A wild or perhaps even a good guess as to what readers crave is a byproduct of becoming a decent reader. One writer rarely reads alone, and that’s part of the saga of collectivity and simultaneity. She and others pick up similar texts, comparable projects; snowballs start flying. When a writer thinks in public about what she is reading, she’s taking aim and will be aimed at in turn, pro and con. This is one yarn, hardly superfluous, of opinion acclimatization.
The signature concern is the reader’s experience. This concern is peculiarly self-fascinated, another point; that so many writers simultaneously figure out readers’ expectations within multiple selves, functioning in extra literary contexts, estranged politics, cultural de-/re-construction, academic-corporate performance theory and the like.
Eileen Myles is central to making sense of these multiple elements often living her own habits and pleasures in the present tense, exposing her ‘other’ for what she is to her readers.
More off-center: Nicole Brossard tames her otherness and the other-directedness that she (writer) and (s)he (reader) share.
Reading Myles you are immersed in her momentary, empathetic presence. When reading Brossard you want implicitly to inquire into her brazen iconoclasm. It would be abetting deeper juxtaposition to bracket one’s enjoyment just to explore the ordinarily unknown. How does Brossard know? How does she improvise? How do you account for a received notion “being in the present”? Even better.
on levait la tête on aimait les petits arbres
derrière le fer forgé du cinquième étage
personne ne tombait jamais
plus bas que notre habitude de la vie
[taking pleasure in these trees, looking up
through the 5th floor wrought iron
nobody ever falls lower than
this, what we make our habit in life]
The narrator who claims personne ne tombait jamais speaks for anyone who wants and takes pleasure with no palpable fear of falling.
While translating freely is not always the fairest compliment a writer may pay another, it is one entry for finding points of empathy (How does she improvise?) as well as beginning to appreciate Brossard’s command of what she suggests here (How does she know?). And in four short lines we stumble across habitude. It is a writer’s answer, Brossard’s answer for now, to be in and of the present.