Bonfire of the Vanities: Contemplating How I Might Burn

The Saturday New York Times is on the table in front of my laptop. The color photo: a boy throwing a hunk of concrete into the burning rubble in a protest in Burundi. The boy’s skin is black, and although he is not himself on fire, the perspective of the photo makes it appear as if he is. I see the metaphor instantly and explain it to my youngest son, Rudy, who wants to know if the boy is burning. Rudy is the youngest of my five children: three Caucasian males, one Asian female, one Asian male. They seem to all be cisgender. Three came to me through my biology, two through transnational adoption. I am ashamed that three of my children—the boys--have been genitally mutilated, and that we still don’t see circumcision as such. I am ashamed I don’t know where Barundi really is and that I had to look up the details of the failed coup and the assassination of the opposition leader last week. I am not really ashamed. Just startled. Always. At the things humans do. At the things humans endure. I am sorry for it all, all of my own failings, the world’s, but I do not apologize for this striving. This is why I conceived of and edited an anthology, A Sense of Regard: essays on poetry and race just out from University of Georgia Press following the much discussed PoBiz AWP explosion about race ignited by Claudia Rankine some years back over her interpretations of some of Tony Hoagland’s poems. I had already been a part of the poetry-race discussion when Amiri Baraka read his poem “Somebody Blew Up America” at the Dodge Poetry Festival by co authoring (with Michael Broek) an editorial for The Star Ledger supporting Baraka’s free speech. I felt then, and I feel now, that Baraka should not have been removed from his position as NJ Poet Laureate (they kicked him out and did away with the position). And I can remember when I first read Major Jackson’s essay, “A Mystifying Silence: Big and Black” (which first appeared in American Poetry Review and is reprinted in A Sense of Regard; in fact, it was the very first essay I thought of in the early stages of wanting to do the anthology), the final paragraph of which rings as relevant now as it did when Major wrote it: Writing about race has to be so much more than writing about race, and moreover, race in poetry is not a mere discussion between black and white peoples of the United States, or a visit to the Martin Luther King, Jr. National Historic Site, or some poeticized contraption set up to ensnare an overly sensitive group of readers who passionately believe in equity, justice, racial harmony, and change. It bears repeating again: for us to actualize as a country whose ideals and documents profess the value of a diverse ethnic and racial populace, we must begin to pen a body of poems that go beyond our fears and surface projections of each other to a fuller account of the challenges and reaches of an ever-evolving democracy. Major’s words struck me when I was soliciting essays, new or already in print, because many people reacted defacto as if an anthology on poetry was going to be about Black and White, period. It was a crucial aspect of the project to represent a more complex diversity of race and related identity factors, and the title of the anthology came from my sense that poetry, successful poetry—to my mind a singular aspect of poetry—is that it moves the reader from one sense of regard to another, and that, of course, the word ‘regard’ connotes respect. I wanted to make a space within which we would listen to each other about poetry and race, listen and consider, perhaps expand our sense of regard, and, specifically, I wanted to understand how many people and poets I respected (and even loved) had very differing views, passionately held and often very thoughtfully articulated. How could these people see things so very differently? I once heard Martin Espada say that we are a nation full of people screaming to be heard, but that very few of us are listening, and this has seemed true to me. I wanted to make an anthology that promoted listening—not necessarily agreeing, but in the spirit of civil discourse, one in which we would promote considered thought and non-reactionary debate. Since Ferguson, I felt I had gone wrong with the anthology. It was far into production, but I couldn’t help thinking I’d been too muted, too fair-minded, too soft in this harrowing year of black men dying at the hands of police in a system our own government has admitted (see the Ferguson Report, light version here at The Daily Kos) in a report I think everyone should read, that our police forces nationwide are built on racial bias that, combined with economic class bias, has targeted communities like Ferguson for income generation: theft, period. Watching the events of this year, I have to wonder how I might have curated this project differently if I were doing it now, since I am one of those Major refers to as “passionately believ[ing] in equity, justice, racial harmony, and change.” It is hard not to be angry. Insanely angry. It is hard not to apologize. For everything, and to everyone. But I don’t apologize for the anthology as it is: it is about asking questions of ourselves; it is about listening; it is about empathy. Rudy is interested in books, and as I have done with all my children, I read to him what he is interested in. Right now, it is a series of books that had its first film adaptation out this winter. Reading to him, I can not help but notice that the main character is written about this way:
  • He picks up a rock and hurls it.
  • Another character: The dark-skinned boy picks up a rock and hurls it.
  • Another character: The Asian boy picks up the rock and hurls it.
It is clear who the normative racial figure is. White. And male. We know this. We all know this. Bonfire of the Vanities (book by Tom Wolfe; movie by Brian DePalma) riffed off the historical Dominican priest, Savonarola, who burned art and books (Ovid! Dante!) because he felt that Renaissance Italy was excessive and morally vacuous and full of sensual vanity. The phrase has become synonymous with censorship, but more so, it has come to mean burning someone at the stake when the zeitgeist of the times reaches a tipping point and what was once part of the social order is now regonized as wrong, yet someone has to go down for it, almost as if to absolve everyone else of their complicity. I have not mentioned Vanessa Place once. People I respect (and, yes, even love) asked me to sign the petition. I will not apologize for her nor will I support work I find intellectually simplistic, but what has happened to her is not synonymous with “micro-aggression” (nor cruelty). Place has been made a target of Internet shaming out of reactions that are at best White apologetic at heart and by people not thinking complexly about the nature of oppression, and all of us are throwing mirrors in the fire. I don’t care what color or class you are or what combination of both, and if I equivocated in my Introduction to A Sense of Regard, I won’t now: AWP should not have caved to reactionary, provincial, myopic Internet mob behavior that further Balkanizes us into literary Po-biz factions based on identity elements. ISIS is beheading people and pulling down thousands of year old historic landmarks; the California coast is awash with oil; people in Colorado can light their own tap water on fire.   But VP's Hattie avatar as profile pic and her Pomo CP performance art-esque literary vaudeville have poets' underpants hiked up. Notice I wrote "poets."  I didn't say Black poets. I didn't say White poets.  I didn’t say Asian poets. I didn’t say First People’s poets. Or Irish American poets. Or Italian American poets… As an Irish Italian (ginny-wop-mic-No Irish Need Apply) redhead (carrottop-ginger- Better dead than red-Are you red all over?) female (Do I even have to go there?) cisgender (breeder-vanilla) former working class and now lower middle class (with no money in the bank but thank you still credit available if the shit hits the fan) community college professor (bottom feeder of academia working with the proletariat teaching an average of 15 classes a year) poet, I am very concerned with both critical thinking and empathy.  Yeah, both of those things matter. And neither have been evident lately in a lot of the Pobiz brawling. The children are fighting again. I looked up Barundi. It is burning, trying to come out of a dozen years of ethnic civil war. None of my older White sons can figure out how to make lives that are not about consumer-driven capitalist rape and pillage of our souls and pockets (I was raped once; can I use the word?). One has a summer job for a major soda company. He asks, How can I morally sell soda to people, Mom, when I know it is a major part of obesity and health problems in the country? Yet there are few jobs for young people, and his choices are limited. My youngest son, Rudy, doesn’t ask about race in the books he we are reading, but he wants to know how to make a cross-bow and if he might need to use to protect me someday. Why would you have to, I ask? Why is the boy burning? He asks. Place has been accused of being divisive, disturbing, provocative. I think art is meant to change one’s sense of regard. What is that line? What is good art? Bad? Who among us is willing to throw art on the fire? Do we do this because we know no one is listening? Recently, Michael Broek and I were discussing something in POETRY, a poet writing that he wanted to scream as he burned. That’s the easy answer, I said. Harder—and more beautiful—to sing while you burn. Regardless of whether anyone can hear you. And my children, all five: they are not male or female, Asian or Caucasian. They are people. Each with multiple lenses through which their identities are formed and forming and through which others perceive them for good or ill. Some will call me a Pollyanna or perhaps say I don’t understand gender or race or transnational adoption as a form of post-colonial human trafficking, but I wonder if we do not fully know ourselves until we see ourselves as Other, as victim and perpetrator of so many aggressions, micro-and otherwise? And I think, What would I sing, if it were me who were burning? In the same New York Times edition that had the Burundi photo above the fold, buried deep, there is an article on an Egyptian poet and activist killed earlier this year by police, about how the witnesses who’d come forward against the police had themselves been targeted with capricious charges, in an effort, presumably, to silence them, yet, to everyone’s surprise, they have been acquitted. The word ‘acquit’, much like the word ‘regard’, has multiple meanings. To regard is to consider, and also it is to respect. To acquit is to clear of charges, and it also means to conduct oneself well, which might also mean behaving with grace. Grace is extending kindness to those who don’t deserve it; mercy is not punishing those who have been convicted. That is what I want to sing of if I were burned at the stake: grace in my own dying, and mercy for those who burned me.

Tags: