7/22/15

Alberto de Lacerda - His poetry mirrored his eccentric independence and defies categorisation. There is a personal and romantic strain but he is as much a master of the classical sonnet as of surrealist leaps of the imagination or minimalist oriental perfection. The poems celebrate his love of paintings, his passion for music – classical, folk, jazz or pop, "excellence the sole criterion" – for dance, theatre, cinema and the everyday



Alberto de Lacerda, 77 Poems. Trans. by Alberto de Lacerda and Arthur Waley. George Allen & Unwin, 1955.                             
Looking back, the life and work of my late friend, the Portuguese poet Alberto de Lacerda (1928–2007), has become a painful reminder of the power of the dominant culture and those who influence it. Read this, read that, the dominant culture says, which is to say, buy this and buy that.
From that thick soup some ingredients are invariably left out, despite the fact that their inclusion would add another dimension, something transformative, even revelatory. The poetry of Alberto de Lacerda has become one of those missing ingredients. But I realize it's a strange question to ask of humanity, the same one that Max Brod considered when he decided not to burn Kafka's manuscripts: should we care?
I walked into Alberto's class, called "Poetry from Symbolism to Surrealism," in 1991, the fall of my senior year at Boston University, and here was a man with a wisp of white hair sort of floating above his balding head, his head turned in slight profile, thus displaying his most prominent feature: his nose. Two pillars disrupted the classroom, and after I sat in one of the only empty chairs, which happened to be behind one of these pillars, he exclaimed, aghast, "No, not there! I must see everyone!" He instructed me to move my chair, which I did, blushing as I screeched the chair across the floor while other students cringed.
Each student who came in after me suffered the same fate, so that by the time class began, we all found ourselves zigzagged across the room, at odd angles to one another, but perfectly placed for Alberto to see all of our faces.
Because Alberto hadn't followed the typical path into academia, because he was a poet and not a PhD, his teaching was quite different from much that I'd experienced before. He kept a sort of devout distance from the poems we read: instead of invading the center of the poem with analysis, he kept the mysterious center intact, and by keeping it intact, we students were able to perceive it. It was a trick that Alberto somehow pulled off, perhaps one that only he could achieve. The result was that I began to see poems as objects that exist in space, rather than mere words on a page. Through Alberto, I understood implicitly what Keats meant when he called his urn that "unravished bride of quietness."
Later in the semester, Alberto told us that he would be happy to have "a coffee" with any of us. It was the first time I'd had such an invitation from any of my professors, and when I later saw him limping down Commonwealth Avenue (the limp was the result of an injury sustained on a wet street in Lisbon in the '60s) a few weeks later, I ran up behind him and said, "Professor Lacerda!" He lunged forward, trembling, "Ah! You gave me such a fright!" (He spoke with a British accent and had many British-isms.)
Despite the fear I struck in him that day, we ended up meeting regularly throughout the semester, and when he returned to London in the spring (he only taught at BU in the fall semester), we began to exchange letters. This was the initiation of what would become a prolific correspondence: we exchanged over the course of our friendship over 300 letters.
His letters at that time were mostly full of suggestions: go to this café (it's quiet, no music), pick up that book, definitely see this exhibition. I remember in particular a very small show of drawings at the Museum of Fine Arts that he recommended and that was wonderful. No one was there. It was my introduction to searching beyond the blockbuster, artcelebrity show. I reported back dutifully on my visits and my purchases, and he responded in kind. But as I had now become a second-semester senior and was turning my attention to life beyond school, the letters dwindled in frequency and eventually stopped altogether.
After graduation, I moved to France, and after a stint farming in the south, I ended up with a room in Paris. From there, I visited a friend in London, and I picked up the phone and called Alberto. "Do you remember me?" I asked. "What nonsense! Of course I remember you!" We met in the café at the National Gallery and then went to see all of the treasures in the museum, which were, to him, like friends. He spoke of them as if he'd known them for a long time but was constantly surprised at how they could still offer something new. In front of Piero della Francesco's "The Baptism of Christ," he went as silent and still as a statue, until finally whispering, "It's one of the wonders of the world."
This visit cemented our friendship. The letters resumed in earnest: from Paris to London; from my native California to Boston; from New York, where I moved in 1993, to Boston, and always to London. Slowly, too, I began to hear about his world, and about his poetry. In one letter, he told me, as a matter of fact, without boasting, that he had "written one of the largest bodies of work in all of Portuguese literature."
This body of work is out of print in the United States, suffering a fate similar to that of Fernando Pessoa's work. And they are linked in other ways: it was Pessoa's Portuguese publisher who accepted Alberto's first book of poems when he was just eighteen. I often ask myself, is he out of print here because Americans don't care much about Portugal, or about poetry, or quite sadly, both?
Alberto's poetry is direct, without artifice. Here's one poem, in its entirety, written when he was about eighteen:
Water
My first element

Fire
Later

Light
Light is now
My slow element
Forever.

Language was Alberto's garden, plucked and tended with utmost care, no weed sneaking through the soil. About the language he wrote in all his life, here is a poem entitled "The Portuguese Language":
This language that I love
With its barbarous cut
Its honey
Its hellenic salt
And olive
This limpidity
Which so often
Has a deaf halo
This wonder
So massacred
By nearly all who speak it
This languor
This singing
Amphora
This manly sword
So graceful
Capable of brandishing all the ways
Of all the air
Of all the dances
This voice
This suburb
Language
Capable of all the colours
All the risks
Of expression
(And always wins the game)
Capable of everything
Like a woman really
In love
This language
Is my constant India
My endless wedding
My love forever
My dissipation
My eternal
Virginity

Although Alberto's poetry is mainly free verse and often with very short lines, he did write a book of sonnets, which he later published in Venice under the title Sonetos. This book contains 147 sonnets, many of which he wrote during an eight-day trip to Venice. He told me that they just fell out of him, perfectly intact, and that he often didn't alter even one word. The subject matter of his work recalls his beloved Frank O'Hara: there are poems to and about Mozart, Picasso, Martha Graham, Stravinsky, The Beatles, Godard, bullfighting, wine, ecstasy, love, paradise, and his many friends. (He once said, "This is what I live for: friendship and the things of the spirit.") There are places, too: Austin, New Orleans, San Francisco, New York, Boston, Lisbon, Mozambique, and, of course, London. London, his "most silent most difficult/Beloved friend. . .
My favorite form of inhabiting the world/My throne. . . To this enchanted forest I came to be born/When I was twenty-three." Alberto was eighteen when he left his native Mozambique (the year was 1946). He arrived in Portugal in the thick of AntĂłnio Salazar's Fascist regime. The situation was bad enough to provoke a move to London to work for the BBC in 1951. London quickly became his spiritual home.
There, he befriended the Sitwells, who introduced him to, as he said, "the world." He became a regular part of London's literary scene in the late '50s and '60s. Arthur Waley translated his first book, 77 Poems, which appeared in 1955. Through Edith Sitwell, the book quickly circulated among the top echelon of London's poets, and Alberto's reputation as a poet "who knows" became established. On a return trip to Portugal in 1962, during a period of student upheavals, he was briefly jailed by the dictatorship; the charge was associating with subversives.
Alberto then emerges in the United States, touching the inner circles of American poetry. In the late 1960s, a chance encounter led him to a professorship at the University of Texas at Austin. Within a few years, he had organized, along with his good friend Octavio Paz, a reading that featured Borges, Zukovsky, Creeley, Milosz, and Robert Duncan. Alberto was then recruited from Austin to Boston University, where he befriended Anne Sexton and Rosanna Warren, among others, and became one of the most beloved professors of those lucky enough, like me, to encounter his classes.
Lacerda's obscurity today wouldn't be so strange if it weren't for how he had been championed in the past: T.S. Eliot sought him out at a party at the home of Edith Sitwell; Marianne Moore quoted him in one of her prose writings; John Ashbery said to Alberto, of his poetry, "You don't need any crutches." I have not even touched upon his friendships in the Portuguese-speaking world: Sophia de Mello Breyner Andresen, Cesariny, and Manuel Bandeira, not to mention two of his best friends, both of whom also expatriated themselves, the painters Vieira da Silva and Paula Rego.
Of course, there are other factors contributing to Alberto's obscurity. First, Portugal itself, the country of Vasco da Gama and the discoveries, so rich in history and global influence, but a country that lost its colonies to the ideas born in the Enlightenment, to revolution, and that squandered its wealth and shrank to a sliver on the edge of Europe, its culture marginalized by the rest of Europe as not as "great" as French, British, German, or Spanish culture. Add to this situation Salazar and the stamping out of culture that the twentieth century saw. After all, it wasn't until after the '70s that Pessoa, that most beloved of Portuguese poets, began to find his rightful place in the literature of Portugal. Although born in 1922, José Saramago, the Nobel Laureate, didn't even begin writing in earnest and receiving fame until after the Salazar regime fell in 1974.
Finally, those who stayed and endured the dictatorship, of course, held the keys to Portugal's cultural establishment, and naturally they wanted to promote those whom they knew—those, like them, who had stayed and endured. To many, Alberto had turned his back, so why promote him? It is a myopic view, to be sure, but one that is very much in play. Then add the fact that Alberto was gay, and there appears quite a lot for him to overcome. After all, the first openly gay character in Portuguese fiction didn't appear until as late as 1997.
Not to say that there aren't those who have championed him, namely his good friend, the poet and memoirist Luís Amorim de Sousa, who inherited Alberto's estate. Despite constantly dwelling on the edge of poverty, Alberto amassed a huge collection that consists of books, recordings, letters, over a thousand works of art, posters, photographs, letters and signatures. (During a recent visit to Lisbon, I held in my hand in the space of an hour signatures and letters from Proust, Lorca, Mallarmé, Pessoa, and Whitman, among others.) Luís has been working tirelessly to find a home for this estate, and he's also brought out books of Alberto's poetry, as well as books about Alberto and his friendships. We're still waiting to see whether or not his efforts will launch Alberto as fully as he should be into the Portuguese consciousness.
He is also remembered by some in the United States. Jhumpa Lahiri, who was also his student at Boston University, wrote about him in two separate remembrances, one in Poetry, where she called him "one of Portugal's greatest poets in the second half of the twentieth century." Rosanna Warren also recently published a poem entitled, very directly, "Alberto de Lacerda." Poet's House in New York had a show last year that put on display some of Alberto's collection as well as documented his literary friendships. Christopher Middleton, Jhumpa Lahiri, David Wevill, and Luís Amorim de Sousa all came to speak at the opening. There's also a book going to press through the University of Buffalo, which will explore Alberto's relationship with Robert Duncan and Jess. Finally, there's the literary program that I co-founded in Lisbon, called Disquiet, which is dedicated to Alberto's memory.
Alberto de Lacerda died in 2007 in London from complications from a stroke. He is gone, but his verse is there, is here, still waiting to be born. - Scott Laughlin























Robert Duncan, Jess, and Alberto de Lacerda, Such Conjunctions, BlazeVOX, 2015.

After meeting in November 1969 at the International Festival of Poetry in Austin, Texas, the Portuguese poet Alberto de Lacerda (1928-2007) developed a trans-Atlantic friendship with the San Francisco poet Robert Duncan (1919-1988) and his partner, the artist Jess (1923-2004). This book celebrates that friendship by bringing together from the Duncan and de Lacerda archives reproductions and transcriptions of all their extant correspondence in addition to the many inscribed publications, books, magazines, photographs, poems, drawings, and artwork that they shared with each other. Together, these items document not only the story of the relationship between these three men, including their subsequent visits together in San Francisco, Boston, and London, but also many of the significant events in each figure’s life during the years 1969 to 1989. Edited by Mary Porter de Sousa and Luís Amorim de Sousa, de Lacerda’s longtime friend and literary executor, and James Maynard, Associate Curator of the University at Buffalo’s Poetry Collection, which houses Duncan’s papers, this collection features essays by de Sousa, Maynard, and Scott Laughlin, a former student of de Lacerda’s.


Habitués of SW3 and SW10, of such tranquil cafés as the Picasso on the King's Road or Dino's by South Kensington tube station, of London's galleries, museums, theatres, concert halls and selected cinemas, cannot have failed to have seen Alberto de Lacerda: latterly a small, hobbling, tramp-like old man, with two horns of white hair and noble brow and nose, ceaselessly flitting from one venue to the next, wearing a battered black parka, whatever the heat, and clutching a crumpled white supermarket bag bursting with newspapers, books and sundries.
Lacerda was made more conspicuous by hurpling recklessly through speeding traffic at the expense of any zebra crossing or traffic-light; and fearlessly airing his right to object to what he considered such social blights as mobile phones, background music, galleries too dark to see for so-called conservation's sake, ignorant panjandrums, functionaries unable to speak English, inattentive waiters, unruly children and women in trousers.
This could lead to wrangles and misunderstandings. He was man-handled and permanently banned from a Cork Street gallery for demanding to know the price of a Picasso; struck off the list at his local health centre for asking the receptionist her nationality. Evelyn Waugh was equally at fault when describing him in younger days as "a little swarthy man who looked like a Jew but claimed to be Portuguese".
How impressions can deceive. Lacerda was a member of one of the three oldest families of the peninsula, kings and cardinals among his ancestors. He was above all one of the finest poets of his generation; but also a collage artist who had a solo show at Lisbon's Sociedade Nacional de Belas Artes; a compulsive collector and connoisseur of all the arts, an inspired teacher who retired as a professor emeritus of Boston University; a brilliant critic (the first to champion Paula Rego), a gifted broadcaster and linguist, in short a man described by Edith Sitwell as one of the most cultivated persons she had known.
Carlos Alberto Portugal Correia de Lacerda was born in 1928 in Mozambique, then a Portuguese colony. His father was a member of the colonial service and subsequently a business administrator. The Lacerdas' house was in open country and Alberto would fall asleep "to the sound of lions roaring". He remembered his astonishment when his parents gave a ball and scores of white ladies and gentlemen appeared out of the darkness in impeccable and glittering court dress. It contrasted with the nightmare of a hurricane which tore the entire roof off the house. As an adult and in his poetry, Lacerda always believed the dream was the true reality; "we are such stuff as dreams are made on" one of his favourite Shakespearean lines.
As a notably precocious child he read voraciously but his formal education was patchy. A first visit to South Africa as a youth opened his eyes to the wider world, but instead of going to university he studied French and English in Lisbon. His reputation as a poet in Portugal was already established before publication of his acclaimed first collection, 77 Poemas (1951), when he was still only 23. He was in the forefront of a notably talented post-war generation of Portuguese poets, which included Sophia de Mello Breyner, Jorge de Sena and António Ramos Rosa.
On this wave of success he came to work for the BBC Portuguese service in London. He went straight from the boat to a Royal Shakespeare Company performance of The Winter's Tale. Thus began the love-affair with London which made it his base for life, although he never became a British subject. Through interviewing the poet Roy Campbell he met Arthur Waley, poet and famed oriental scholar, who translated his first collection, published in England as 77 Poems. His reputation was endorsed and lionisation by the Sitwells was an almost inevitable reward.
Brief imprisonment under Salazar's regime and a fall in Lisbon, which left Lacerda with a permanent limp, confirmed his preference for exile. The reputation of poets is often at odds with the pittances they earn, and while Lacerda's arrival in Brazil caused headlines in the national newspapers, in England he lost his BBC job and had to make ends meet through literary and other freelance work. His situation improved when he embarked in the early 1960s on an academic career in the United States, which lasted nearly 40 years, first at the University of Texas, Austin, and then at Boston. At both universities he was professor of comparative literature, specialising in those of France, Portugal and Brazil.
Lacerda's poetic reputation rests on 12 books published between 1951 and 2001, and has long been secured. It is testimony to his international standing that such poetic luminaries as the Nobel Prize-winning Mexican Octavio Paz, the American John Ashbery, the Frenchman René Char, the Brazilian Manuel Bandeira and English Edith Sitwell were among his many admirers.
His poetry mirrored his eccentric independence and defies categorisation. There is a personal and romantic strain but he is as much a master of the classical sonnet as of surrealist leaps of the imagination or minimalist oriental perfection. The poems celebrate his love of paintings, his passion for music – classical, folk, jazz or pop, "excellence the sole criterion" – for dance, theatre, cinema and the everyday. One of his most famous poems, "The Portuguese Language", extolling "Esta maravilha / Assassinadissima / Por quase todos que a falam (translated by Lacerda as "This wonder / So massacred / By nearly all that speak it") may be made compulsory reading in Portuguese schools.
Lacerda wrote many of the poems, one of them characteristically praising coffee, in the cafés he regarded as "essential to civilisation"; corroborating his belief in the things of the spirit and friendship: " vivo para isto: as coisas do espirito e a amizade". He abhorred the egalitarianism of deconstructive criticism, the tyranny of political correctness, the pervasiveness of supermarket values. "We live in the age of vulgarity," he sighed; "vive la difference" his guiding principle. As for television, he never owned a set: "Am I interrupting your viewing?," he would tease a friend on the telephone. "You're sure? They tell me it's very educational."
Yet Lacerda was always aware of his own lonely fate, which became painfully pronounced in age.
Aos outros levarei a felicidade
Que a mim obscuramente foi negada
Hei-de ficar sem nada
(To others I shall bring the happiness
That to me was mysteriously refused
I shall be left with nothing)

And so it proved.
His one-bedroom flat in Battersea became an extraordinary archive of his life and times but by depressing turns unvisitable, irreparable and eventually, by common standards, uninhabitable. He cut himself off from friends, refused to have his telephone reconnected, left letters unanswered, said he no longer wrote poems. A formal Portuguese initiative, instigated by the poet Luís Amorim de Sousa, to place his archive in a museum and rehouse him was spurned.
A few months ago, radio and television programmes in Portugal were interrupted falsely to announce his death, yet only chance led to his discovery when an ultimately fatal heart attack came. The full horror of the flat was finally revealed, but tucked everywhere were poems, some written this summer, short and exquisite distillations of his profound solitude.
Now Portugal's former president Mário Soares has issued a formal statement in honour of Alberto de Lacerda. Friends have returned from as far away as California for his burial. Plans for the museum have resumed. Like Pessoa, Lacerda's posthumous reputation seems destined to dwarf even the fame that in his heyday led to murmurs of a Nobel Prize. - John McEwen

Alberto de Lacerda, one of Portugal's greatest poets in the second half of the twentieth century, died this past August at the age of seventy-eight. I met Alberto in September 1993, when I was a graduate student in literature at Boston University. He was teaching a seminar about Fernando Pessoa, and I was the only registered student (there was also one auditor). I had no prior interest in Pessoa, had never heard of him, in fact. But Alberto came recommended.
When we crossed paths he was a small man in his sixties with a gentle sing-song voice and white wispy hair, but he made a formidable first impression, enough to make me consider dropping the course. My staying made the class possible, but Alberto seemed, in those early weeks of the semester, suspicious of my reasons for being there. He lectured without notes, an intense, virtuosic delivery peppered with occasionally condescending asides. In the course of making a reference to a painting by Picasso or a passage from King Lear, he would turn to me and ask, "Do you know whom I mean by Picasso? You are familiar with Lear?"
The first of the many things I learned at Alberto's table was not to let these remarks bother me. We dove, our modest party of three, headlong into Pessoa, but in spite of the seminar's singular focus, Alberto's lectures knew no bounds, his mind skipping from Mozart to Duchamp to Dylan Thomas. I brought a pen and a notebook to class, but mainly I just listened. By the middle of the term the class was no longer a class but rather an escape from the ordinary, and I approached our weekly three-hour sessions with the pleasure of visiting a dear and exceptionally learned friend.
Though Alberto's creative life was no secret, he was quiet about the fact that he was an acclaimed, working poet. Like his hero, Picasso, he believed that artists were born and sustained in the process of studying other artists. His attitude toward Pessoa and the other geniuses he loved was pure, visceral, inexhaustible, devotional. Alberto's mission was not to explain a poem or a painting, but to absorb it. He approached art matter-of-factly, ritually, as one approaches a meal, as if his very existence depended on it. Ever the aesthete, he was also a great gossip. Tea with Edith Sitwell, sitting next to T.S. Eliot at a dinner party—these were among the anecdotes he mentioned now and again. (On Sitwell: "She was a snob, but wonderfully generous to me. And had fabulous hands.")
He gave me a bilingual edition of 77 Poems, his first published volume (translated by Alberto with Arthur Waley and published in 1955), without fuss one day, inscribing it with a ballpoint pen as I sat across from him in a pizza place that doubled as his public office, on Boston's Commonwealth Avenue. By then we had been friends for four years. Before handing over the book, he turned to a page that was in Portuguese and corrected an error in the text, even though he knew that I did not understand Portuguese and that my eye would never fall there. Alberto seemed shy on his side of the table, as I did on mine. It is always strange to experience, for the first time, the creative work of a friend. And it is rare to know a friend for so long and not encounter the work. In a way, I knew that it was irrelevant to Alberto whether or not I liked the poems. I did. They were transparent in the best sense: they hid nothing. They were fearless and vulnerable, the two things, I was beginning to learn, that an artist must be. I was haunted by the frank expression of melancholy and loneliness, by the combined detachment from, and desperate connection to, the world. Rereading 77 Poems after Alberto's death, I was undone, because so many, written when he just in his twenties, seemed uncannily to predict the course of his life, and to articulate beliefs he held into old age. "The only usefulness of the poet/Is to exist" he wrote in "Poem 75," a credo that distills so much of Alberto's essence to me. Here are the first two stanzas from poem 24, titled "The Shore":
My song dies away beyond this life
Because it does not belong to it entirely;
Facing death, and lonely,
I am going to close the tragic circle.

Friends I had not, and that loving
Vision which Love forbade me here—
I slowly suffered their absence
In my agony of interrupted Wing.

Though Alberto in fact had many friends and delighted in their company, there was an impenetrable aspect to him, a privacy he ferociously guarded. He could be remarkably hospitable but invited next to no one into his home. In 1996, he retuned to London, the place he considered his center. For the next eleven years he continued to write poems, and during that time he wrote me a number of letters. He quoted Blake, told me to go see the Ingres exhibit at the Metropolitan, warned me of the tyranny of editors. In 1998 he wrote: "I've written quite a bit since I returned [to London]. Not lately. It doesn't matter. I've done enough; anyway, I never had that kind of anxiety."
In 1999, three years after Alberto gave me 77 Poems, I, too, shyly presented him with my first published effort. Before then, I never mentioned to Alberto that I was an aspiring fiction writer. If he intuited anything, which most likely he did, he never pried. It was better that way. And yet he influenced me deeply. "I've just, this very moment, finished writing a poem," he began one letter. "If you knew Portuguese, I would send it to you. It may survive; maybe reading it tomorrow, I'll tear it up." He never opened the door of his apartment to me, but from that declaration of camaraderie and trust, that cold, clear-eyed appraisal of a writer's process, I glimpsed something more precious.
Anyone who knew Alberto, even briefly, understood that he was an idiosyncratic, outspoken, in some senses anachronistic man. He was not afraid to say what he thought, not afraid, now and again, to make an enemy. But I believe that in the most profound aspect of his life—his work—he found peace. He understood the importance of art and the mystery of it, accepted the inability, ultimately, to control what is produced and what becomes of it in the eyes of the world. The point, he knew, was to stay inspired. It is an awareness that, I think, grounded and accompanied him throughout his life. - Jhumpa Lahiri  

Santiago Vizcaíno - Here, we are entirely in Dickinson’s “hour of lead,” a time of heaviness and density and enervation. “We are sunk in lethargy. The monkeys stretch their limbs and there is a series of sickly screams. To react is as stupid as suicide”

as

Santiago Vizcaíno, Destruction in the Afternoon. Trans. by Alexis Levitin, Lavender Ink – Diálogos, 2015.

excerpt 1
excerpt 2

How did Rimbaud end up? He ended up at Vizcaíno’s house, and now they stride dark landscapes together. Few others have this gift of metaphor—inscrutable yet radiant with truth. Few poets have Vizcaíno’s courage and tact on the subject of human frailty, the “dissolute aridity,” “this terrible mutation.” Here, in master translator Alexis Levitin’s canny versions, we can “inhale the petals of an ancient mercy” and be at the forefront of modern poetry at the same time. —Peter Thompson

The landscape of Santiago Vizcaíno’s Destruction in the Afternoon is mysterious and dark, violent, and the sense is that the living here face almost unbearable suffering and cruelty. Yet there is hope here, resigned and subdued, but hope all the same. We are left with a vision oddly non-apocalyptic. One of Ecuador’s finest poets, Vizcaíno writes into a nothingness filled with desire and ecstasy, asking only for “what was once so ordinary/humid purple air,/the murmur of life beyond the patio.” From Alexis Levitin, one of our foremost translators from the Spanish and Portuguese, I welcome this version of these beautifully corrosive, dissonant poems.Mark Statman

Destruction in the Afternoon is a seething, narcissistic psychological journey through a human desert of torpor, anguish, mourning, despair, an aridity of the soul. The long first section, “Hands in the Grave,” is a particularly powerful delineation of death and the void, the “monster” of the body and the “coffin of time.” “We hear our voices / like a feeble manifestation of the end,” Vizcaino writes, hardly feeble himself in his compelling poetry, and in translator Alexis Levitin’s masterful hands, the translation likewise is anything but weak, frail or listless. Rather, Destruction in the Afternoon sustains a kind of dark ecstasy of negativity, the poet’s resistance to his, and our, nightmares, as the poems bloom into gorgeous verbal “flowers among the carrion.” — Adam J. Sorkin

“Nothing is more real than nothing.” — Samuel Beckett, Malone Dies
“Poetry… belongs in its own right to the Library of Hell.” — Maria Negroni, Dark Museum
1. The Blind Spot in Optimism
Has there ever been a more strangely optimistic culture than ours here in the U.S.? In the States, depression and melancholia are elements to be “battled” against — and we frequently use such metaphors of war when discussing them. We treat depression with medication, or shopping, or self-help books, or a better diet, more sleep. As soon as the melancholic opens his or her mouth, some solution is thrust upon them. What we seldom do is let the melancholic speak. Even in some of the memoirs and novels about depression, the writer couches the narrative in the language of salvation and/or disease, as if melancholia itself has no intrinsic worth, and is best seen from the proverbial rear view mirror. (Of course, the best novels about depression, such as Suzanne Scanlon’s Promising Young Women, have a much more complicated approach.) This isn’t to say, of course, that clinical depression isn’t real, and shouldn’t be treated with therapy and medication. But I suspect that U.S. culture is peculiar in its fear of/ disgust toward melancholia.
Against the grain of this optimism, I would argue that melancholia sometimes leads to insights and ways of thinking not accessible to joy, and that poetry especially is richer when the voices of melancholy are not shouted down by the voices of optimism. There are few works of intense melancholia in American poetry, but the ones we do have are crucial. U.S. poetry would be greatly diminished without Dickinson’s death poems, or Eliot’s “The Wasteland,” or Berryman’s The Dream Songs, or Baraka’s “Cold Term,” or Reines’ The Cow.
Latin America poetry has never had such an anxious relationship with melancholy. In its poetry, melancholy is usually not considered a weakness, or a form of self-indulgence, and some of the most brilliant poets of Latin America in the last century have at times written under the light of Nerval’s “Soleil noir de la Mélancolie.” Vallejo, di Giorgio, Saenz, Pizarnik, Peri Rossi, and Negroni have all produced poems that speak forthrightly from melancholy, and even despair.
2. What the Melancholic Sees
Tomorrow
they’ll dress me in ash for the sunrise,
they’ll fill my mouth with flowers.
— Alejandra Pizarnik, “Shadow from Days to Come” (trans. by Yvette Siegert)
Santiago Vizcaíno’s relentless Destruction in the Afternoon (Diálogos Books), beautifully translated by Alexis Levitin, is part of this tradition. The collection consists primarily of two long poems whose titles immediately tell us we are in a bleak, elemental space — “Hands in the Grave” and “Dark Water.” These long poems begin and end the book, but they are not long poems in the heroic, Whitman-ian sense. Rather, they are fragments, accumulations, as if the poet wrote each in a brief burst before sinking back into the silence so often mentioned in this book. Here, we are entirely in Dickinson’s “hour of lead,” a time of heaviness and density and enervation. In “Hands in the Grave,” Vizcaíno writes, “We are sunk in lethargy. / The monkeys stretch their limbs and there is a series / of sickly screams. // To react is as stupid as suicide.” As the last line suggests, there is no easy remedy for the despair of this vision — “to react” is stupid — and there might not be any remedy at all.
One of the essential motifs in this collection is life-in-death and death-in-life. The speaker appears to be inhabited by death. Or maybe the speaker is a figure who actually is dead but who continues going through the gestures of life, like a marionette that only seems alive. In section XIV of “Hands in the Grave,” the poet writes:
Sometimes
as if we were alive
we walk up to the wall,
a sad spectacle
of scarecrows in the sun.
And in section XXX of the same poem:
“You are a frightening mummy,” I tell myself.
You ought to dig a grave and bury yourself,
and take along your smell, your tongue.
The poet is simultaneously the corpse that must be buried, and the one to do the burying: the fact that the poet is talking to himself emphasizes this sense of doubling.
In several of the poems, an “other side” is referenced, an “other side” that is just beyond a wall. This other side could be the other side of life (death), or the other side of human perception, or related to both. But whatever this “other side” is, it stores a sort of vitalistic negativity. In the opening of “Hands in the Grave,” Vizcaíno tells us that on the other side there is “an enormous hungry blowfly, / a smiling bluish corpse…a hand that longs for an arm, / a stomach full of worms.” Hunger, smiling, longing: this other side might be outside the human conception of life, but it is not simply dead. This other side is shot through with elements we associate with life, with energy, even if what is being shot through (a corpse, an arm) is dead. (This undoing of an absolute opposition between “life/death” finds echoes in modern philosophy too, where writers such as Nietzsche and Kristeva have tried to have a more nuanced approach to the issue. Nietzsche: “Let us beware of saying that death is opposed to life. The living is merely a type of what is dead, and a very rare type.”)
In contrast to this “other side,” our side — the side of the known world — often appears sapped of its will, its force. In section VI of “Hands in the Grave,” Vizcaíno writes, “We are vacant, / abandoned to a feeble will. // How have we gotten here, / so surfeited with death?” “We” are empty husks, here without explanation. In section XXII, the poet tells us his wish to end his suffering: “One of these nights, / I’ll manage to choke myself with tears.” Yet even this requires too much will. In the last lines of the poem, the poet tells us, “I stay like this, / picking at the wound of my world.” The lethargy of the melancholic, this emptiness and stillness, mirrors the emptiness and stillness of death.
Like Beckett, Vizcaíno emphasizes inertia and pointlessness. If Beckett’s narratives tend toward the circular, with his characters wanting to leave and yet not leaving, wanting to go and yet not going, Vizcaíno’s poems also refrain from the linear trajectory of salvation narratives (no matter if that salvation is religious, psychological, or political). As Estragon says in the famous first words of Waiting for Godot, “Nothing to be done.” Because of this lack of trajectory, works like these bracingly remind us of our precarious state, our nothingness, and by doing so they operate like a modern memento mori — being modern in sense that they are not meant as reminders of an eternal life that will come after this transitory one, but instead make us viscerally aware of how everything is transitory.
But works by writers like Beckett and Vizcaíno shouldn’t simply be seen as reminders of mortality. There’s a huge difference between a Vizcaíno poem and a skull on a desk, and it has to do with the thoroughness with which nothingness is explored, and how writers such as Vizcaíno leave us no stable ground, no safe harbor from which to watch the world and its history float by. These works of melancholia reveal something almost Buddhisttic in its nature, or at least the type of Buddhism discussed by the philosopher Keiji Nishitani, who claimed one of the positive aspects of nihilism is that it allows us to see “the ground beneath our feet.” The language of melancholy lays bare the writer’s being in the world (and, by implication, ours). As Vizcaíno writes in section XXX, “I exist, / I people the nights with birches.” The markers of contemporary life — our current debates and anxieties, the issues we discuss at work and at home — are drawn into the background, and we’re instead left with a vision of nakedness, doubt, and non-being. All the usual answers to the question of our being here — no matter if they’re religious or ideological — are forsaken. “Maybe meaning is in gazing till it hurts,” Vizcaíno writes, suggesting that by gazing at something long enough for it to hurt us in its nudity and its meaninglessness, a new, more haunted meaning emerges. For the melancholic, ontology is a process of perpetual subtraction.
3. Disgust, Revolt
I was the source of discord, the owner of dissonance, the girl of the harsh counterpoint.
— Alejandra Pizarnik, “Density” (trans. by Yvette Siegert)
I don’t want to push the comparison between Vizcaíno and Beckett too far, though. They are similar in the scope of their despair, and in how they reduce their art to elementals (rocks, hair, blood, emptied landscapes, the human body in its fragility). But Vizcaíno is very un-Beckett-like in his disgust. In Beckett, inertia is so embedded in his characters that rage, even when it flares up, often quickly dissolves. In Vizcaíno, however, there is a vivid undercurrent of disgust, one that reminds me of Baudelaire and Vallejo and Artaud. In “Ideology,” he writes, “I drink from the luminous drivel / flooding the world.” And later in the poem, he tells us, “I think that I will have to measure out my hatred and scream / until I stain the moon with my breath.” Such unapologetic rage echoes Artaud’s claim that all writing is pig shit, and it’s a type of rage that is rare in U.S. poetry, where rage is accepted as long as it is being directed at specific political or social targets, but where rage at large — a rage against life, or language, or humanity as a whole — is seldom expressed. If U.S. poetry tends to refrain from the negativity of melancholia, it also tends to refrain from the negativity of incalculable rage.
This anger seeps into the despair in this collection, giving the images and metaphors of despair a lacerating quality. Vizcaíno writes:
My face will be a nauseating stain.
Enormous lizards will lick my brow,
exhibit their blackish snouts
and stretch themselves to sleep their glorious siesta.
In the meantime,
the desert opens its jaws,
its burning dunes,
and carries off my panting
and my writhings
like a lethargic amphibian.
The vitriolic intensity of these lines, with its “nauseating stain” and giant lizards and devouring desert, reveals the venom of this despair. At such moments, we are far from the classical, almost Olympian melancholy of Sebald (which is by no means a criticism of him — there are many shades of melancholia). The despair in Vizcaíno is messy, irritable, and dissonant: very much a despair of “harsh counterpoint,” to use Pizarnik’s phrase. In section XII of the same poem, the poet tells us, “My heart is a bed / of copulating scorpions,” and the image brilliantly captures both the uncanny vitalism of this melancholy (these creatures aren’t sleeping or waiting: they’re fucking), and the poisoned quality of it (the choice of scorpions seems incredibly precise). Like Artaud, like Pizarnik, this is the poetry of metaphysical revolt.
But in its very revolt, this collection holds a mirror up to the reader. This isn’t a misanthropic poetry that lifts itself above the audience in exalted disdain; rather, Vizcaíno writes in the spirit of Baudelaire’s “mon semblable, — mon frère.” We are all in this exhausting “day of never-ending sun,” and we are all “just an ornament in god’s hair, / a silent rooster, / a lethargic olive tree.” To pretend to somehow be above this “we” is only another expression of illusory vanity. In “Desert Poem,” Vizcaíno writes, “That’s how we are born, / shamelessly indifferent, / filled with blood like torpid leeches.” Not you, not I, but we: all of us are “like torpid leeches.” In Destruction in the Afternoon, self-loathing and misanthropy are not opposites, but twins. We becomes the mirror of I.
If some U.S. poetry has a tendency to shy away from negativity — the negativity of melancholia, the negativity of disgust — too often the implicit comradeship of this poetry strikes a shallow note (to me, at least). If we’re all basically good-natured and amiable, if our basic attitude toward life is one of good cheer (with the occasional lapse here and there), it makes liking “us” really damn easy. But this tireless repression of negativity comes at a cost, aesthetically and imaginatively. After a while, such easy-going geniality seems suspicious and one-dimensional. When reading certain books of U.S. poetry, I ask myself: Does this poet’s persona ever have an ungenerous thought? Or is the writer too busy having morally laudable insights to ever drift into human fallibility?
Not so, a poet like Vizcaíno. There’s no cheap idealism in his work. And that’s what makes the rare glimpses of comradeship in his book so charged and unexpected. There’s no question that melancholia can turn one away from others, or, at its worst, turn melancholia itself into a kind of race (my depression is worse than yours). But sometimes despair has the power to tune us in to the despair of others. And at the very furthest extreme, it can tune us in to the suffering of other (non-human) creatures. In the “Dark Water,” Vizcaíno writes:
Because I don’t know how to say it,
Because this suffering of the world turns to suffering in the flesh.
That is to say the suffering of a fish or of an octopus.
This isn’t a human, contained suffering, a suffering that can ever find an answer. Rather, it is a “suffering in the / flesh” that includes not only human concerns such as age, death, and disease, but animal suffering too. A vision of cosmic despair occasionally dovetails into a vision of cosmic compassion. We see this in the Mahāyāna school of Buddhism and in some of Schopenhauer’s philosophy. We see it in the relationships in Beckett’s plays, where cruelty gives way to brief moments of creaturely sympathy. As Vizcaíno writes in “Hands in the Grave,” “What can we do with ourselves if not console each other, / make of this emptiness a sentence.”
Not too much should be made of this. These moments of compassion in Destruction in the Afternoon are rare glimmers, and by no means should they be seen as a cure for anguish. This harsh and beautiful onslaught of a book offers us no antidote. Instead, these moments of radical compassion complicate the picture of this anguish, suggesting not a glib breakthrough but a way to continue on.
- James Pate 

Interview with Santiago Vizcaíno, Ecuadorian poet, by Alexis Levitin:
Your vision is clearly apocalyptic. Do you feel there is a political dimension to this cataclysmic end-time vision?
- Confronting the sense of unease that all humans are faced with in the post-modern era –above all, the idea of uncertainty, not just in terms of the future, but within our awareness of our despicable present, I don't think any other vision is possible.  Is there anything that might be extracted from the present reality to provide hope?  I don't know if my poems have a political dimension in this sense.  What I do know is that this cataclysm we are living in cannot be reversed through any positive perspective.  If reality itself is not reflected on by human beings, then art in some way has to serve that function, that is to say, it must provoke and subvert.  Poetry is a response springing from resistance and a sense of estrangement.  I write because I feel out of step, because I feel alien to the reality I am confronted with every day.
Do you feel your vision is particularly Latin American, or could it apply anywhere in the world? 
- I’ve always believed in Tolstoy’s idea: describe your village and you describe the world. I don’t believe that art possesses a private dimension, nor do I think that there are forms of art specific to a geographical area. There is no special vision linked to a determined geographic context. Human concerns are universal, independent of their origin, and even of their religious context. If it is art—in the case of poetry, if it has the capacity to move the reader—, then a text written in Patagonia should be able to convey the same symbolic significance in Angola or Oslo. If the poet has an individual vision of reality, it is simply the vision of the poet. The moment he writes, the moment the ink spreads across the page, the work no longer belongs to him, it is an object of his creation that should be understandable in any context.
Did you think of Hieronymus Bosch as you wrote these poems?
- I was not thinking of Bosch as I wrote these poems, although the parallel makes sense. If we think about it, it’s clear that the epoch in which Bosche painted his canvases was in some ways similar to our own. During the early 1500s, apocalyptic ideas abounded, and the vision of this painter is in accord with that reality. In the case of “Hands in the Grave,” I had no deliberate intention of showing a reality of condemnation springing from a theological idea. At least I didn’t think of that. The beings that inhabit my texts are immersed in a reality that reflects their most intimate selves. I think the world in which a man lives is always the sinister double of what he feels within. In Bosch there is a medieval concept that cannot be separated from its religious dimension; in the case of my poems, it’s more a question of a postmodern nihilistic vision, typical of our era, in which nothing remains but the human being, alone, confronting a hostile, inimical world, in which all his gods have abandoned him.
Was the looming threat of global warming (climate change) in your mind as you worked on this book? 
- As soon as I had written the book, it occured to me that it could be associated with that idea. But that wasn’t my original intention. I think the artist cannot underestimate the reality he is faced with on a daily basis, so, for that reason, it is perhaps objectively true to say that that idea is present. in this work Nonetheless, as for that vision of stateless, deformed, grotesque, abandoned beings, I was already working on it for a number of years and I think it can be applied to other realities: that of immigrants, the landless, the persecuted, those who are the detritus of war, of state-sponsored terrorism, in a word, it isn’t just an apocalyptic idea or pronouncement, it is a tangible reality, terribly real, and one which we would prefer not to see.

7/20/15

Dolores Dorantes & Rodrigo Flores Sánchez - in a climate of state-sponsored violence, what kinds of speech, writing, relation are possible? We are being intervened. How do we collaborate? How do we resist?

Intervenir/Intervene




Dolores Dorantes & Rodrigo Flores Sánchez, Intervenir/Intervene, Ugly Duckling Presse, 2015.

Intervenir/Intervene is a searing, tender, unflinching collaboration between two Mexican poets—Dolores Dorantes, who lived in Ciudad Juárez for 25 years and now has political asylum in Los Angeles, and Rodrigo Flores Sánchez, who lives in Mexico City. Intervenir/Intervene asks questions no one should have to ask: in a climate of state-sponsored violence, what kinds of speech, writing, relation are possible? We are being intervened. How do we collaborate? How do we resist?

“… imagine an intervention between the body and that which destroys it ” — Daniel Borzutsky

OFICIAL

*
I forget poetry
just like I forgot your burst body:


WITH ITS FACE
DOWN

Write “my love’s face in the dirt”
Write “what did they do to you, love?”
Write “I found my love’s body missing a finger:”



Intervene: Dolores Dorantes and Rodrigo Flores Sánchez [by Guillermo Parra]
In the fall of 2014, the Mexican poets Dolores Dorantes (Córdoba, Veracruz, 1973) and Rodrigo Flores Sánchez (Mexico City, 1977) will be publishing a collaborative book of poems entitled, Intervene/Intervenir (Brooklyn: Ugly Duckling Presse, 2014, forthcoming). The English translation of the collection (which hasn't been published in Spanish yet) is by the North American poet and translator Jen Hofer (San Francisco, 1971). Jen Hofer is, by far, the most important North American translator working with Mexican poetry today. Her many publications include the groundbreaking Sin puertas visibles: An Anthology of Contemporary Poetry by Mexican Women Writers (University of Pittsburgh Press, 2003), and most recently she co-translated Heriberto Yépez's critical study of Charles Olson's travels and research in Mexico, The Empire of Neomemory (Oakland/Philadelphia: Chain Links, 2013).
I was introduced to the work of Dolores in 2003 via the network of Mexican poetry blogs, which emerged at the same time as many experimental North American poets took to the blogosphere. Dolores still maintains a blog today (Dolores Dorantes) and for over a decade her online writing and her books of poetry have been essential to me. North American readers can find her work in the volume sexoPUROsexoVELOZ and Septiembre: A Bilingual Edition of Books Two and Three from Dolores Dorantes, translated by Jen Hofer (Denver: Counterpath Press and Kenning Editions, 2007). Dolores lived for many years in Ciudad Juárez and today resides in Los Angeles, CA.
Through correspondence with Dolores I arrived at Rodrigo's poetry, via his second collection Estimado cliente (Toluca: Bonobos Editores, 2007). Rodrigo himself is a translator who has brought Jack Spicer and Muriel Rukeyser into Spanish. He lives in Mexico City and Intervene/Intervenir will be his first book to appear in English. I spoke with Dolores and Rodrigo via e-mail regarding their upcoming book with Ugly Duckling Presse. I have translated their responses into English. If anyone would like to read our conversation in Spanish, I've posted it at my blog Venepoetics.
I get the impression that Intervene emerges, partly, from the friendship between you two. How did you decide to collaborate on this book?
Dolores Dorantes: Intervene came about from an invitation to collaborate with the magazine Kaurab Online. The poet Aryanil Mukherjee wrote to me when he was editing an issue for the magazine with texts created in collaboration. Aryanil wanted three pages from each pair of collaborators and I invited Rodrigo to do something together. For me, the experience of collaborating was so new and getting to know Rodrigo's creative process made such an impact on me (this was my first time collaborating with someone): it was like discovering the mechanism that makes a flower open up, or something like that, so I didn't want to stop. I had already decided to abandon writing poetry in a formal manner, to give up writing verses, but working with Rodrigo made me see the formula for writing poetry in a different manner, I began to break many of my own rules, with great trepidation, I took up verses once again (something I haven't done since then). And likewise, with great trepidation I opened up my creative process to another writer in order to collaborate. That was fantastic.
Rodrigo Flores Sánchez: Lola and I have been friends for a while now. She proposed to me that we collaborate on something for a magazine; so we wrote two or three poems together, without any specific topic. Those poems came out in one or two days. In other words, Lola would send me a couple verses, I'd send her back a couple more, that's how the first texts were created. Then the strategy changed: each one of us wrote complete poems and we responded to each other with new texts. That small group of poems soon became a multitude.
DD (2013)(Dolores Dorantes, by Rob Ray)
Could you describe the process of composition for the book? Did you collaborate in person or via e-mail?
DD: For me it was a euphoric process of exchanging Word documents that we'd send back and forth via e-mail. A complete immersion. Afterwards, I can't remember specific dates, but Rodrigo might, I travelled to Mexico City and we met in the neighborhood of Coyoacán to decide what poems we'd keep for the book, and of those what other poems might survive the revision process. I think that's how it happened, but in these cases the process can always be seen differently by each person, it's like the same story told by different grandparents, there'll always be details that I carry with emotion and preference and that Rodrigo might see in a much more precise manner, he always looks at things in a more precise and organized manner than I do.
RFS: For me the process was very stimulating and disconcerting at the same time. In the case of Intervene, I hadn't ever participated in a collaborative writing project without the elements I mentioned above. You have to keep in mind that Lola was in Ciudad Juárez and I was in Chilango [Mexico City]. Lola and I have actually only met in person a few times, but I feel a great deal of affection, admiration and empathy for her. I think that without those elements I wouldn't be able to participate in a project like Intervene. I read everything Lola publishes and we've been writing to each other for years. In fact, after Intervene we began to write letters to each other for another project. For me the development of a gradual immersion in the other was quite dense. This process was a radical questioning of what identity means and of the "style" of a piece of writing. The process is the inverse of Ariadne's thread. The intention wasn't to leave the labyrinth but rather to go further in, to get lost in the questions, recurrences and stylistic marks of the other. In the end I think the writing, at least this writing, is a line, a glance toward signs that have been obstructed ahead of time, that belong to Nobody, that is, to a Cyclops, a blind man, a blindfolded man. What I mean is that you don't have any clues for deciphering a trajectory or definite a path. The only thing you can do is to thread the territory with questions.
At a reading you gave together in Mexico City in 2009 that can be seen on YouTube, the voice of the poet Jorge Solís Arenazas is heard reading a few fragments offstage from the audience. Is it safe to say that Intervene is a book that seeks out interventions from its readers?
DD: The reading that's up on YouTube was recorded during the presentation of a chapbook that we gave away for free where we printed a fragment from Intervene. The entire event was a total party. Without thinking about it or openly deciding to do it in that way, yes there were several interventions: the intervention of the poets Karen Plata and Inti García Santamaría, who made the chapbook. The intervention of the poet Laura Solórzano who read right before the two of us intervened that space: the house of the poet Jorge Solís Arenazas, who helped us out by presenting his voice for the performance, and the intervention of Producciones Autismo, who recorded the reading. Everything happened at the “Casa Vacía”  [Empty House] (that's what Jorge would call his home each time he organized a reading) on Avenue Álvaro Obregón in the Colonia Roma neighborhood, and many of the things and situations that happened there were accidents. Decisions we made only minutes before reading.
RFS: The meaning of the title and the book for me has to do with two things. First, historically Mexico is a country that's been and is now intervened by different forces, armies, countries, police, etc. Before 1519, the constitution of Mesoamerica has to do with the intervention of different cultures and clans. The territory that's known as Mexico today and includes parts of the United States was intervened by the Spanish empire for three centuries. Afterwards, Mexico was intervened twice by France and twice by the United States. The Mexican territory was diminished due to North American annexations and the independence of Central American countries. In this sense, it really catches my attention that while the history and politics of Mexico can be read and tracked by following the history of its interventions, it's official policy has been the Estrada Doctrine: that is, non-intervention. In Freudian terms, it's a social projection that has been cured by a cliché and by an impossibility that isn't merely historical but also epistemic: to not intervene. In my case, I was interested in making that traumatic word visible, a word that today remains quite relevant. On the other hand, in the book, the intervention is represented by over-writing. Let's just say I believe that the social simile is subjectified  in the map that is this book: a territory full of addendums, suppressions, typographical hierarchies, voices, questions, none of which belong to an authorship but instead merely make the authorial banishment evident. I really enjoyed the experience of that first public reading of the book (which so far has been the only one we've done together). Because we were able to do it in a “choral” manner, Jorge, Lola and I would read different typographical marks. It was a big inspiration to me, for instance, when I came across audio recordings of readings by Hannah Weiner, whose work, by the way, I got to know thanks to Lola. They're incredible.
RFS (2013)(Rodrigo Flores Sánchez, by Ramón Peralta
What was the process of Jen Hofer's translation into English like? Did you collaborate with her in the translation?
DD: Well, I think Jen's processes are always very careful and creative. It's a process that hasn't finished yet and that I'd like to know more about, from Jen Hofer herself. Collaborations with Jen Hofer never take place merely on the plane of an interpretation and reinterpretation of a text. Jen always looks beyond, and she asks her questions. But, like I say, it's a process that isn't over yet because the bilingual edition of the book will be published at the end of 2014.
RFS: I enjoyed the translation process a great deal, Jen is an excellent conductor of texts. Besides being interested in the literality of the translation, she pays close attention to understanding the text in its context and to moving beyond that first level, I mean the literal one. In that sense, on her part there was always an open dialogue with Lola and myself, in which she contributed questions, uncertainties and observations. It was a very enriching experience for me.
It seems to me that the English translation of the book offers new possibilities for presenting the book in public, for creating a dialogue between the two languages. Do you plan on presenting the book in the United States when it's published here?
DD: Of course, we have to present the book in the United States. That's the way publishing houses promote their books and ensure the text will have a bigger impact on the reading public, especially when it's a case of poets who write in another language. How could the publishing house justify its reasons for publishing Mexican poetry if not through the authors themselves? Publishing poetry in itself is already a risk, and publishing poetry in another language, with authors from the closest country to the United States isn't precisely high on the list of priorities of white North American intellectuals, so we have to make ourselves visible, and have fun while we do it. Years ago, I read part of Intervene at a museum in Detroit, along with the poets Patrick Durgin, Laura Solórzano and Jen Hofer, who with their voices sustained a discourse that was different from the ones that appear in the upcoming Intervene (Intervene is a book in which more than three discourses are interwoven). That gave it an interesting theatrical dimension. I don't know how we'll have fun this time, and when exactly, but I'm sure it'll be something pretty crazy, because of Rodrigo's presence, (whew!) he's from another planet.
RFS: I'd love for Intervene to be presented in the United States.
(January 2014)  blog.bestamericanpoetry.com/the_best_american_poetry/2014/01/intervene-dolores-dorantes-and-rodrigo-flores-s%C3%A1nchez-by-guillermo-parra.html


Dolores Dorantes
another excerpt here: 
http://www.poetryinternationalweb.net/pi/site/poem/item/21973
check out Dolores’s blog here:
http://doloresdorantes.blogspot.com/

Mexican writer granted political asylum leaving stamp on LA literary scene

In March 2011, without packing or telling anyone, writer Dolores Dorantes fled her home in Ciudad Juarez, Mexico, and crossed the border into El Paso.
Ciudad Juarez was the city where she grew up, began work as a reporter, and developed a following as a poet — and it was reeling from drug-related violence. The government responded with deadly military action and the deaths of hundreds of young women went unsolved.
In a column for a Mexico City newspaper, Dorantes criticized government policies that failed to put an end to the violence.
She received death threats, she said. Then a writer friend was violently killed and someone set fire to the house where an activist she knew lived. And so she fled.
“I am seeking asylum because I am afraid of being strongly accused, imprisoned, threatened, kidnapped, beaten, tortured, raped, or killed if I return to Mexico,” she wrote in a 299-page petition for political asylum. Her appeal was granted in 2013.
In El Paso, away from the violence, she wrote “estilo,” a book of prose poems that transforms the acts and language of violence into unexpected images:
“7.-Close us. Destroy our mouths. Enter. Torture us in other realities. Take us with your mind and your word. Bring us to our knees. May your gust of birds pass over us. Convert us in a sky cut across by branches. Capture us by the throat as with animals. As with animals, fervor.”
The following year, she published “Querida fábrica,” (Dear Factory) in which she examines how love is like a factory:
An accident crackling across the imagination with which I remember you:
                                                                          I saw the blood

(something I don’t know is occurring here)
here a dark hand occurs that grasps your neck, sugar
that brings you to your knees, life
“So you remember my dead
So you bind yourself with your back to my dead seas and you listen
to their breathing without seeing                 and you await another
gallop of the sea  and another
wallop of the sea  and another (that something might occur, love)

might occur
                                    (hot just like your whip-crack)
Dorantes’ translator Jen Hofer and several other Los Angeles writers urged her to relocate to Los Angeles and join their literary circle.
In 2012, not long after she arrived in L.A. poet Anthony McCann asked Dorantes to read at the Machine Project gallery in Echo Park. She was still homesick for the city she left, but she agreed to read from “estilo,” only if she could stage it as a performance.
“She came up with the idea, and the idea was she would read with Jen if the audience was handcuffed and blindfolded,” McCann said, like the women and men from Ciudad Juarez who’d endured the same before being killed.
Fighting for asylum
Drug-related violence along Mexico’s northern border displaced thousands of people. They traveled into other parts of Mexico and north into the United States. A small number received political asylum in the United States, Dorantes among them.
Dorantes’ petition included vigorous letters of support from leading poets and literary figures from around the United States.
“Dolores Dorantes is an active and engaged member of society dedicated to contributing to positive change for marginalized populations,” wrote poet Anne Waldman, co-founder of the Jack Kerouac School of Disembodied Poetics at Naropa University.
“If granted asylum in the United States, I have no doubt that she will continue to contribute through her writing, community leadership, and social engagement,” Waldman said.
Dorantes was one of 204 Mexican citizens granted political asylum by the United States in 2013. That number grew to 448 the following year, according to Department of Homeland Security statistics.

Even though the U.S. turns down many asylum claims from Mexico, Dorantes made a strong case that without asylum her life was in danger because of her writing and activism, said Kristen Jackson, a lawyer with the legal advocacy group Public Counsel who helped Dorantes request asylum.
“L.A. is very lucky to have her and the United States is lucky to have her, wherever she may be. We really recognized the value and intensity of Dolores’ work and, in fact, some of her poetry and articles formed part of her asylum claim,” Jackson said.
While in Los Angeles, Dorantes has given autobiographical writing workshops like those she gave for working class and incarcerated women in Ciudad Juarez. She's also given readings outside of L.A.
"The contrasts between the city noises, smells, traffic, police, surveillance, the helicopters flying overhead, make this city a very peculiar and terrible setting, and that makes me love the city," she said of L.A.
She now splits her time between Southern California and El Paso, where she relishes the silence of the desert that lets her write.
As a writer and intellectual with a growing following in the U.S., Dorantes could be seen as a spokeswoman for Mexico’s troubles and her native city's decline. But it is not what she wants.
“It’s tough to see Ciudad Juarez go through so much turmoil, and that’s been used for political means, and for personal gain. I could never use the city’s pain to boost myself personally.” she said.
She was in L.A. last week at Machine Project, and talked about her newest performance, inspired by experiences during her four-year stay in the United States.
“Latin Americans are treated, generally, like servants in order for us to make a living. The other idea is how white artist communities in this country continue seeing us non-white artists as servants, and use [us] as token cultural trinkets,” she said.
LA. writer Roman Lujan and her long-time collaborator Juan Manuel Portillo joined Dorantes for a performance last Sunday.
Portillo recited lines as the conscience and the cynical muse while Lujan – dressed in a suit and tie – played the part of the cultural gatekeeper. Dorantes, wearing an apron that read “No Sirvo,” which translates into “I do not serve,” or “I’m broken,” filled the role as the artist. At various times she kneels to kiss Lujan's and Portillo’s shoes and some of those in the audience in a show of servitude.
“I think it’s a mistake to look at Dolores’ work solely in a political context,” said L.A. writer Ben Ehrenreich. He said Dorantes’ writing is inspired by local, personal experiences but is also infused with larger ideas from world literature and spiritual questions from her practice of Buddhism.
“I think for Dolores these are spiritual battles and they’re profound ones and they’re ones on which she is and has been willing to stake everything,” he said.
It’s an approach to writing that Dorantes tried to spread in Ciudad Juarez and that is summed up in the last line of her performance.
“No hay nada mas cobarde, que un escritor cobarde” — which translated means there’s nothing more cowardly than a cowardly writer. - Adolfo Guzman-Lopez

6/24/15

Louis-René des Forêts - A series of connected, loosely chronological, imagistic reflections that form an emotional history, Ostinato is neither poetry nor prose. Rather, it is a kind of antibiography, in which the facts of this life are less important than the style in which they are rendered. What is there to tell that matters? Neither history, nor memory, but emotions. It is not the events that make this work possible to understand but the work that gives the life its form and its music


Louis-René des Forêts, Ostinato, Trans. by Mary Ann Caws, Bison Books, 2002.       read it at Google Books



Written over an extended period, Ostinato is the long-awaited autobiography of Louis-René des Forêts, one of France's most beloved writers. A few sections of this remarkable text have been published in fragments over the years, and then, with some reluctance on the part of the author, as a series of fragments in France in 1997.
The ostinato-a persistently repeated musical figure or rhythm-is a continual, stubborn, and essential element of certain musical pieces and of the life that emerges in this book. A series of connected, loosely chronological, imagistic reflections that form an emotional history, Ostinato is neither poetry nor prose. Rather, it is a kind of antibiography, in which the facts of this life are less important than the style in which they are rendered. What is there to tell that matters? Neither history, nor memory, but emotions. It is not the events that make this work possible to understand but the work that gives the life its form and its music.


Louis-René des Forêts (1918–2000) lived in Paris. He was best known for his novels and poetry and was awarded the Grand Prix National des Lettres for the entirety of his work.

"Memory, untiring memory that multiplies its illusions with a perverse art, memory turbulent as a child running from room to room": style is substance in award-winning French novelist and poet Louis-Ren des Forts's (1918-2000) episodic and inventive autobiography (in the loosest definition of the term) Ostinato. Imagistic paragraphs follow one another with the dream-logic of a ghazal, and the power of emotions becomes the note struck again and again (the title means a musical figure insistently repeated). CUNY professor Mary Ann Caws translates and prefaces a volume that shies away from concrete dates and details, but relishes in the most profound sensations of the author's life. - Publishers Weekly


13576172

Louis-René des Forêts, Poems of Samuel Wood, Trans. by Anthony Barnett. Allardyce Books, 2011.

POEMS OF SAMUEL WOOD is a meditation on the mysteries of life and language and loss of others and the approaching loss of self by Louis-René des Forêts (1918-2000), author of The Children's Room and Ostinato, co-founder of the review L'Éphémère and a painter of the fantastic.

Poems of Samuel Wood, originally published in French by Fata Morgana in1988, is Louis-René Des Forêts’ meditation on life, language and mortality. Allardyce Book have followed Fata Morgana in producing a work of art in both form and in content.
Louis-René Des Forêts (1918–2000) uses the character of Samuel Wood to distance himself from his own thoughts on death and the act of writing. At the heart of this long monologue are the double voices of the poet and his imaginary character:
Samuel, Samuel, is it really your voice I hear
Emanating as if from the depths of a tomb
To reinforce my own in its struggle with sentences . . .

We are introduced to a dark and claustrophobic picture of the poet as insomniac trying to create meaning: ‘making his little gnawing noises, . . . /He is searching, blindly searching, but searching.’
One of the main thrusts of the poem is a Beckettian debate about ‘the pitfalls of language’ where the poet: ‘. . . hunches himself over a narrow strip of field/ As an animal hollows out a hole, he will make it his grave.’
In this nightmarish world the lost beloved alternates between ‘. . . this woman sitting on a window ledge / . . . her fingers gloved in red?’ and a figure ‘standing smiling/ Amid the asters and the roses’.
Barnett draws on echoes of Shakespeare to translate passages in which the narrator confronts mortality and makes a plea to:
Withdraw wisely as an old actor in his declining years
Leaves the stage . . .
Strutting the boards, fretting ineffectual words. . . 

In this night of insomnia we are at first ‘stupefied beneath the burning sun . . . drown under its blinding light’ but as the monologue progresses, and perhaps dawn begins to break, the sun becomes ‘glorious’ or ‘the morning friend who pushes us out of bed’.
Ultimately the poem finds a reluctant acceptance of mortality as the narrator advises himself to: ‘Rather look at the birds sailing across the sun/ Listen to their evening concert in the woods . . .’
The creative act may be ‘nothing but a fabricated shadow’ yet:
even after it has lost its meaning
Its timbre still resonates in the distance like a storm
No one can tell is approaching or passing.

Barnett’s translation offers an English reader an insight into an intriguing French poet. - Ali Thurm

The Children's Room - Louis Rene Des Forets

Louis-René des Forêts, The children's Room, Trans. by Jean Stewart, Calder, 1963.


John T. Naughton, Louis-René Des Forêts  

6/22/15

Alisa Ganieva portrays the influence of political intolerance and religious violence in the lives of people forced to choose between evils. She tells an excellent story about the rise of Islam, the fate of the republics in post-Soviet Russia and the traditions of a people little known in the West



Alisa Ganieva, The Mountain and the Wall, Trans. by Carol Apollonio, Deep Vellum, 2015.

"Never before has Russian literature produced such an honest and complete picture of today's Caucasus."—Kommersant Weekend (Russia)

"The Mountain and the Wall is a major event in contemporary Russian literature."—Ulrich M. Schmid

This remarkable debut novel by a unique young Russian voice portrays the influence of political intolerance and religious violence in the lives of people forced to choose between evils.
The Mountain and the Wall focuses on Shamil, a young local reporter in Makhachkala, and his reactions, or lack thereof, to rumors that the Russian government is building a wall to cut off the Muslim provinces of the Caucasus from the rest of Russia. As unrest spreads and the tension builds, Shamil's life is turned upside down, and he can no longer afford to ignore the violence surrounding him.
With a fine sense for mounting catastrophe, Alisa Ganieva tells the story of the decline of a society torn apart by its inherent extremes.

The Mountain and the Wall is both the first novel by Alisa Ganieva, and the first in English translation from the Russian republic of Dagestan. I have to be honest and admit straight away that I’d never even heard of Dagestan until I read this book, so I come to write this review more tentatively than I might usually. In a way, though, that’s quite appropriate; because it seems to me that Ganieva’s novel is very much concerned with hearsay and the limits of knowledge.
The prologue, set at a social gathering, is a cinematic carousel of anecdotes told by a succession of characters, until someone realises a critical fact that nobody knew. In the first chapter, we find Ganieva’s protagonist Shamil visiting a village of goldsmiths, on assignment from a newspaper to write about their traditional crafts – though he soon discovers that these are losing out to cheaper tourist trinkets, which is not the story he’s there to tell. These set the scene for a tale of hidden information, not least of which is the rumour that the government is building a wall to separate off Russia’s Caucasus republics – a wall that we hear plenty about, but never see.
Carol Apollonio’s translation from the Russian moves through a range of different styles, particularly as it quotes from various fictional texts – including a novel which Shamil reads, and about he which he might feel differently if he knew what we find out about its author. In all, The Mountain and the Wall strikes me as a story of characters on shifting ground, trying to find their way with incomplete information – and the ultimate sense is that, to go forward, they need to know where they’ve been. - David Hebblethwaite



Dagestan is next to Chechnya and is also an Islamic country. Since the break-up of the Soviet Union, Islamisation has become stronger here, as elsewhere. There has also been some spillover from the Chechen war. Ganieva shows this in a prologue where we meet Zumrud, whom we will meet later in the book, and her extended family. There is much discussion within the family on the changing situation in Dagestan, with stories of apparently liberal people adopting Islam wholesale, liberal women taking the veil and men taking second (and more) wives. But there are also stories of jihadists as well as stories of how people do or do not observe the Koran. Inevitably, there is also much corruption. There is also opposition to this intense Islamisation, as some people fight for human rights and a more liberal state.
The main story starts with Shamil (it is no concidence that he is named after Imam Shamil) in the town of Makhachkala, where Ganieva spent some of her childhood. Shamil is working as a journalist for a local newspaper. Indeed, we meet him when he is visiting a village, where there are goldsmiths who have a long tradition of making beautiful items but now seem intent only on making items for the tourist trade. It is interesting that he starts his article by staying Religious extremism is on the rise in Dagestan. However, two key events happen at this point. When he returns to Makhachkala, he hears rumours of a wall that the Russians have constructed or are constructing between the Caucasus republics and Russia. At the same time, the mobile phone system seems to go down and no-one can phone anyone to get this rumour confirmed or denied. Things seem to be heating up and we learn of another issue in the region. The various constituent nationalities are arguing among themselves, each one claiming that their nationality is the superior one and the one that has been most oppressed. The Kumyks want their ancient lands back, while the Lezgians maintain that their lands have been stolen by the Azeris.
While it is the wall that dominates the story, we never actually see the wall or, rather, Shamil does not see it. Indeed, with the Internet soon going down and most TV stations out of action, no-one actually knows for sure, though some people claim to have seen it in their travels. Much of the rest of the book is a fascinating mixture of stories, first- and second-hand, about what happens post-Wall and accounts of the lives of a few individuals. Shamil seems to drift around almost in a daze. He was engaged to a woman, Madina, but has decided he really does not want to marry her. When he visits her house, he learns from her parents that she has has married one of what are called the beards, i.e. the radical Islamists, who seem to be gradually taking over. Her parents are furious about this and bitterly oppose it. Shamil is horrified, so much so that he goes round visiting all his ex-girlfriends.
We also learn more about his past, in particular a key event when he and his friend, Arip, go hiking. They see what looks a fortification high on the hill and climb up to it, where they find a village which is almost deserted. However, an old man takes them in and feeds them and talks to them, often in riddles or proverbs. They fall asleep and wake up on the mountainside. There is no sign of the village. Was it a dream? If so, both of them had the dream.
Another key character is Makhmud Tagirovich. Ganieva interestingly gives us several excerpts from the works of other people, including Makhmud Tagirovich. Makhmud Tagirovich started to write a novel, abandoned it and then started to write a long poem, before getting a sudden burst of inspiration and finishing the novel. We get excerpts from both. Makhmud Tagirovich is also something of a lost character, berated by his wife for his failure to achieve anything and all too often a victim. All he wants to do is write his poem and novel and spend time with his friend in the local bar. His father had been a poet and something of a colourful character. It is clear that Makhmud Tagirovich cannot live up to his father's reputation.
The background to the story and to the stories of Shamil and Makhmud Tagirovich, is the changing situation. The airport is closed. The bosses seem to disappear. The police hide way and , when they appear, are often killed. The beards are taking over and are being ruthless in imposing what they see as strict Muslim standards. Inevitably, there is an economic crisis, with long Soviet-style queues for food. Madina comments the brothers aren’t terrorists, they are Muslims who want to live like Muslims. And soon everyone will live that same way . Even Arip says Maybe there’ll be some real change? We could have a new state, one that’ll care about truth, justice, and morality more than cash. But museums are sacked and destroyed, a Caucasian Emirate declared and a Mahdi is revealed as the new saviour, till he takes all the cash and disappears.
This is a superb book, giving us the Islamisation aspect from an insider's point of view. There is a certain level of chaos in the novel, by which I mean, it jumps around. This, however, is definitely a positive, as it it gives us an impressionistic view of what is happening in post-Wall Dagestan, both the rise of a traditional Islam view and sharia law, as well as the viewpoint of those who are opposed and those who hover somewhere between the two, i.e. the Russians are bad and we should return to our old ways but this might be too extreme. There is no doubt that Ganieva sees the Islamisation as negative but she is quick to point out the failures of both the Soviet and post-Soviet systems. Just as importantly, for us, the readers, she tells an excellent story about the rise of Islam, the fate of the republics in post-Soviet Russia and the traditions of a people little known in the West. - - www.themodernnovel.com/dagestani/ganieva/mountain.htm

Alisa Ganieva's first novel, The Mountain and the Wall, brings readers into a dystopic world that is slowly being ripped apart at the seams. The novel is set in Dagestan, which is located in Russia's North Caucasus region and is its most ethnically diverse republic. (It's worth noting that Ganieva grew up in Makhachkala, Dagestan's capital city.) While no ethnicity forms a majority, approximately 80% of the population adheres to Islam. In recent years, Dagestan has been the site of occasional ethnic and religious tension, which has sometimes resulted in violence –including suicide bombings and other acts of terrorism—between militant and secular-leaning Islamist groups. This is the reality from which the novel grows.
There are many intersecting storylines in The Mountain and the Wall, but Ganieva centers these intersections on Shamil, a young reporter from Makhachkala. He is the observer whom we observe—a somewhat reluctant protagonist who, despite his best efforts to "postpone the collapse of his world," is continually thrust into rumor, conflict, and violence. Through Shamil we hear that the Russian government may or may not have cut off Dagestan by erecting the Wall along its border. Through Shamil we witness the resulting ethnic and religious unrest caused by the Wall. It is when Shamil's fiancé, Madina, joins radical militants that we observe the turmoil and despair that occur in communities when tension escalates to a breaking point. And it is Shamil who connects us to an experience of hope on the Mountain of Celebration.
Ganieva uses Shamil and his community to give readers a sense of the rhythm of life in a place of such unrest. That rhythm has two primary components: the struggle for information and the consolations of routine. After attending a tense press conference about the Wall (which is full of conflicting reports) Shamil, bewildered, wanders into the streets. There he observes taxis, girls laughing and talking as they shop, and a bread-seller shouting at a group of children playing. "What am I so scared of?" Shamil asks himself. Later, one of Shamil's family members will tell him that "things are always falling apart."
As Shamil watches things fall apart—Madina becomes radicalized and leaves him, family members go missing and are perhaps dead, the government collapses, the streets are filled with violence—he consoles himself with routine:
In a personal effort to postpone the collapse of his world, Shamil sought out forbidden DVDs of non-Muslim films, intensified his workout schedule, and went around visiting his relatives. They fought their anxiety and remained steeped in everyday routines and cares: changing diapers, counting money, repairing their homes.
As is often the case, the routine causes Shamil to disbelieve the extraordinary events he has witnessed. "Maybe everything's alright now," he thinks, "no Wall, network's back up. Maybe it was all just some kind of trick?"
But Ganieva's characters—Shamil especially—wish for something more than cheap denial or escape. As the escalating violence continually rushes at them, they long for hope. And Ganieva does not leave Shamil or his community to suffocate from the tension forever.
One of the ways Ganieva creates space in the narrative for her characters (and for the reader) is by interpolating texts. Throughout the narrative, Shamil encounters newspaper articles, propaganda masked as a children's story, and the manuscript of a novel by a character named Makhmud (as well as a few lines of Makhmud's poetry). Sometimes these interpolations highlight the tensions presented in the narrative—i.e. Shamil's sister's "schoolbook" that includes propagandistic stories of a culture that has thrown off religious tradition and has learned that "not in the mountains, not in the old ways, is happiness to be found, but in the new and joyous morning of freedom." But it is Makhmud's manuscript that becomes important in the final sections of the book.
Makhmud's novel-in-manuscript quickly becomes the subject of a different kind of rumor, marked by hope, vision, and the potential for unity. The manuscript includes a story about Rokhel-Meer, the Mountain of Celebrations. If the Wall is the unseen instigator of division and violence, the Mountain of Celebrations is the intimation that hope exists beyond the conflict and dystopic dread. And it is hope, not mere denial or escape, that Ganieva gives her characters.
Before it appears in Makhmud's manuscript, the Mountain of Celebrations is introduced to readers via a memory that Shamil recounts to himself after discovering that Madina has become radicalized. Shamil and his friend Arip had gone for a hike in the mountains. As they explored, they became drowsy and fell asleep. When they awoke, they followed a path that led to a deserted village, where they found a mysterious man. The man only spoke in proverbs, mumbling as if to himself. He called the village "Rokhel-Meer."
Shamil remembers how the mysterious man brought them back to his mostly empty house and fed them. Soon Shamil and Arip fell asleep again. They awoke on the same mountainside where they had rested before. As they attempted to piece together the incident, they searched for the path to the village again, but found that the mountain was bare—there was no village, and there was no man. It was as if they shared the same dream.
When the Mountain of Celebrations makes its appearance in Makhmud's manuscript, he writes that it is a place "where the soul ends up after death." What he describes is like an embodied dream, an enchantment grounded in work and feasting, a meeting point between heaven and earth: 
Our souls end up at the top of Rokhel-Meer, the Mountain of Celebrations. And there, on Meer, will be a place of purity, where there is no poverty, scarcity, or want. There will be a great village there with tanneries, armories, and stone workshops. Its dwellings are part of the very cliffs; there, benign white spirits will feast together with the people, and the celebrations will never end.
The Mountain of Celebrations in Makhmud's novel has a different character than it does in Shamil's memory. Each vision of the mountain is increasingly populated and celebratory. And it is this vision that Ganieva leaves us with at the end of the novel when she shows us a third scene on the mountain. It is a vision of hope that contrasts the dystopic violence in the rest of the book.
The real-life ethnic tension and religious violence in Dagestan and elsewhere since the novel's original publication in 2012 make this dystopian future seem all the more immediate and urgent. Ganieva's novel is about things we often see in headlines: fundamentalist / secularist tensions, ethnic clashes, personal and social collapses, shifting cultural dynamics, and the manipulation of information. But it is also about the survival of a people and the desire to move beyond postmodern cynicism and despair to a hope that lies on the far side of struggle.
Ganieva's novel is terrifying in many ways. But it is also courageous, timely, and clear-eyed. The book begins with the Wall, but it ends on the Mountain. By doing so, it acknowledges that pain and darkness are real. But it argues that hope is also a real and worthwhile endeavor. - A. T. Grant




Alisa Ganieva, born in 1985, grew up in Makhachkala, Dagestan. Her literary debut, the novella Salaam, Dalgat!, won the prestigious Debut Prize in 2009. Shortlisted for all of Russia's major literary awards, The Mountain and the Wall is her first novel, and has already been translated into several languages. Ganieva lives in Moscow, where she works as a journalist and literary critic.