I.
Over
a few days this past week -- mostly while packed into a car also containing my
mother, my sister, her friend, Heather, and the dog, en route to and from the
Red River Gorge where we were doing some small-scale backpacking -- I read Jon
Krakauer's Into the Wild, just
something I'd pulled off Heather's bookshelf for the journey. Everybody knows
the story, I suppose: young man enthralled by Tolstoy, Thoreau, and his own
depth of spirit sets out to make it entirely on his own, living off the land
and then dying on the land after a mercilessly swift series of miscalculations.
Krakauer attacks the situation with sympathy, especially in a middle chapter
dissecting the chorus of sneering voices who chastised Chris McCandless for his
foolish death.
From
the available evidence, McCandless doesn't seem to have been an especially
likeable person. I would, I think, have clashed with him across the seminar
table in college, constantly prickled by the suspicion that beneath the discord
our deepest convictions sang in unison. His notes are full of ardent
underlining and rampant self-glorification. He seems to have treated other
people highhandedly and with insufficient respect for their reality. But I
don't think that fully explains why lives and deaths like his are held in such
contempt, because there's also something defensive, reactionary, in the tone of the
castigators.
There
are certain lives that are popularly read as an act of judgment against
mainstream existence, whether those living them would ever formulate such a
judgment or not. The smoldering annoyance provoked by this continual imaginary
judgment comes out against the less dramatically ascetic as well: there is for
instance the scorn tossed at vegans, straight-edge kids, non-drivers (to name
only categories of which I am or have been a member). And I've just as often
fallen on the other side: how often have I rolled my eyes at the fasters, the
neatniks, the taut creatures who organize their days around workouts?
All
these people have given their lives a certain tentative form, and the more
committed, like McCandless, a much stronger one. Such forms omit deliberately
things widely considered worth pursuing; they refuse to frame their neglect to
obtain these things as a failure. And, often accidentally, they function as
statements, as argumentative positions that would be very uncomfortable to
engage seriously in debate. So their deliberate omissions must be reframed as
failures. They must be drawn into comparison and competition with the critic's
normal life, which is shaped without much conscious intention by the essentially
economic imperative of continual growth, acquisition. Any answer to the
critic's challenge will typically serve only to make the defendant appear as
fanatical, judgmental, and foolish as everyone has suspected all along.
Therefore
it's better to be silent, assuming one doesn't in fact possess the strain of messianic
zeal that made McCandless apparently insufferable. I yearn to go unnoticed when
I turn down the cheesecake, just as in high school I gave only a cheery
"no thanks" to whatever bottom-shelf bottle was being passed around, just as
I demur on any number of more sensitive and deeper-seated subjects. I keep the
scope of my convictions very small. They do not trespass on anybody else's
life.
II.
"Would
you believe -- could you hear without laughing
. . . that for years my secret ambition . . . was to stand up fearless
and honest like Joan of Arc or Galileo --
"And suffer for the truth?"
So
says one of Joanna Russ's characters in The
Female Man, and my laughter is only the laughter of sympathy. After I
considered that martyrdom and ensuing sainthood might not be as accessible a career path as I'd hoped
at age five, I still retained St. Joan as a role model and thought perhaps I'd
enter a convent. At fifteen I'd abandoned religion or the other way around, but
I still tried my hardest to find a way to accept the Christianity a friend of
mine was trying to lead me back into by way of Chesterton and Anselm. I walked
around under low, oppressive clouds for two weeks after smacking into what
seemed the inarguable blank wall of Spinoza's Ethics, which casually and coldly did away with any meaningful
conception of free will given its premise of an omniscient god. (It's not
really much better if you omit the deity and start from a scientific,
mechanistic standpoint, but the whole thing seems less invasive, somehow.) The
knowledge nauseated me. Color was drained from every interaction until it crept slowly back of its own accord, as sleep must come after a long string of insomniac nights.
I
mean to say that truth was of direst importance. I tucked a letter
into the library volume of Spinoza beseeching anyone who'd gotten around the
problem to assist me; I passed notes on the question to a bemused, unhelpful
friend in class; I wrote a term paper for my community-college philosophy class
that was little more than a wail in the general direction of the heavens and my
professor. I got an A, but no answer.
I thought I'd be a philosopher, probably
(and just the mention of the word brings on a phantom chorus of cackling about
useless degrees). When I finally decided not to swear off college, I went to
the mountains and talked and talked about truth for four years. To get in, I
wrote entrance essays on riding my bike (which my high school English teacher
all but called boring) and on Robert M. Pirsig's work of pop philosophy Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance,
which I took very seriously, not knowing how little respect it was accorded. My
youth is a chain of embarrassments, and not in the regular way of awkward and
troublemaking teenagers everywhere.
But I
also got a little more urbane at college, aided by friends who knew how to
deeply enjoy ephemeral things and make cutting remarks in amusing ways. I'd
never been a pure crusader for truth, anyway -- too lazy, too easily
distracted. Imperfectly, I became civilized.
So
I'm arch, I'm diffident, by nature and cultivation both, but push most any button
and watch buckets of earnestness come pouring out. Just get me on a long car
ride alone or a walk in the woods or at the edge of the shore at night and
you'll easily harvest enough material to embarrass me further for years to
come. For instance, I'm readily seduced by thoughts of wandering away into
wilderness ready to prove my self-sufficiency. I loved many of the fellow
creatures who accompanied me up and down sandstone slabs and switchbacks in
Kentucky, but I also ached to travel those same paths in solitude and silence.
(Part
of the appeal of being alone in the wild is, I think, the near-impossibility of
really doing wrong. Most of my crimes against what I feel to be my better
nature pertain to other people, or to making poor use of my time. There are no
other people out there, and only a limited number of ways to spend one's time,
all of which seem intrinsically worthwhile, if not virtuous. A very bright and
morally simple reality presses in from all sides, leaving little room for error.)
A
wary thrill rises in my chest when I meet a fellow natural pilgrim. My friend
Kari once noted that she tended to date "Levins" -- after the Tolstoy
stand-in in Anna Karenina, the spiritual seeker, agriculturalist, and railer
against falseness. I seek them out too, on the page and as acquaintances; I
wrote my senior thesis on Dostoevsky's Alyosha Karamazov and Prince Myshkin,
two exemplars of tormented earnestness. But I also keep my distance from them a
little, aware of how easy it is to be written off as a kook, to make oneself
completely unlikeable in the rigidity of one's chosen path.
It's
an odd mix: in many ways my character is built for strong belief. There just
isn't much content with which I can, in good faith, fill those channels; it's a
dry, impoverished truth I've ended up with after a youth spent trying and
failing to make various doctrines add up. But my thirst for those big nouns --
the good, the true -- remains, ready to embarrass me and annoy any of the more
sensible souls who come into contact with it.
Please, don't ever stop writing this blog.
ReplyDeleteThank you, anonymous friend! Such directives are not only flattering but very useful to me (as the gaps between posts here suggest).
ReplyDeleteOh my god, I second Anon!
ReplyDelete