With Fifty Shades of Grey giving pornography a bad name,
it's time to turn to Nicholson Baker's The House of Holes. Unlike Fifty Shades of Grey, the prose in
House of Holes in skillful, inventive, and playful.
This book is fun to read; it is fun for the
lighthearted and imaginative sex, and its ever-bubbling imagination and use of
language. The plot is episodic. There is an overarching story of the character
Dave's Arm reuniting with Dave, but basically it is divided into many short
chapter-length adventures with intermittently recurring characters. The House of Holes itself is a fantastic
resort estate spacious and sunny, and the managers and staff of the resort play
deus ex machina to resolve several
crises, often with somewhat ritualistic healing powers. The characters are not stereotypes, but they
are not deeply drawn. They are, mostly
good-looking, unattached 20- or 30-somethings (no one under age) pining for
erotic romance. Men and women are
equally present, equally thoughtful and randy, equally initiators of action. They have a range of longings, needs, quirks,
and oddities that distinguishes them and involves the reader in various
ways. The sex is almost all heterosexual,
with a few woman and woman bits, and a few gentle touches of S&M. The text is primarily action described from
an omniscient third person point of view but the dialogue has what I would call
a flirty, mischievous banality.
Here's an excerpt, which describes some paintings,
but that gives a feel for the characterization:
They [five paintings] were all of women sitting on
chairs wearing pants but not wearing anything over their breasts. Some sat relaxedly, some seemed tense. It caught something unusual in their
expressions, which were sad and human.
This dialogue follows:
“I like their faces,” Jessica said.
“Thanks, will you excuse me for a moment? My underpants are wet with my come, and I am
just going to take them off and throw them out.”
Bosco went into the back and reemerged in a few
minutes…
“Do you offer a modeling fee she asked?’ in order to
preserve her dignity.
“Name it,” he said.
“When I modeled for the photographer, he paid me
$200.”
He shook his head.
"I'll sell the painting for eight thousand, of which the gallery
will take fifty percent. So, I will
gross four thousand dollars. Nothing
that I paint would exist without your beauty.
How about 2000 for you, 2000 for me?”
She thought.
“That’s generous. But sure, yes.” He nodded.
“Good. Now?”
She took a moment to reflect. “I’m kind of sweaty from walking,” she said.
Baker’s imagination and verbal inventiveness are ever
present in this book. They are present
for instance in the way people arrive at the House of Holes.
“Any hints on where to find a porthole?”
“Try the fourth dryer from the left of the laundromat
on the corner of 18th St. and Grover Avenue,” said Jackie she waved. “Bye.”
Her face began to blur and liquefied, and then she
poured herself down into her straw and was gone.
Cardell picked up the straw and look through it. There was no blockage. “Jackie?”
He said. The bartender stood
watching him, holding a glass. “What
just happened?” Cardell said.
“Your lady friend seems to have been sucked into her
straw,” the bartender said.
That’s what I think, too,” Cardell said.
The bartender shrugged. “It happens, man.”
Note also the meticulous punctuation.
It's hard to
write well about actual sex, as any of you who have tried know, and Baker does
it with apparent graceful ease.
Separation of parts from bodies is a common event in
this book, which I don’t believe appears in most people’s erotic fantasies. Besides arms, and penises, of course,
vaginas, and separately clitorises, heads, and other parts are painlessly detached,
skillfully maintained, and ritually reunited.
I’m sure you’ll be happy to hear that the person who obsessively
snatches clitorises, has a change of heart and returns them to their owners.
In his long
and thoughtful review of Fifty Shades of Grey in New York Review of Books (http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2013/feb/07/fifty-shades-grey-why-so-popular/?pagination=false),
the distinguished critic Tim Parks attributes a substantial part of its popularity
to the mixture of guilt and pleasure. That
is, the characters and actions are so constructed that people can indulge in
mildly S&M sex and at the same time feel bad about what they’re doing. Thus, they satisfy themselves in forbidden
pleasures while maintaining the moral structure they believe in that sustains
their self-image. The House of Holes gets
a similar effect in a different way. In
the House of Holes, it's all innocent fun.
This sense of fun made me puzzle a little about
Baker’s lengthy and public admiration for John Updike. I have never been comfortable with Updike’s
attitude towards sex, which seems to me to be squeamish and guilty in a way
that denigrates pleasure. I remember two
characters talking in his novel Couples, where among some suburban neighbors
most of the heterosexual combinations have been guiltily realized. At one point a mopey woman is dancing with a
man who has not shown interest in her, and she asks something like “Why don’t
you want to fuck me?” I answered in my
mind, 'because, in Updike, sex is no fun'.
Quite the contrary in the House of Holes.
Delightful! Though silly, but that's what NB likes.
ReplyDelete