is probably considered charming and capable. But to Kate, she is often brutal – brutal with the polite kindness of a mother who ‘wants what’s best’ for her daughter and continually belittles her. She makes constantly clear that Kate is a disappointment: not beautiful enough, not successful enough, not elegant enough, not married enough. There is a very telling moment early on where Kate tries to decide what to wear to see her mother – knowing that she will be criticised if it is too casual (as being disrespectful and unflattering) and equally criticsed if she dresses up (silly and over the top). But she can’t help try, forever reframing her understanding of herself through her mother’s gaze.

Kate is no pushover herself. She is clearly damaged by her domineering, probably well-meaning mother – and it comes out as determination and bad decision making.

There are a scattering of sympathetic characters in Treasures of Time, with my favourite perhaps being the enthusiastic, wrong-footed documentary maker. But Lively isn’t very interested in whether people are sympathetic or not. Rather, she is searing in how she presents any human relationships – perhaps more at home when describing familial relationships than romantic ones.

Lively is also very good on class. I thought this was brilliant (and heaven knows I still encounter enough middle-class people desperate to be considered busy beyond belief in their very ordinary lives):

He had discovered with surprise, on his arrival in the southern white-collar counties, the furious busyness of the professional classes. You could not hold up your head in society, it seemed, if you were unable to claim intolerable pressures, both inside an occupation and, even more, outside it. At a sherry party in his supervisors house, he had listened with interest to a group of (he gathered) unemployed women vying with one another in their accounts of lives have never a spare moment to, dizzy in the service of Parent Teacher Associations, Conservation Societies, adult literacy campaigns and ornithology. Going home again, he found himself taking a new view of his parents’ untroubled appreciation of the eight hour day in the five day week. If he had asked his father if he was busy, he would have stared in incomprehension: if you were at work, you were at work, and if you were at home you were at home, and that was all there was to it.

This is all sounding like a very positive review, and I do admire a lot about Penelope Lively’s writing. But I’ll end by admitting that I do struggle to love her novels. I’ve read a handful, and indeed some with very overlapping themes (a biographer in According to Mark; reflections on a long life in Moon Tiger) and it can feel like I’ve looking through a clouded pane of class. It is expertly done, but I don’t quite feel connected to it. I admire, but I haven’t yet felt touched by her writing.

Some spinsters for Spinster September

It’s September, which means it’s officially Spinster September! It’s the brainchild of Nora (@pear.jelly on Instagram) and it’s a celebration of all the wonderful spinsters of literature. You know I love a novel about spinsters, whether it’s a joyful one where she’s reclaiming her independence or a morose one where she’s all melancholy. It’s all my jam.

My suggestions could be endless, so instead I’m going to go very route one – sharing the books I own that have the word ‘spinster’ in the title! Here we go…

Spinster by Sylvia Ashton-Warner

There’s more than one Sylvia BLANK-Warner on the block for Spinster September! This is a New Zealand novel about a teacher that I was given back in about 2011 but haven’t read yet – it’s the one I’m hoping to read during this month.

Patricia Brent, Spinster by Herbert Jenkins

Oh my gosh I LOVE this novel so much. You might not usually think of Patricia Brent as a spinster, since she is in her mid-20s – but she is feeling the judgement of the old ladies in her boarding house. So she pretends she is engaged and off to meet her fiance. When she is followed, she sits next to a man and welcomes him as her affianced, hoping (successfully) that he plays the part. And, of course, they fall in love. It’s so silly, but a total delight.

Spinsters in Jeopardy by Ngaio Marsh

I bought this murder mystery novel quite recently, on the strength of the title (and having enjoyed one or two other Ngaio Marsh books). Not read yet.

The Indignant Spinsters by Winifred Boggs

Winfired Boggs wrote Sally on the Rocks, a brilliant and surprisingly modern-feeling 1910s novel now reprinted in the British Library Women Writers series. So I had high hopes for this brilliantly titled novel about three sisters who assume fake identities to try and get eligibly married. Sadly, it doesn’t live up to the excellence of the title, or the sophistication of Sally on the Rocks. It felt, instead, like quite disposable romantic fiction.

The Magnificent Spinster by May Sarton

People love this novel, don’t they? I’ve read it, and even done a Tea or Books? episode on it, but I don’t remember a single thing about it. Time to revisit?

What will you be reading during Spinster September?

It’s another A Century of Books round-up!

My century of books is much healthier than it looks, and that’s cos I have been reading a whole heap of books I’ve not been writing about. And these eleven books aren’t gonna get a whole blog post out of me… so let’s see how we can fill some ACOB gaps.

The Art of I. Compton-Burnett (1972) ed. Charles Burkhart

Charles Burkhart was such an Ivy Compton-Burnett stan (samesies) and this is one of many books he wrote or edited about her – it includes various critical essays, appreciations, reviews, obituaries etc. Most valuably, it has two interviews that ICB gave – where she is at her most irrepressible. Such a glorious mix of disingenuous obtuseness and elaborate self-revelation. I love the collection for those – everything else is fun but inessential.

More Women Than Men (1933) by Ivy Compton-Burnett

Speaking of, I never mentioned that I re-read my favourite ICB novel earlier in the year. And it’s still marvellous and ingenious.

A Thousand Mornings (2012) by Mary Oliver

So many people have said they love Mary Oliver, so I thought I’d try a collection of her poetry. I’ve definitely enjoyed some of the works I’ve seen people post, particularly around the time she died, but this collection did leave me a bit cold. Maybe it’s deceptively simple and I need to reread a few times.

Much Dithering (1938) by Dorothy Lambert

I had really high hopes for this novel about quiet, young widow Jocelyn and the three men who might end up being her next husband (at least one of whom faces competition in Jocelyn’s vivacious, selfish mother). The plot is really fun and there are enjoyable details about village life, but I’m afraid I found the novel a bit bland overall. There was something in the writing that seemed to deaden the momentum for me. A pity.

Sunday (1962) by Kay Dick

This was even more of a disappointment. Kay Dick is now best known for They, reprinted to much fanfare (though I haven’t read it). Sunday is about a woman called Sunday from her daughter’s perspective, and the various men who were in love with her at different times – as well as their complex relationship. The final sections were quite good, told in the present – but most of the book is told in a ‘My mother always used to -‘ sort of way that makes it all feel very distant. There is no urgency to the novel and I found it extremely tedious. I’m assuming They is rather better.

How To Suppress Women’s Writing (1983) by Joanna Russ

Hopefully it’s obvious that this title is satirical! Russ traces the history of literary reception, and the way that women writers have been suppressed from writing, or from finding fame if they do write, or from a glowing reception if they were famous. It’s fascinating and saddening, and I hope some things have changed in the past 40 years – but I daresay not as much as you’d hope. (I found it interesting that most of the book’s argument is written out on the front cover.)

A Song for Summer (1997) by Eva Ibbotson

We had a lot of fun talking about The Morning Gift by Eva Ibbotson when Claire was a guest on the Tea or Books? podcast – and it definitely felt like retreading similar ground in this WW2-set novel. The heroine is very good and very spirited; the hero is diffident but noble and musical. It was entertaining enough as a novel, but clearly not her strongest. (I also listened to the audiobook, and the narrator’s choice of voice for the hero was distractingly weird and husky.)

Other Voices, Other Rooms (1948) by Truman Capote

Apparently very autobiographical, this is about a fey young boy trying to find his absent father – and meeting a fascinating and eccentric group of people in his search. I really enjoyed the writing with this one, though maybe it’s not one I should have listened to. One day I’ll probably reread as a physical book, and that would do the story justice.

At The Pines (1971) by Mollie Panter-Downes

Love Mollie P-D; felt quite ambivalent about this book. It’s about the home of Algernon Charles Swinburne (poet) and his life. It’s amazing how much he’s fallen out of favour – does anybody care about Swinburne now? I hoped this book was about Panter-Downes’ experiences and reflections, and it isn’t really. She writes well, but on a subject I had no interest in. I’d much rather she wrote about herself.

Woman on the Edge of Time (1976) by Marge Piercy

This is another where I’d misunderstood what the novel was actually about. The blurb says it’s a feminist classic about a woman who sees the future – so I thought maybe she’s see a few hours into the future, and perhaps use this skill to get beyond the bounds of misogynistic control. But she actually sees visions of 2137 and the people there, all the while sectioned in a run-down hospital. The novel opens extremely brutally, and it’s a pretty bleak book throughout. I guess it’s a sort of fantasy (it’s called science fiction, but I don’t see quite how) that doesn’t interest me very much.

The Bridesmaid (1989) by Ruth Rendell

My first Ruth Rendell and I was very impressed by her writing. It wasn’t really a murder mystery, which I had been expecting, and there wasn’t actually a bridesmaid (it’s, for some reason, the name of a statue). I don’t even want to give away what happens – except that it’s a story of how love can get out of control. Wikipedia tells me it’s a fan-favourite, and I can see why.