Two-inch Foot Drop

I was born cool; that’s just the way I am. It’s very unusual for anything to shock me. Yet when my mother died, I was shocked by two things. First, I cried. Honestly, all told, for maybe two or three seconds, but that was completely unexpected for me. And second, Like that! I immediately forgave her. And again the sensation was “How did that happen?”

So, maybe if I think about it, I wasn’t born cool, but I became cool when I had to to get through this hard life. “Oh-blah di. . . etc,” and I don’t think about it much. But at the time, it was terrible, and I wanted to die, but now I’m fine, and she’s fine, and, of course, I’m still cool.

But my father’s death? God. That is all I can say. Twenty years gone, and I still feel his pain (and I know he feels mine.) He was a prince—“The heavens themselves blaze forth the death of princes.”(Julius Caesar, Shakespeare)—but God, what a struggle to be born in this life.

All of the actors are now dead, so I can’t say for sure, but his sister Jean— who actually raised him—told me that when he was born, he was either pulled out too fast or they dropped him down a flight of stairs, so that he was, from his birth, actually paralyzed on one side. He had a “hemiparesis” (half paralysis), which resulted in the left side of his body not catching up, muscle-wise, bone-wise, to the right side of his body. He did reach six feet of height, but his left side was always two inches shorter than his right, resulting in what’s called a “two-inch foot drop. He couldn’t walk without limping; he had no left calf, and every step he took was pain. Terrible, stabbing, wincing pain. Every breath. Every step. Every minute of his life. 

And it seems crazy, ( I mean, it actually is crazy) but it never occurred to me that he had a limp. But, of course, he did; I mean, how could he not? One leg was two inches shorter than the other. He wore this torturous, orthopedic device on his foot that cost hundreds (now thousands) of dollars to make. And he could never walk, ever, in a pair of  bedroom slippers. So, what a shock when I was twenty three, and I met this girl Rosa in my apartment (that is a stretch. . . ) complex who had come from West Islip—where he was a school principal—who had actually attended his school (Paumanok). “Oh, Mr. Demarest was your father? I remember him, with that terrible limp, always coming down the hall.” Was I shocked? Completely! I wanted to smack her in the face. Because, first, give me some credit. That was a fucked up thing to say—even ”innocently”— and second, that was the way that he walked. And third, I walked the same way too. 

Once, at my thirtieth high school reunion, while I was walking with my good friend Hutch, (we had grown up together), he said, “I see that you’re not limping now.” And I thought, what is that supposed to mean? And, intuitively, reading my confusion, he said, “I remember that you were always limping in school. Now you’re fine. What happened then?”And you know what happened? I was unconsciously walking the same as my dad, favoring the right leg, wincing on the left. I loved my dad. It was sympathy.

His mother had died when he was twenty two months old. She had Bright’s disease, which was the name they called acute kidney disease; it was actually more common on the other side of the family, but that’s what she died of and my grandfather was neither willing nor able to raise a small child. So that’s why his thirteen year-old sister raised him.

Nothing against my grandfather. I really never knew him, and when I did, he had dementia, so there’s really nothing I can say, but my father told me a story once of how, when he was seven or eight years old, he didn’t feel like going to school. He’d leave the house each day and play in the fields, eat his lunch, play some more, and then come home when he saw the other kids begin walking home. For six weeks! The teachers never reported him absent, and his father never asked him what he did in school that day. He could not have been less interested. 

Well, of course, that was a different time. Can you imagine the lawsuits of today? But can you also imagine, what if you were gone for six weeks, and no one missed you?

So, there are just two things I want to say. First, my father never ever made fun of me or belittled me, and my mother truly did. Horribly. Incessantly. It was terrible abuse. Honestly, “the less said, the better. .  .” But it was —even though I have forgiven her— a terrible thing to have done to a child. And, of course, it started when I was an infant, so what kind of context was there to make sense? And, truthfully, my dad, though he had suffered so much, he was complicit and he knew it —I mean, he let it happen—but he was also incredibly kind. Not just to me but to everyone. He was, I think, an enlightened soul. Whenever my mother sent him upstairs to spank me, he would take the hairbrush and hit the side of the bed. Really, the danger was that I would really get spanked because I was obviously faking it so loudly “Ye-oww!Owww!”that my sadistic older sister would come in to watch. Here is the gift I remember the most: At his Memorial Service, quite unexpectedly, two former students from West Islip, now middle-aged men, came so they could share memories of him. They had both grown up in “broken homes,” with lethal potions of drunkenness, abandonment, and abusive foster parents. And yet they always knew they could come in to my father’s office to talk to him, let him get them some breakfast and know that he would be comforting to them. He was kind and the memory of this kindness saved them. Not just me, you see, but anyone.

And the other thing? He loved music. Or, more specifically, the flood-stage of music notes that coursed through his arteries. Because it is a fact—or at the least, I do believe, that if everyone could lose their minds for hot jazz music the way my father always lost his mind for “Caldonia” by Woody Herman and his Thundering Herd—then the world would be a much happier place. (“Tuck! No. . .wait! Listen to those horns!!”)

 I could be wrong, but you get my point.

And he loved to sing although his voice wasn’t much. But he could sight read and sing the right notes from a chart. (Not quite perfect pitch but relative pitch although I am a musician and can’t tell you the difference.) When he and my mother moved to Florida, he joined a big, local amateur chorus. I honestly have no recollection of the name. And he loved it. It was something that gave him real meaning in his life. But after a few years, his dementia kicked in. Maybe it was Alzheimers; maybe it was just the intractable Demarest dementia that has taken out more than a few family members. Once, when I was visiting my parents (father) in Florida, I was sitting on the beach when some young guy came up to his girlfriend beside me. “Whoa!” he said, “Sorry. I got held up by this crazy old guy. Crazy.” 

“Where?” she said. And he turned around and pointed to my dad. He was standing by the phone pole and smiling at me.  And, of course, because of the difficulty of walking on the sand, it was an ordeal for him to come down to the beach. I can’t remember to this day if I ran up to get him.

On the next trip to Florida, I asked, ”How is the chorus?” And he was silent as if maybe he hadn’t heard me, and for some reason, I knew to hold my tongue. So we rode on, in silence, until he began: 

“Well, I was making mistakes, you know, singing the wrong notes; coming in at the wrong places. . .” 

“Yeah? And. . .”

“The director. . . he said, ‘Why don’t you just stand there and not open your mouth?’”I clutched my head inside my hands. What . . . . if you were gone for six weeks and no one missed you? This man had been damaged for all of his life and now he had apparent brain damage? No. No. It wasn’t fair. 

Eventually, he was moved into Assisted Living, where he forgot all the names of my mother, my sisters and pretty much everyone else except: “Tuck!” he’d yell every time I called him. “How is Jin Jin? How is she?” He just adored my tiny Chinese daughter, who’d been left by a roadside in China by her mother. He had one more child to be kind to. And he was, my one true Buddha dad.

And you’ve probably deduced that I treasured him, of course —but really, what I want to say is that he was kind. My dad was kind.

Jacob Lawrence : The Great Migration

Jacob Lawrence:

The Great Migration

3 From every southern town migrants left by the hundreds to travel north.

If you‘ve ever looked up and seen a flock of small starlings swooping and soaring in exuberant flight, you’d know that migration is always a miraculous sight. Suddenly, for no reason, they just pick up and fly. And even more amazing is the fact that they are truly hardwired. In late summer the American Golden-Plover begins a flight of over 10,000 miles from their breeding grounds in Northern Canada to the grasslands of South America, including a nonstop flight of up to 3500 miles over the open Atlantic Ocean, and then in late Spring flies back to the tundra again.. It’s something to see. But it’s a story of survival, just like any other life.

Likewise, it’s the story of the Great Northern Migration, which took place in the United States between 1915 - 1960, when six million African American left their homes in the rural South for new jobs in the industrial North. Six million people boarded trains or even walked hundreds of miles to get away from the poverty and punishments of the post-Civil War South that kept ex- slaves in servitude when, in fact, they were free. Even though they had been“freed” by the passage of the Thirteenth Amendment (in 1865,) they weren’t “free” by any means. They couldn’t go to White schools; they couldn’t sleep in White hotels; they couldn’t sit on buses, etc. Even as late as 1963, George Wallace was overwhelmingly elected Governor of Alabama by declaring, “And I say segregation now, segregation tomorrow, and segregation forever!”

It was not an easy journey, but it was past time to leave. The factory workers of the Northern industrial cities like Detroit, Chicago, Pittsburgh, and Philadelphia were being drafted by the government to fight World War I (1917 - 1919) and so the factory owners began looking to the South for new workers to replace them. The owners, in fact, even paid for the trains which brought the rural Southerners to the cities in the North.

13 The crops were left to dry and rot. There was no one to tend them.

15 There were lynchings.

One of the migrant families moving North was Jacob Lawrence’s family. They made it as far as New Jersey where he was born in 1917. And where he and his three brothers lived until their parents separated and placed them all in foster care. Eventually, when he was thirteen, his mother took her four sons north to Harlem, New York, the site of the “Harlem Renaissance,” Between the end of World War I (1917) until the beginning of World War II, the Harlem Renaissance was an African American hotbed of dazzling artistic and cultural activity. The legendary artists who emerged from this period, including Langston Hughes, Ralph Ellison, Zora Neale Hurston, Richard Wright and Duke Ellington. And Lawrence emerged from this artistic hotbed too since it was at the Harlem Art Workshop in 1932, where he studied under Charles Alston, that he began to develop his unique style of abstract figures and flat primary colors. At twenty one, he had his first solo exhibition at the Harlem YMCA and in 1940, while still only twenty three years old, he created a sixty-panel piece then entitled “The Migration of the Negro” and now known as “The Migration Series” which rocketed him to fame. The now legendary 60-panel series is now split between the Phillips Collection in Washington D.C., and the Museum of Modern Art (MoMA) in New York City. Lawrence then became the first African American artist represented in MoMA’s collection.

28 The labor agent sent south by northern industry was a familiar presence in the black communities.

39 Railroad platforms were piled high with luggage.

The brilliance of the series is that it represents both the hope and despair of the migratory journey. The ride North was initially easy, but they soon realized that the jobs were not as high- paying as the factory owners had promised. And also, since their expertise was in agricultural work, they were only given unskilled positions (and pay) in heavy industry. They’d made the migration with good intent, but as August Wilson said, “it was a transplant that didn’t take.” However, either way, there was a flight that was something to see, and Jacob Lawrence told the story of the miraculous sight.

45 The migrants arrived in Pittsburgh, one of the great industrial centers of the North.

58 In the North the African American had more educational opportunities.

St. Francis Fed The Animals

St. Francis Fed

The Animals

Take Me To Church

One time I read a story about a man who, trying to make more sense of his life, moved to a California forest community called—I’m not kidding—“Last Chance,” built a rudimentary

shack with no indoor plumbing, and then renounced money, sex and all material possessions except for the 800 pounds of seed he drove into town to buy each month in order to feed the woodland animals. That was nice. St. Francis also fed the animals. But one August, lightning started a wildfire that consumed the entire community in addition to another 40,000 acres as well, and instead of leaving, this man drove 800 pounds of seed back into the forest, got trapped inside and died, “doing what he loved,” his step-niece said, but I don’t think it was for love. I mean, even the woodland beasts had fled.

Plaisir D’Amour

There is no accounting for love, but, strictly speaking, it is expensive.

The Serpentin Vase

When I first saw the image of a Serpentin Vase in 1997 on a website for Transjo Hytta, a small studio in the “glass kingdom of Sweden,” it was so beautiful, I was suddenly sad. Don’t kid yourself. Art and love do exactly the same thing. They remind you that there is an alternate reality, an “other” beauty that you can’t access cognitively. You have to experience it, “take it on faith” as it were. Moreover, as Paul Cezanne (1839 -1906) said, the first time that he saw a Jean-Baptiste Chardin (1699 -1799) still-life,“Objects enter into each other. They never stop living, you understand. Imperceptibly, they extend beyond themselves through reflections, as we do. . . they speak to us; we speak to them.”And at the time, buried as I was in an abusive marriage, holding out for an adoption that maybe would or would not come through, the “Serpentin,” a purple glass “bottle vase” of almost otherworldly hue, I can’t explain what it was, but it promised relief. But it was too expensive, that is: $700 plus shipping from the middle of a primeval forest. Back in 1997, that was one magic vase. But then a diamond ring would have cost more and what, in the scheme of things, was that worth in my life? Then, unexpectedly, three things happened: The adoption came through. I got immediately divorced. And I decided to keep searching for the Serpentin vase. And twenty years later, in 2017:  Ecce Serpentin!  I found a used one on Ebay for $470, or, even better, “best offer.” I offered $340, and now I say “morning light, Serpentin” every morning of my life.

The Victory Tour

And I do love my exceptional daughter, but even she knows that I love my Tana Lee more. She’s a Brittany Spaniel, and I think, “is this how it will end?” Half of her a wild child, the other half a tired old lady? I see she’s sleeping more these days as she probably should; she’s fourteen years, and it’s almost time. Her legs are starting to collapse; I end up carrying her home. Sometimes when she picks up a dead bird, I want to smack it out of her mouth, but I just can’t. I pull the body from her teeth and say “bad dog!” but it’s all for show. We’re on the Victory Tour; if she should go, I want to know I was the kindest, gentlest mama ever, not just for her but more for me. I want to know that I can live with how she died and that it ended as it should. It’s not a vow of poverty, and I’m not feeding the woodland beasts, but it’s the least that I can give, that is, that she can take with her.

L’Esprit Literary Review

My Dear Theo

Emile Schuffenecker, copy of van Van Goghs Selfportrait with Bandaged Ear

Letter from Félix Rey to Irving Stone August 1930, The Bancroft Library, UC Berkeley

My Dear Theo

Susan Demarest

There Are So Few People Given Us To Love.

Anne Enright


You may have heard that Vincent van Gogh sliced off his ear. It’s “common knowledge,” and it’s almost true —that is, it wasn’t the whole ear, and he didn’t give it to a prostitute either, (she was, actually, a housemaid at the brothel) but close enough. He did pass out from loss of blood and had to go to a hospital. And you may have heard he killed himself although, recently, there’s another story about that, but someone shot him in the stomach, and, of course, you know, that he was nuts.

Well, that, at least, is true enough.

But did you know that by the age of twenty seven, van Gogh was done with finding work? (He died at thirty seven.) True, by then, his vocation was drawing and painting, but in the ten years before he died, he’d earned a total of eighty dollars with that. He was a very keen and enthusiastic critic of art, and he had actually trained to be a dealer, except—and if you think about it, this is really a problem—he didn’t like anyone telling him what to do. Instead, his younger brother, Theo (who literally was an Art dealer) supported him for the rest of his life with money for food and board and art supplies, (and also for mental hospitals bills) which is amazing when you consider that Theo himself was not well-off, and that Vincent completely expected it of him. In fact, not only did Theo support Vincent, but he also paid for Paul Gauguin to keep Vincent company in his imaginary “art colony” (of two) in Arles, and then for Gaugin to get the hell out of town when Vincent (or Gauguin — and again, there’s disagreement on that) sliced off his ear. Finally, when Vincent shot himself (or was shot), Theo raced to Auvers to be with him when he died. But, then shockingly, not six months afterward, Theo himself died horribly from the final, excruciating stages of syphilis, leaving his newly wed wife, Johanna (Jo) van Gogh- Bonger, and their infant son (Vincent) behind. Jo had to deal with Theo’s inheritance of all of Vincent’s art (over 850 canvases and drawings) and correspondence that Theo had stored inside their Paris apartment. Artists and dealers in Paris suggested she should leave the work with them, but she knew, instinctively, this would be wrong. And “instinctive” is correct because she was not an art dealer at all. She was a newlywed widow with a one year-old child.

Nine months later, taking all of Vincent’s drawings and paintings and letters (963 of them) with her, Jo moved back to the Netherlands and opened a guest house in the town of Bussum, an actual art colony located about ten miles southeast of Amsterdam. There, over the next twenty five years, she taught herself about art history, the art business, and singlehandedly created the success and reputation of Vincent as a phenomenal genius that is unparalleled in the art world today. Honestly, you can’t buy a van Gogh painting today. They have long since passed the five hundred million dollar mark. They are, in fact, “priceless.” Today, if you were to ask, “Who is/was the greatest painter of all time?” there would, of course, be various names offered up, but it is a certainty that Vincent van Gogh’s would be one. But while the story of Theo’s unending support is the truth, his most loyal supporter was actually Jo. Because it was she who, over the next twenty-five years, in multiple countries and in four languages (which she spoke,) altered his reputation from a lunatic who sold, literally, one painting in his life to an artistic genius who burnished the reputations of all the major museums that bought his work, culminating in the magnificent “Sunflowers” that was purchased by the National Museum in London and “The Starry Night” purchased by the Museum of Modern Art (MoMA) in New York.

And why did she devote all this energy to Vincent? Truthfully, it was no less than she would have done for Theo. “For a year and a half I was the happiest woman on earth.” Her marriage to Theo was the best time of her life. He was a sensitive soul, and he was totally devoted to her. Actually, he proposed to her on the first night he met her. (She said no.) But his loyalty to Vincent was first-priority in his life, and Jo’s loyalty was remarkably in sync. Even the fact that they named their new son Vincent (Vincent Willem) was an acknowledgement of their joint devotion to him. Traditionally, you don’t name your first child after your older brother (although, by coincidence, Vincent was named after his older brother —Vincent Willem — who had died a year to the day before his birth) but Vincent at the time, was in a mental asylum, and they both knew that Vincent would never have a child of his own. 

Some might say he was “unlucky in love,” but, honestly, he was impossible to love. He was a stranger to the habit of basic hygiene, (he rarely bathed and his teeth all fell out) and, obviously, he was incapable of supporting a spouse. Moreover, even though he had a spiritual and visionary approach to his art, he insisted that there was no other valid point of view about his art. includ-ing, unfortunately, those of his art collectors. It wasn’t an accident that he only sold one painting in his life. The expression “bull-headed” does not even begin to describe him. He was NEVER!!!  EVER!! (ever) wrong. At one point, Theo wrote to him, saying in effect, “Really Vincent, have you considered a bath? And, maybe you could, maybe you should, finally get some work?” Vincent, helpfully, set his poor brother straight:

And now for as much as 5 years, perhaps, I don’t know exactly, I’ve been more or less without a position, wandering hither and thither. Now you say,  from such and such a time you’ve been going downhill, you’ve faded away, you’ve done nothing. Is that entirely true . . .it’s true that I’ve lost several people’s trust, it’s true that my financial affairs are in a sorry state, it’s true that the future’s not a little dark, it’s true that I could have done better, it’s true that just in terms of earning my living I’ve lost time, it’s true that my studies themselves are in a rather sorry and disheartening state, and that I lack more, infinitely more than I have. But is that called going downhill, and is that called doing nothing?

Yes! Yes it is!! (Theo sent him money.) And scene.

* * *

Jo knew early on that the task to redeem Vincent was at the heart of her mission to memorialize Theo. It was not the first time she realized that she wanted to contribute meaning to the world. In  March 1880, when she was 17, Johanna Bonger wrote in the first of her four diaries:. “ . . . I would think it dreadful to have to say at the end of my life: ‘I’ve actually lived for nothing, I have achieved nothing great or noble.’” Now at twenty-nine, widowed with a two-year old year old child, she wrote in November 1891: “I am alone and lost. But I have a mission in my life.” And that was to finish the promise to make Vincent’s work known to the world, and to complete the task that her husband had begun.

I live utterly with Theo and Vincent in thought, oh, how infinitely fine and tender and loving that relationship was! How they felt for each other – how they understood each other! And oh, how moving Vincent’s dependence was sometimes—Theo never let him feel it—but he felt it himself sometimes and then his letters were distressing –- 

Diary   6 March 1892         Jo van Gogh-Bonger,

Initially, though, she was not taken seriously, neither as a woman nor, obviously, as an “untrained” art dealer. And also because, in Holland —which was not the home of color and Impressionism (France was) —Vincent’s paintings were considered the product of  his “long mental illness.” “The Starry Night,” probably now one of his most legendary works, was considered as proof of his mental disease. One reviewer compared the whirling nests of painted stars to oliebollen, the fried dough balls that Dutch people eat on New Year’s Eve. And to be fair, they were the product of his long mental illness (which, to this day, nobody can actually say what it was,) but they were also the product of his spiritual conviction that “art was a window into the mind of the artist.” Vincent’s belief in the power of complementary colors as symbols for expressing the energy of the divine was the certainty that drove his commitment to art. In the last three years of his life, Vincent began producing his finest and most famous works, not only revolutionary in brush stoke and surface tension, but in unlikely colors and vigorous lines. 

The Starry Night June 1889 , Saint Rémy, MoMA

Unlike the Impressionist painters who used color to reveal how things looked to the eye, Vincent’s colors revealed how they looked to the soul. And,  gradually, eventually —and, of course, posthumously—his post-impressionistic style began to gain recognition.

By 1892, Jo was able to display three of Vincent’s paintings at an ‘art appreciation session’ held by Arti et Amicitiae, a prestigious art colloquium that was based in Amsterdam and although the paintings were only there for discussion, Vincent’s work was at least considered being worth discussing. And then, after that, between 1892 and 1900, she managed to coordinate another twenty exhibitions, often writing the newspaper articles that “discussed” his great work, and successfully achieving new respect for it. Miraculously, by 1905, she managed to mount an exhibition at the Stedelijk Museum in Amsterdam  of no fewer than 484 of Van Gogh’s works —(shrewdly excluding “The Starry Night”)—which, according to Hans Luijten, the heroic researcher of both Vincent’s and Jo’s lives, “an exhibition of this magnitude would never again be matched.” And that was before she published Vincent’s letters to Theo.

Dear brother,

And then, when dusk fell —imagine the silence, the peace of that moment! Imagine, right then, an avenue of tall poplars with the autumn leaves, imagine a broad muddy road, all black mud with the endless heath on the right, the endless heath on the left, a few black, triangular silhouettes of sod huts, with the red glow of the fire shining through the tiny windows, with a few pools of dirty, yellowish water that reflect the sky, where bogwood trunks lie rotting. Imagine this muddy mess in the evening twilight with a whitish sky above, so everything black on white. And in this muddy mess a rough figure—the shepherd —a throng of oval masses, half wool, half mud, that bump into one another, jostle one another—the flock. You see it coming— you stand in the midst of it— you turn round and follow them. . .

2 November 1883      Vincent van Gogh

* * *

Letter from Vincent van Gogh to Theo van Gogh with sketch of Sower with Setting Sun (verso), November 1888, Van Gogh Museum Amesterdam

Because it was the letters —not the art —that sealed his reputation as a genius, and it was part of the plan that she’d had all along: first the works, then the letters to Theo. And if the letters were all that we knew of van Gogh, his reputation as a genius would still be ensured. Because they’re that remarkable. In 2010, the Museum of Dutch Literature placed Van Gogh among the one hundred greatest Dutch writers of all time. Clearly, it took Jo much longer than she thought to transcribe over 900 letters (van Gogh scholars estimate that at least as many—900 letters— have been lost as well) but as she was fluent in four languages (English, Dutch, German, French), Jo decided to translate and transcribe them herself although when she was finally finished with transcribing and translating them, and personally financed the publishing of of Vincent van Gogh: Brieven aan Zijn Broeder  (Letters to My Brother) it was 1914, twenty four years after his death. However, the Dutch and German editions, published in 1914, changed the entire  perception of the van Gogh landscape. And, finally, effectively, Jo’s work was done . . . she died in 1925. Then it was up to Vincent Willem, Jo and Theo’s only son, to take all the hundreds of paintings left to him (the ones that she had previously sold were for the purpose of raising public awareness.) to make a deal with the Dutch government to  design and build a van Gogh museum on its legendary Museumplein in Amsterdam in exchange for the donation of all of his works. And also, twenty four years after Theo van Gogh died and was buried in the Netherlands, Jo exhumed his body, transported it to France, and had it reburied next to his beloved brother Vincent’s. Next, she planted a bed of ivy, one of Vincent’s favorite plants, to cover them like a blanket and protect the two graves. And finally, quoting from George Eliot’s The Mill on the Floss, she said: “In their death they were not divided.” Think about it: She loved her husband so much that she dug up his body and buried him next to Vincent. Honestly, I can’t explain it, but I know it is love.

* * *

Many years passed before Vincent was recognized as a painter; now people can become

acquainted with him and understand him as a man.

Introduction: Letters to My Brother     Jo van Gogh-Bonger,

For the flowers will be short-lived and will be replaced by the yellow wheatfields.

Letter to Theo 6 June 1889 Vincent van Gogh

Wheatfield after a Storm 1889

Grief

Photo credit: Chuck Balsamo Sr.

Grief

 

Post 9/11: Barrett interviewed two witnesses who kept dreaming

about people jumping from buildings, until finally their dreams equipped

the jumpers with umbrellas or parachutes to float safely down to the ground.

“The Global Dream Lab” Brooke Jarvis


When my father died, I thought “Thank God;” it was the ending I’d been praying for; his mind in shreds, his body torn, his soul traveling through space to see the Great South Bay once more; to feel the sea foam trickling in because it works; each time I see the bay, I want to cry. It’s always grey, maybe grey-green. And we were close. We never talked. My ideal is a talk that once begun will never end, but we didn’t talk. Until he died.  

Until the morning of 9/11; the desperate jumpers and their deaths, the black smoke punishing the sky, the crumbling towers, the Pompeii ash, and who does that? Who prays for anyone to die? And, of course, I had.

And then my mother’s death: Jesus. This one was bad. There are no words. I wasn’t sad. And I know she wants to say she did, but she didn’t love me. No, she did not. And then you go through life with that.                                 

There is a photo on my desk: Two cedar waxwings on a branch, like Kookie Byrnes with slicked back hair, black eyes behind Lone Ranger masks, a sunlit green hydrangea leaf, the silver frame darkened with smoke, the souls that slipped out of my dreams, the ones that made it to the ground. I can’t explain, but now they’re safe. It takes the sting away from death.

Susan Demarest

Middle Child

“O brave new world that has such people in it!”

Miranda, The Tempest, William Shakespeare

Sometimes a person will ask me about my family, that is, my family history, I don’t know why; maybe they’re trying to figure out like a crime or something.. And, truthfully, I don’t like to say very much at all. First, I do believe, “If you can’t say something nice, don’t say anything at all.” That is good advice. But honestly, that’s not the real reason I go mum. I mean, how many times have I said, “I grew up in a small town on the South Shore of Long Island.” Then, “I’m one of three girls; I have two sisters.” Followed by ”No, I am the middle one”—only to hear, and this is an actual quote: “Ohhh. I SEE-E.”

And what would you think if you heard that every time? Seriously? You’re still trying to decode what that mean? Here’s a hint: “It doesn’t mean, “Hey Queen!! You rule!!

(I have sometimes wondered how, as an infinite soul wandering in the vastness of space, I might have chosen the parents who then gave birth to me. I mean, obviously,  I have had crazier thoughts . .  But a middle child? Please. Even I wouldn’t choose that.”)

Because I have always believed in the idea that I first discovered in the book, The Doors of Perception, by Aldous Huxley, that babies are, essentially, all-consciousness: they’re born little godheads, all-knowing and alive. Huxley, who is actually more famous for his dystopian book called Brave New World, in fact, derived his own “doors of perception” theory from an essay written in 1790 by the visionary poet and artist, William Blake, entitled “The Marriage of Heaven and Hell.”

“If the doors of perception were cleansed, every thing would appear to man as it is, Infinite. For man has closed himself up, till he sees all things thro’ narrow chinks of his cavern.” (Blake)

And then, after much “experimentation” with  magic mushrooms, Huxley concluded:

“. . . ordinary consciousness represents only a fraction of what the mind can take in. In order to keep us focused on survival, the brain must act as a “reducing valve” on the flood of potentially overwhelming sights, sounds and sensations. ”

In other words, we’re only savants when we’re shitting ourselves. We get duller and stupider as we get inevitably older. (Mercifully, however, we do learn language—a very, very hard task— while we are still fundamentally “unformed.”) I thought you might find that interesting. But my point is that even a newborn would not choose to be a “middle.” Because this is what it’s like to be a middle child: 

One Fourth of July, while I was lying on the grounds of a deserted lighthouse (with a really cute skirt on) with the man I was sure was the love of my life, I thought, “here it is: love; I have always wanted this.” It was nice; the grass smelled of wildflowers and faintly, sea salt; the waves just beyond us went “shhhh” on the shore, and languorously, I asked, “Am I the love of your life?” 

He immediately replied. “Well, you are a love.” Well, Happy Fourth of . .  . my life. And that’s what middle children are; we are an a not a the. Do you think The Great Gatsby was an ambitious  middle child?  Uhhh. . .”The”??

But a “middle-born?”Forget it. It’s not merely that you’re “second.” You’re not the well-behaved “first-born” that your parents prayed for; nor the last-born, the “charmer” who, and I don’t need to tell you this—will totally, for his whole life, completely get away with murder. You’re . . . resented by the first and derided by the third. When you step up to the plate, you are always “brushed back.” What? It’s hard for me to believe I am even telling you this. As if you didn’t already know.

And I’m not talking out of my hat. There have been  multiple studies about personality and birth order. The original theory they examine was espoused by Alfred Adler. Originally a Viennese ophthalmologist and a close friend of Freud, he developed this theory in the early twentieth century. His theory states that the order in which a child is born eventually impacts his or her personality. These personalities traits aren’t considered to be present at birth—because, think about it: A “second child” is not a “middle child” until the third child is born. And also, it seems, a child of a different gender might also be treated as a “new firstborn”(e.g. the “long-awaited” son or daughter), but the point is, the personalities that emerge are the eventual products of the individual family dynamics. 

But the weird thing is, even given the “individual dynamics,” the birth-order “types” are, amazingly, the same. Quick quiz: Which one is the “achiever”? Which one is the “rebel”? Which one is the “baby who always gets  away with murder”?

You get an A!

And another thing that comes out of birth-order studies: First-borns are shown to get higher test scores, end up with more money, and, of course, run triathlons and are generally well-behaved. The middle child, let’s face it, is a huge disappointment. We’re rebellious, free spirits, and, of course, we do drugs. ( . . .) In my opinion, the middle child also tends to be “smarter,” more socially adept, and, of course, self-aware. (And also, it’s a fact that we tend to dress better.)

And the baby? What can I say, but they are much more charming. They are cheerful and easygoing and they always dress better. Unfortunately, for these munchkins, their lives are so charmed that when something goes wrong —let’s say, an illness, or a job problem or a drug-addled child, they think all is lost! That this must be the end! They go off the rails, begin to doubt their self-worth. Whereas, for a middle child, “shit happens” on a Tuesday (and Thursdays? Oh please; we are nobody’s fool.)

Personally, I self-soothe with Burgundy and soft cheese.

Good food, Gatsby knew, was the secret of success. And maybe, come to think of it, he really was a middle child. First, as you know, he wasn’t actually “Jay Gatsby.” He was James Gatz, an aimless seventeen year-old, clamming on the quiet shores of Lake Superior, who one day, caught the eye of the wealthy Dan Cody, an older, sort of gangster-ish American titan. And it was right then and there that James Gatz became “Jay.” Or, as Nick Carraway, The Great Gatsby ’s narrator says, “The truth was that Jay Gatsby, of West Egg, Long Island, sprang  from his Platonic conception of himself.” Which made me think, Ayyy!! Go Gatsby! I mean, that’s how we do, isn’t it? Why we all, if we’re truthful, invent the person we become. We’re all—even babies—trying to emerge from this muddle as, admit it “somebodies.”And at least, Jay Gatsby, well-dressed bootlegger and mad, stupid rich—he was his own man — became somebody. He then pursued, single-mindedly, the love of his life. But that didn’t work out. I mean, he basically got killed. 

Gatsby’s not my favorite novel although I still talk about it; for one thing, all those rich  wannabes —I mean, uggh! And also, I am an artist so that whole “I am somebody!” means nothing to me. But the last line of the book? Oh my. It’s sick! It was written on the mysterious North Shore of Long Island (Sands Point, for a fact) and it should be the mantra of every developing child:

“So we beat on, boats against the current, borne back ceaselessly into the past.”

And do you know why I am an aggrieved middle child? I am inclined to believe it is, obviously, karma. I believe in my past life, I threw a child off a cliff. At least one. Maybe two. And it was probably a first-born.

The Maid of Orleans

divider.png

The Maid of Orleans

Look at me! Look at my arm! I have ploughed

and planted, and gathered into barns, and no man could

head me! And ain't I a woman?

Sojourner Truth, “Ain’t I a Woman?”

Joan of Arc on Horseback

Joan of Arc on Horseback

Look. If there’s any upside to going back to school in September, it’s that your mom finally breaks down so you can buy swag. And you get to  spend money and pick your own look. Are you gonna be a marketer? An influencer?? A recording engineer? We signal a whole lot about who we we are - or who we think we are - by our choice of style, of clothing.  I mean, who of you owns a pair of $400 Nike sneakers made by poor child laborers in a sweatshop in China?  And what did they cost to make? Maybe $2.50, tops?  Because you know, $40 Keds cost the same amount to make - in the same sweatshop by the same laborer. (That, of course, is his problem. Your problem is that you have $400 shoes.) Our clothes are like the two-way mirrors in Law and Order: SVU, where only Tutuola and Olivia can see both sides of the glass. You’re in the perp room, thinking, “Ha! They think I’m guilty? I’ll never break!” while Tutuola and Olivia are saying, “Oh God. He’s guilty. He’ll definitely break!” My own style of clothing says,“duchess, of course” I think that works, don’t you? And if it doesn’t, I’m too gracious to say otherwise.

I think we have always been interested in clothing and accessories, and stories are smart to strategically include them. Correct me if I’m wrong, but do you or don’t you know what Eve was wearing after she and Adam were expelled from Paradise? I think you do. It’s in the Third Chapter of the first book of the Holy Bible . .  “Then the eyes of both of them were opened, and they realized they were naked; so they sewed fig leaves together and made coverings for themselves.” Here is the story of the beginning of the world: earth, people, and fabric stitched together. And Joseph of Egypt? Did you ever hear that story? What did Joseph’s father have made for him? A coat of? . . . “many colors,” of course. Yeah, you knew that as well  - although the rest is a little bit hazy. And Jesus Christ wore - on his way to the cross? (Hint: it’s a headpiece. . .) We don’t even know if these people existed - and yet, for some reason, we know what they wore. 

But we do know that Joan of Arc - The Maid of Orleans - was real.  She was a peasant girl from Domrémy, France, who, from the age of thirteen, heard the voices of Saints (Margaret, Catherine and Michael) and angels telling her to save the dauphin (Charles VI) from the occupying English, and crown him as next King and also, to save France. And she did! Can you imagine? A seventeen-year old peasant who listened to voices in her head? And also we know that she dressed as a man, wearing a white full-body armor suit to lead the French troops to victory in Orleans in 1429 over the occupying English.  She wore the armor because she was going into battle, but also because she was afraid she she might be sexually assaulted, of course, by the same French soldiers that she improbably commanded. In 1430, she was captured, betrayed and sold to her English captors by the French people whom she had just saved! and burned at the stake for the high crime of heresy, which means, “rejecting  the church’s authority in favor of direct inspiration from God.”Recently, it seems that her armor has been found. She was evidently a tiny little thing; some speculate she may have been anorexic as well. Yet, between her seventeen-year old thinness and her head-to-toe armor, Joan of Arc signaled to her armies that “I am a man.” In fact, part of her legend is that she continuously wore men’s clothing in a time when so doing was completely unheard of.

In 1430, the duke of  Burgundy France captured her and SOLD her to the British for 10,000 francs, (By way of comparison, a horse at the time would have cost 12 -14 francs.) She was thrown in a prison - in chains - in anticipation of her “trial.” Ten months later, the trial was held. There were sixty English inquisitors - prosecutors - and she, after ten months, was allowed no defense. At one point, when they had told her that she would be burned at the stake, she briefly “recanted”  that she’d ever heard “the Saint’s voices” because she was terrified of being burned to death. And, in exchange for her life, she also agreed to put on women’s clothing. But then, in her cell, she heard the voices again; the Saints were reproaching her for “giving in” to her enemies, and as a result, she resumed wearing men’s clothing. That was the last straw for the English inquisitors. They came to her cell and condemned her to death. Her most unforgivable crime - that of being “a relapsed heretic” - was their legal way of saying she was being herself. And their proof? That she was once again wearing men’s clothing. When they burned her the next day at the stake, she  was silent and uttered only two words of grace:

“And the silence of Jeanne D’Arc

Saying amid the flames,‘Blesséd Jesus’ —

Revealing in two words all sorrow, all hope.” 

“Silence” Edgar Lee Masters 

So, it really is serious business what we put on out backs Obviously, our clothing signals how we want to be “seen.” But we, who are buying it - we don’t “see” ourselves.  So I think, on a subconscious level,  it’s about what we need. Remember, Ariel, the mermaid who just wanted to be loved? “Every  footstep as if she were walking on the blades and points of sharp knives, just as the witch had foretold, but she gladly endured it.”  (Girlfriend,  high heels . . amirite?) So what is the deal about those $400 (Oh please. Even I know they’re $600 shoes - that you never even wear.) What are you seriously trying to say? That you HAVE them? That just to KNOW you have them says that you’re not a footman - you are clearly a duke? That the pain and the loss and regrets in your life have been assuaged by the shoes in a box at the top of your closet? That you’re a somebody of “style” with a shoebox as proof?

Just a thought, but have you ever considered that that might be shallow? When you’re at home and no one’s watching, do you sit around thinking about your shoebox of shoes? Or, do you think about someone you love? Or someone you’ve hurt, or instead, has hurt you? Do you think about what you’d like to do in your life? Do you think about how hard it’s going to be to get a job? It’s going to be hard! Or do you think about who’s selling your next pair of shoes? Seriously, when you are alone with your thoughts in the chapel of your soul, are you honestly thinking about Kanye shoes?

I mean, you might. I don’t think so. But I mean, Kanyes? Jesus.

You know, your choice of clothes does not define you any more than the job you choose does. I learned this from Joan of Arc who heard the voices in her head, led the French armies to victory, rescued France and also dressed in male armor. It was a choice that she made, and it worked until it didn’t. But for of all her exceptional achievements, she was, seriously, most proud of her spinning and sewing. At her trial for her life, in front of sixty inquisitors, she was asked “if in her youth she had learned any craft. She said, ‘Yes, to sew and spin: and in sewing and spinning, I fear no woman in Rouen.’ ”

horizontal-line-clipart-15.png

Gallery: Vincent Van Gogh

Rembrandt Van Rijn

Rembrandt Self Portrait 1669

Rembrandt van rijn

(15 July 1606 – 4 October 1669)

Rembrandt  goes so deep into the mysterious that he says things

for which there are no words in any language.” Vincent van Gogh

"Don't ever confuse genius and saint," biographers of Rembrandt warn us. If Rembrandt van Rijn, (1606 - 1669) the greatest European painter and draughtsman of all time, were alive today, he would probably be charged with mental cruelty for his callous and disposable treatment of women. He wasn’t always that way. He started out caring, enchanted with his adored and rich wife, Saskia, but she died, too young, . . . and then he didn’t do well. That is, after Saskia’s death, when the nanny that he had hired to care for his one surviving son, Titus,( Saskia had lost three children in infancy) demanded - after six years of being his mistress- that he marry her as he had promised instead of the new “housekeeper” who had replaced her - he had her locked up in an insane asylum. For “destitute and diseased prostitutes.” Cold!

But was he a genius? Absolutely. His many portraits and self-portraits are so psychologically acute that they encounter you - not the other way around. Rembrandt, who was recognized and sought after, by the time he was twenty as one of the best painters alive in the Netherlands, “believed that human emotions were more important than any other aspects of life,” (theartstory.org)  He was, according to Martin Gayford in the UK Spectator, “the outstanding chronicler of the human face, daily altered by experience, and of the heart’s journey through love, grief, despair and every imaginable emotion” (https://www.spectator.co.uk/2014/09/why-everyone-loves-rembrandt)  In fact, if there’s any point to getting up in the morning, it is to do this: to journey through love, grief, despair, and every imaginable emotion.” And Rembrandt did all of that —  he just did it messily.

Rembrandt had been the most successful painter in all of Amsterdam, and, with his income, combined with Saskia’s money, had purchased a three-story townhouse in the fashionable Jordaan. But Saskia died  in 1642 at 29- probably from tuberculosis - and the terms of her will were that if he ever remarried, he would lose all of his inheritance from her. Well, he didn’t marry, but he also didn’t paint, and he spent money he didn’t have until by 1656 he went bankrupt - the richest painter  in all Amsterdam! - and was forced to sell the townhouse and all the furnishings in it, and all his unsold art. But even  that was not enough, So, fourteen years after her death, he sold Saskia’s grave in the Oude Church of Amsterdam. And he lost his inheritance. 

Now a disgraced man, with his housekeeper/mistress Hendrickje, and his surviving son Titus procuring his commissions and managing his business, he entered into his ‘late” and entirely brilliant stage of painting. He excelled in the rendering of light and darkness and experimented with his palette knife in applying thick paint.  One of his final paintings, The Jewish Bride, (also known as Rebecca and Isaac) painted in 1667 is so extraordinary that van Gogh, upon seeing it, predictably said: ‘I should be happy to give 10 years of my life if I could go on sitting here in front of this picture for a fortnight, with only a crust of dry bread for food.’ According to vangoghmuseum.nl, “the intimacy of the double portrait appealed to Vincent, and he was probably also pleased by Rembrandt’s use of coarse brushstrokes – a way of painting that saw him tear up the rulebook on how one was expected to paint in the 17th century.” 

Rembrandt died a pauper at the age of 63. He was given a  customary funeral for the poor. He was buried in an unknown grave owned by the church. A few years later, as was customary, his remains were dug up and casually destroyed. Maxim Kantor, a Russian painter and essayist, wrote these lines about Rembrandt: "Rembrandt van Rijn was a very sad artist. Only in the beginning had he an easy life, then it went hard, and he did not paint laughing people in his maturity.” But, happily for all of us, he really did paint.

Gallery : Lucien Freud

Lucien Freud, the grandson of Sigmund Freud, was born December 8, 1992 in Berlin and died July 21, 2011 in London. A true bohemian, his subject was humanity itself and he captured the vulnerability of his sitters in his studies. “I work from the people that interest me, and that I care about, in rooms that I live in and I know,” he said. He is considered one of the greatest painters of the twentieth century.

Theodore Roethke

Theodore Roethke was born on May 25, 1908, in Saginaw, Michigan. During his writing career, his major works included “Open House,” “Words for the Wind” and “The Far Field.” Roethke won the Pulitzer Prize for his poetry volume The Waking in 1954 and the National Book Award in 1965 for The Far Field. He died on August 1, 1963, on Bainbridge Island, Washington.

Elegy for Jane

(My Student, thrown by a horse)

I remember the neckcurls, limp and damp as tendrils;
And her quick look, a sidelong pickerel smile;
And how, once startled into talk, the light syllables leaped for her,
And she balanced in the delight of her thought,

A wren, happy, tail into the wind,
Her song trembling the twigs and small branches.
The shade sang with her;
The leaves, their whispers turned to kissing,
And the mould sang in the bleached valleys under the rose.

Oh, when she was sad, she cast herself down into such a pure depth,
Even a father could not find her:
Scraping her cheek against straw,
Stirring the clearest water.

My sparrow, you are not here,
Waiting like a fern, making a spiney shadow.
The sides of wet stones cannot console me,
Nor the moss, wound with the last light.

If only I could nudge you from this sleep,
My maimed darling, my skittery pigeon.
Over this damp grave I speak the words of my love:
I, with no rights in this matter,
Neither father nor lover.

The Waking

I wake to sleep, and take my waking slow.
I feel my fate in what I cannot fear.
I learn by going where I have to go.

We think by feeling. What is there to know?
I hear my being dance from ear to ear.
I wake to sleep, and take my waking slow.

Of those so close beside me, which are you?
God bless the Ground! I shall walk softly there,
And learn by going where I have to go.

Light takes the Tree; but who can tell us how?
The lowly worm climbs up a winding stair;
I wake to sleep, and take my waking slow.

Great Nature has another thing to do
To you and me, so take the lively air,
And, lovely, learn by going where to go.

This shaking keeps me steady. I should know.
What falls away is always. And is near.
I wake to sleep, and take my waking slow.
I learn by going where I have to go.

Alfred

Self Portrait, 1972 Francis Bacon, The Francis Bacon Estate

Alfred

When I was in college, I took a course in Shakespeare with an erratic professor - that is, a professor who taught Shakespeare and also dropped acid. He wanted to “date me” in exchange for an “A”, which, I believe, is what we call sexual harassment today. Also, and this was a little tough at 10 o’clock. on a Monday morning, his critical responses were hard to decode. He might respond to a question by saying, “You’ve been staring inside the mirrors inside the mirror for too long.” One day, when I asked, what did that exactly mean, he gripped my arm, dug his fingers in, and hissed: “There are stranger things than you know.” I took an incomplete in his course rather than earn my date night “A”, but he was right. There are stranger things than you know, and I know this because of Alfred.

Alfred was a beautiful child. A camera wouldn’t have done him justice because he was always drooling, and his smile was kind of like a Francis Bacon schmear across his face, but he was a delight to behold. And I don’t know how he did it, but he transmitted a kind of joy not light, and I don’t think a camera would have captured that either.

He was not merely retarded but profoundly retarded, with an IQ of somewhere between 0 and 20. The IQ range for mildly retarded is between 60 and 80, moderately retarded between 40 and 60, severely retarded between 20 and 40, and profoundly retarded is measureless. And yet, as astonishing as it was to conceive of a brain of, literally, measureless expanse, I still felt - profoundly - that Alfred inhabited a far more complex human existence than I could ever lay claim to. But finally, as if to underscore the complete tyranny of his physical existence, he had cerebral palsy too although, after all these years, I don’t remember if that was the exact reason why his legs were in braces. I do remember, though, that it was my job to help him to move and, in particular, to negotiate the narrow stairs of the old converted elementary school on East 9th Street in Huntington.

Naturally, he was on some kind of powerful medication - maybe it was ritalin, maybe phenobarbitol - but it was something powerful, and sometimes he would be so zonked out, he’d walk into the cement wall and smack his head. But that wasn’t Alfred; that was the meds. Alfred himself was utterly lovable. He was seven years old with sandy brown hair, slate blue eyes, and soft, white skin. I seem to always remember him dressed in a white cotton tee shirt edged with light blue trim and light blue shorts. He looked so precious in light blue that he could pass for an almost normal little boy. But then, as if to check, you’d look into his eyes and some vital light would be missing. It was as if the lens aperture of his mind was always in the closed and folder position, each triangle plate resting comfortably, mysteriously, on the plate beneath it.

Sometimes, for no apparent reason, Alfred would let out this soul-crushing wail. It was not a hearty child’s howling sound but a keening, empty stream of grief. It was terrible, and we would do anything to make him stop. But finally, when Alfred laughed, the air seized; it was the sound of flooding, incomprehensible joy. It began on the low end with a giggle, like the sound of stones overrun with rushing water, and ended on a precipice with rhapsodic shrieks - long, incontinent, spiking shrieks. what an incredible sound. We never knew where that sound came from or why it came, but we knew - no thanks to us - that Alfred was happy.

Every day after lunch, Alfred and I would climb up to the second floor stairwell and then painfully, slowly, return back to the first floor. I was more of a companion than a guide because I hd no idea what I was actually supposed to teach him, but Alfred knew what he had to do and was a good sport, cheerful even, on the slow but steady climb to the top. Going down stairs made him miserable, though. First, it was harder to go down stairs than up because it required more balance, and Alfred, as I said, was it braces up to his thighs. Second, if one learns from what one already knows, then what Alfred knew on the way down was frustration and failure. In retrospect, it was amazing that I could block out the bitterness and frustration of the day before and still look forward to my twenty minutes with him, as if his hot tears and terrible howls were an anomaly and not sinking into my heart every day. At night, my dreams were intense and primordial. Waking up, I’d stare exhausted into the morning sky.

One day in early August was just a perfect summer’s day. The sun was shining, beaming almost, and the sky was brilliant, sequined blue. There was a light breeze rippling through the leaves and the whole air was just infectious with happiness. None of us wanted to stay inside. At lunch, Rose, who was an elderly, Irish-Catholic, and sensible colleague - safe to say, my mirror opposite - was just overcome with laughter. “Jesus, Mary, and Joseph!” she said. “Just wait until you see Alfred today. We went outside this morning and Alfred - I’ve never seen him like this - he was just so full of beans. He was running and laughing and jumping up and down and, of course, falling on his little tail. Then we’d get him up, and he’d laugh harder and fall down on his tail again! Oh that little monkey! He was having such a ball!”

After lunch, Alfred fairly flew up the stairs. He really was in a delightful mood, laughing and burbling like a winsome, happy child. I remember him flapping his arms like some fledgling pale bluebird as he he hopped up to the top of the stairs. And then, he walked down. Just like that. He made it down the stairs all by himself. I don’t remember anything that happened after that, but that doesn’t matter now. I do know he made it down. That night I dreamt of a brilliant sunrise. And I’ll always remember this: I smelled apricots.

The next morning I didn’t notice that Alfred wasn’t there, but I did notice that Rose was gone. “Where’s Rose?” I asked a colleague. She seemed to hesitate as if not believing that I didn’t know what everybody else already knew. “She’s not coming in,” she said and then waited for me to say something. Finally, I caught on. “Did something happen?” I asked. “Alfred died,” she said. When Alfred got home that afternoon, he was, as Rose had said, still full of beans. His family, who were really lovely people, had a four-foot above ground swimming pool that no one had ever worried about childproofing because Alfred had never climbed up the small wooden ladder by himself. He climbed up; he fell in and he drowned.


I was twenty three the summer that this happened. Up until that point, I hadbeen kind of epically naive. I hadn’t experienced many deaths; I had no idea what grief was, and I certainly, at least consciously, had no idea that I was going to die. Now I know I am going to die.


A few nights later, I drove to Alfred’s wake. I took the back roads through Patchogue to the funeral home in Sayville. The purpose of driving through the back roads was to miss the congestion of Patchogue’s Main St. Additionally, Main Street had a flatness that, uncannily, seemed to mirror my life. The back roads passed through residential areas, but in fact, they required a focus and concentration that distracted you from scenery. It was a mazelike route with sharp right, quick left, checkerboard turns every fifty to seventy five yards.. I used to know the names of all the streets, but if I did it today, I’m sure I’d still find it from the sound of the transmission. At Division Street, which runs parallel to the railroad station, I became aware of a small white moth in the car. I opened the windows, but the moth didn’t get out. It stayed on the passenger side, near the window, near, the ceiling, but it didn’t leave the car. For the next several minutes I drove through the back roads of Blue Point and Bayport until finally, I turned onto Main St. of Sayville.


At the funeral home, I was a little tense and nervous, so I didn’t notice what had happened to the moth when I finally got out of the car. It was my first wake. Inside, all I remember is the eerie whiteness of the lights and the walls and the flowers. Alfred was in an open casket in a powder blue cotton suit with a white dress shirt and a powder blue bow tie. I don’t remember if his eyes were open, but I guess they were closed. I don’t remember if I cried. I don’t remember anything. Except this: When I got back into my car, I felt an incredible lightness - as if my heaviness had flown away. Alfred took my sorrow from me. I think that moth was part of Alfred’s soul; Alfred was a part of me; and there are things stranger than you know.

Bad Dog

divider.png

Bad Dog

Self Portrait 1889, Oil on Canvas

Self Portrait 1889, Oil on Canvas

Dear brother,

I feel what Pa and Ma instinctively think about me (I don’t say reasonably).

There’s a similar reluctance about taking me into the house as there would be about having a large, shaggy dog in the house. He’ll come into the room with wet paws — and then, he’s so shaggy. He’ll get in everyone’s way. And he barks so loudly. In short — it’s a dirty animal.

                                                                                    Letter to Theo van Gogh, 1883

Listen. I’ve had some terrible dates. Cheap, loud talkers, aggressive gropers, who conveniently forgot that they were married; men who stole my valued prints (I could not afford paintings.) as well as precious years of my net life ( but that’s on me.) So I’m not an expert, but I am certainly not  - well, I probably am - some babe in the woods when it comes to “regrettable dates.” I have said “yes” to many things I should have not. But even I would not have dated van Gogh. He was a loon, a ginger, a drooling deadbeat, who, on a “good day” dressed poorly, bathed rarely, followed women into their own houses and, God in heaven, sucked the paint right off his brushes. In his entire life he sold exactly one painting for the equivalent of $80.00 in 1888, which was then resold in 1905 for $10,000, and today would be worth. . . .well, let’s just say the last painting of his that sold, twenty eight years ago, sold for 92 million, which, with inflation, would be worth at least 152 million today, and that was twenty eight years ago. Today, it would easily sell for at least 400 - 500 million more. Not bad, I’d say, for a drooling paint sucker.

And that is because? Well, easy, really. No one else in the world has ever - ever - painted like van Gogh.  He “followed his bliss,” in a manner of speaking.  His bliss was inscrutable to fairly everyone else in the room - but even they acknowledged (especially his literally, supportive brother, Theo, an art dealer in Paris) his incredible talent. And that was his ability to “naturalize divinity” through his  stone cold confidence in the power of color and his singular longing to  translate the infinite.  And, incredibly, he actually succeeded. To see even one van Gogh painting in the most crowded museum is to feel the stillness that clings to you inside a shrine. He was interested genuinely in materializing the divine and he  felt certain that his process of revealing it was right. He really believed, “the radiance and vibration of coloring offers something of the eternal” . . . It’s just that any other method of expressing himself was, for all who encountered him, an embarrassing mess.

He got fired from so many jobs that, by the age of twenty five, he didn’t even try to work any more. He just “borrowed” money, every month and sometimes twice a month, from his compassionate younger brother, Theo. And the reason that he kept getting fired was that he refused to do any-thing that he was asked. He was offended! Once, when he was thirty, unemployed, and living with his parents, he wrote to Theo,  explaining how his father, who had already tried to have him involuntarily committed  to an insane asylum, was trying to kick him out of the house again because he was unwashed, unrepentant, and most offensively of all, Catholic (His father was a Protestant pastor). He said to Theo, “Well, I won’t!.” He said, “I don’t like his tone!” Yet he was  clearly articulate, thoughtful, and naturally poetic. Truthfully, his letters could be considered “found poems”. He was a rare and miraculous hothouse flower. Until he wasn’t. When he started to have one of his “fits,” he was as crazy as a tick. He was absolutely mortifying. His neighbors in Arles, Provence, presented their petition to a judge to have him sent to an insane asylum because, among other things:

“. . .In my capacity of manager of the house resided in by the said Vincent Van Goghe, I had occasion yesterday to talk with him and to observe that he has become insane, because his conversation is incoherent and his reason wandering. Further, I have heard that this man is given to touching the women who live in the neighbourhood; he has similarly assured that they no longer are even safe in their homes, because he enters their houses”

Or “. . . The said Van Goghe, who lives in the same quarter as me has for some time  become increasingly mad; also everyone is frightened in the neighbourhood. Women especially no longer feel safe because he is given to touching them and makes obscene remarks in their presence. In my case, I was seized by the waist in front of Madame B.'s shop by this individual the day before yesterday, Monday, and lifted in the air.”

 So, for the record, he was creepy and incontinent as well as during this period (1888 - 1890) doing his absolutely most astonishing work. Like, for example, La Berceuse, (which he translated as “the lullaby, or “she who rocks the cradle.”)  The image, of which van Gogh made five versions, was begun before he was committed to the asylum at San Rémy, but not finished until January or March 1889, during his confinement. By that point, he had regained his sanity, and calmly described it in a letter to Theo:

“It is a woman dressed in green (olive green bust and pale Veronese skirt). Her hair is all orange and plaited. The color of the face is done in chrome yellow. with, of course, broken tones to give a natural look to it. The hands that hold the rope to rock the cradle are the same color. . . .”

La Berceuse 1889, Oil on Canvas

La Berceuse 1889, Oil on Canvas

Van Gogh conceived La Berceuse as a response to a story that Gauguin had told him - yes, that Gauguin, the Tahiti guy with syphilis, who lived at that time with van Gogh, fought with van Gogh, and, most famously when van Gogh sliced off his ear, hopped on the next train that was heading out of town. However, he had  previously regaled van Gogh with a story of “the Icelandic fishermen, exposed to all the dangers, alone on the sad sea.” Inspired by this, van Gogh wanted:

                       

“ . . .to paint a picture in such a way that sailors who are at once children and martyrs, seeing it in the cabin of their Icelandic fishing  boat would have that old sense of being rocked come over them and remember their own lullabies.”                               

In fact, he envisioned it as a sacred triptych, surrounded by panels of sunflowers on each side,. . .   as a consolational painting and any resemblance to his own desolate life, “alone on a sad sea” was, surely,  . . . a coincidence.

Because, in the end, his death was, to all, a death foretold. He knew as well as anyone that this painting as much as every other painting he had done would be going to Paris, where it wasn’t going to sell. I mean, of course, it would have been nice. There is such a thing as validation and dignity. But in some quiet place in his brain, van Gogh knew well enough what his art would be worth:

“I cannot help it if my paintings do not sell. But the time will come when people realize that they are worth more  than the cost of the paint.”

And at that point, although his output of paintings was increasingly furious, van Gogh was aware that he was painting for his death. He had realized, alone, on the “sad sea of life,” that his oeuvre was more salable dead than alive. And so in 1890, after committing himself  once again to the asylum at San Rémy, after realizing that Theo, his  brother, his closest confidante  and, of course, financier, now had different priorities with his wife and new child, van Gogh made one last move, to Auvers-sur-Oise, a town north of Paris, where he painted his last color-drenched paintings of wheat fields and flowers. And, somewhat more ominously, of wheat fields and crows. In June 1890, about one month before he shot himself in the chest, he painted a portrait of Dr. Gachet.  In a letter, he described it to his sister Wilhelmien:

 

“So the face of Dr. Gachet shows you a face the colour of an overheated brick, and scorched by the sun, with reddish hair and a white cap, surrounded by rustic scenery with a background of blue hills; . . .”

“ . . . his clothes are ultramarine - this brings out the face and makes it paler,   notwithstanding the fact that it is brick-coloured. His hands, the hands of an obstetrician, are paler than the face.”

“Before him, lying  on a red garden table, are yellow novels and a foxglove flower of a somber blue hue.”

Portrait of Dr. Gachet 1890, Oil on Canvas

Portrait of Dr. Gachet 1890, Oil on Canvas

He was an artist, a genius, and, indelibly, a poet. As Thoreau has said, “All men lead lives of quiet desperation,” but his was a comet that roared through the sky. If I had met him, would I have dated him? It’s pretty exciting to live in that world. I know. I have, but no. He was also a ginger and totally broke. I’d like to think I might have overlooked the paint-sucking, but then - I’m almost positive - I would have pushed him away.

horizontal-line-clipart-15.png