I'm reading a profile of Jim Harrison in "Outside." I normally really like "Outside," with its fun quirky frat boy mountaineer voice, but maybe that's just me.
Sadly I stopped liking this story the more I read of it, and that's not because the writing is bad (although it is, insidiously). It might be because about halfway through I stopped reading it with the eyes of a reader and started reading it as a critic (or even worse, a blogger - the entire point of blogging being, obviously, to take pot shots at people who are more successful, more talented and more sexually satisfied than you...which in my case leaves the field pretty wide open)
But...there were a couple of things about this story that really stuck out to me, so let us go for a literary walk in the woods, so to speak, if by walk I mean "reading together" and by woods I mean "story."
"For Harrison, the natural world was not something to be cherished because it was pretty; rather, the natural world was something to be howled at, gloriously, in the night." This is charming at first, but as the story goes on this breathless rebel Jack London thing that the author is trying to do gets a little tired and worn. The big danger with celebrity profiles is that they sometimes end up being profiles of the celebrity profile, which is really unfortunate.
"I was 15, and the first time in my life I underlined a phrase not to retain its information but to acknowledge its mystery." This is really the most honest line in this entire article. And something any reader can relate to.
"But it is an amazing face, an iconic face, and Harrison's goofy left eye is an essential, defining imperfection." Part of the myth of great artists, of course, is that their imperfections are the sum of their art, everything is part of the package. And since this is a celebrity profile, we have to uphold the myth.
"One day, Harrison spotted [his future wife] climbing stairs in her riding pants and thought, I must have her. She was 15, he was 17." This really almost happened to me once, I swear, except that no one was wearing riding pants and later the person who would have been in the pants if anyone was in the pants turned out to be a jerk. But I'm glad this worked out for Jim Harrison, I really am.
"He lied about his age and found work as a bellhop at a series of resorts in the American West's quadrilateral mountain states. He hitchhiked to New York City, where he lost his virginity to a sex worker." Sentences like this make me worry I'll never make it as a fiction writer. Also, considering the tone of the article I think we're supposed to admire Harrison's unconventional pluck but I'm not entirely sure.
"In this respect, visiting Harrison was not unlike climbing to the top of a mountain in search of a wise man." Reading this article is starting to feel like climbing to the top of a mountain.
"His literary friends, meanwhile, were as full of misbehavior as the loosest starlet." This simile seems like a bridge too far, if by "bridge" I mean "sexual metaphor?" and by "too far" I mean "vaguely disgusting." Even for a frat boy mountaineer.
"What the Great Leader is really about is divorce...napping...the appropriation of Native American religion...and the curse of sexual persistence. Sunderson, Harrison told me, is 'sort of in his last push, sexually. And that drives people a little bit crazy, that sense of waning sexuality. We don't get so much work on what it's like to be getting older." really? Didn't Jim Harrison go to school with Philip Roth at one point?
"If writers ever required permission to raid another tribe and steal its corn, we would need to ask Harrison." Umm frat boy mountaineer Native American, apparently, depending on locale. Also, enough with the breathless wise men, tribal elder, blah blah comparisons.
"I knew by then I would be quitting my teaching job." I hope the author had already informed the place where he taught.
Final thoughts: It's hard for writers to write about other writes, particularly other writers they admire. I can't help but wish that Tom Bissell had actually quoted a bit more from Jim Harrison's books or dialogue, rather than yammering on endlessly about how and why Harrison's work affected him (Bissell). Also, Bissell's inclusion of his own midlife crisis was a little tardy and insufficient, if you ask me. David Foster Wallace (whom Bissell cites) did this first, and did it better.
At the end of the day, I feel bad because I feel like this could have done a lot more to capture the spirit of Jim Harrison that it actually did. Celebrity profiles are notoriously difficult to write, particularly in this age of limited access and unlimited litigiousness. And I really love profiles of writers, mainly because you get more access and because most writers are really interesting people. This article does capture Harrison's "interesting-ness" but none of his vitality or voice. And that's a tragedy.
For an example of a really spectacular and almost breathtaking celeb profile, try this profile of Frank Shorter in Runner's World.
Sadly I stopped liking this story the more I read of it, and that's not because the writing is bad (although it is, insidiously). It might be because about halfway through I stopped reading it with the eyes of a reader and started reading it as a critic (or even worse, a blogger - the entire point of blogging being, obviously, to take pot shots at people who are more successful, more talented and more sexually satisfied than you...which in my case leaves the field pretty wide open)
But...there were a couple of things about this story that really stuck out to me, so let us go for a literary walk in the woods, so to speak, if by walk I mean "reading together" and by woods I mean "story."
"For Harrison, the natural world was not something to be cherished because it was pretty; rather, the natural world was something to be howled at, gloriously, in the night." This is charming at first, but as the story goes on this breathless rebel Jack London thing that the author is trying to do gets a little tired and worn. The big danger with celebrity profiles is that they sometimes end up being profiles of the celebrity profile, which is really unfortunate.
"I was 15, and the first time in my life I underlined a phrase not to retain its information but to acknowledge its mystery." This is really the most honest line in this entire article. And something any reader can relate to.
"But it is an amazing face, an iconic face, and Harrison's goofy left eye is an essential, defining imperfection." Part of the myth of great artists, of course, is that their imperfections are the sum of their art, everything is part of the package. And since this is a celebrity profile, we have to uphold the myth.
"One day, Harrison spotted [his future wife] climbing stairs in her riding pants and thought, I must have her. She was 15, he was 17." This really almost happened to me once, I swear, except that no one was wearing riding pants and later the person who would have been in the pants if anyone was in the pants turned out to be a jerk. But I'm glad this worked out for Jim Harrison, I really am.
"He lied about his age and found work as a bellhop at a series of resorts in the American West's quadrilateral mountain states. He hitchhiked to New York City, where he lost his virginity to a sex worker." Sentences like this make me worry I'll never make it as a fiction writer. Also, considering the tone of the article I think we're supposed to admire Harrison's unconventional pluck but I'm not entirely sure.
"In this respect, visiting Harrison was not unlike climbing to the top of a mountain in search of a wise man." Reading this article is starting to feel like climbing to the top of a mountain.
"His literary friends, meanwhile, were as full of misbehavior as the loosest starlet." This simile seems like a bridge too far, if by "bridge" I mean "sexual metaphor?" and by "too far" I mean "vaguely disgusting." Even for a frat boy mountaineer.
"What the Great Leader is really about is divorce...napping...the appropriation of Native American religion...and the curse of sexual persistence. Sunderson, Harrison told me, is 'sort of in his last push, sexually. And that drives people a little bit crazy, that sense of waning sexuality. We don't get so much work on what it's like to be getting older." really? Didn't Jim Harrison go to school with Philip Roth at one point?
"If writers ever required permission to raid another tribe and steal its corn, we would need to ask Harrison." Umm frat boy mountaineer Native American, apparently, depending on locale. Also, enough with the breathless wise men, tribal elder, blah blah comparisons.
"I knew by then I would be quitting my teaching job." I hope the author had already informed the place where he taught.
Final thoughts: It's hard for writers to write about other writes, particularly other writers they admire. I can't help but wish that Tom Bissell had actually quoted a bit more from Jim Harrison's books or dialogue, rather than yammering on endlessly about how and why Harrison's work affected him (Bissell). Also, Bissell's inclusion of his own midlife crisis was a little tardy and insufficient, if you ask me. David Foster Wallace (whom Bissell cites) did this first, and did it better.
At the end of the day, I feel bad because I feel like this could have done a lot more to capture the spirit of Jim Harrison that it actually did. Celebrity profiles are notoriously difficult to write, particularly in this age of limited access and unlimited litigiousness. And I really love profiles of writers, mainly because you get more access and because most writers are really interesting people. This article does capture Harrison's "interesting-ness" but none of his vitality or voice. And that's a tragedy.
For an example of a really spectacular and almost breathtaking celeb profile, try this profile of Frank Shorter in Runner's World.
No comments:
Post a Comment