Six Questions — June 23, 2014, 8:00 am

Rivka Galchen on American Innovations: Stories

Rivka Galchen © Sandy Tait

Rivka Galchen © Sandy Tait

The characters in Rivka Galchen’s new collection, American Innovations, are as surprised and confused by time travel, mysterious growths, and encounters with the dead as they are by being unemployed, getting divorced, and falling in love. In “Once an Empire,” which was published in the February 2010 issue of Harper’s Magazine, a woman arrives home to find her furniture climbing down the fire escape. Other stories revisit such classics as Thurber’s “The Secret Life of Walter Mitty” and Borges’s “The Aleph,” but consider them all from the perspectives of women. In each story, Galchen creates a world at once recognizable but disturbed, uncertain yet comforting. 

Galchen’s first novel, Atmospheric Disturbances, was published in 2008. She is a recipient of the William Saroyan International Prize for Fiction Writing and a Rona Jaffe Foundation Writers’ Award. She has also written for Harper’s about Handel’s Messiah, hurricanes, and the Argentinean writer César Aira. I wrote to her with six questions.

1. In “The Entire North Side Was Covered with Fire,” you describe “Prison bars of not-money” growing around the narrator “like wild magic corn.” It seemed to me that many of the characters in American Innovations are concerned about money or work, and I notice that the first of the ten stories was published in 2008. Is this a book of Great Recession stories?

I hadn’t thought of it that way, but it’s an interesting point. I think most people worry about money in one way or another quite often, maybe most of the time, but maybe this is heightened by absorbing as a kind of pollen from the zeitgeist a sense that the today of things is not the tomorrow of things. No one wants to slide down the socioeconomic ladder, and the majority of my narrators have chosen jobs that aren’t really coming with pension plans, yet I’m not sure if that fully explains the sensitivity to cost that many but not all of them have. Money is a taboo; people have weird mystical irrational rituals around nearly every aspect of it.

2. The stories in the collection are described on the jacket as “canonical stories re-imagined from the perspective of female characters.” “The Lost Order,” for example, echoes James Thurber’s “The Secret Life of Walter Mitty.” How did having a female narrator influence the reshaping of this story?

Not in the way I had expected. I had long had a little joke with myself, when I would find myself persecuted with boring thoughts about my appearance or what someone thought of me, I would think: The Secret Life of Willa Mitty. The idea was that Walter Mitty is having a dull day, sure, but at least in his mind he’s a wildly heroic figure, a fighter pilot or a dashing surgeon. He basically has the kinds of fantasies that the culture supplies to men, about what it might mean to be manly, which is problematic, sure, but it just seemed a lot more buoying than the fantasies out there for women . . .

So I think I thought the story would pay close attention to what kinds of inner dream spaces are suggested to women, and then see where that led me . . . that that would form a perverse mirror to the Walter Mitty story . . . but then the story didn’t go that way! It was almost as if the story and the character were both rejecting my weak idea and pushed me around, made me co-opt that space of being a fantasist of a certain kind, of a male kind, and then find out how it comes to fisticuffs with reality. I often when I’m stuck with a story proceed in that way, proceed by thinking: how can I uncover what was wrong in the thinking that brought me this far? And then things turn, and briefly give off light.

American Innovations, by Rivka Galchen

3. Do you think of the narrator as being the same person, though at different moments in her life, in each story?

Hmm. I think they’d all be kept in the same part of the zoo, that’s for sure, but I definitely think of them as different people.

4. The narrator’s unreliability — the narrator lies or conceals information, or the account suddenly turns surreal — is common both to these stories and to your novel, Atmospheric Disturbances, in which the main character is a delusional psychiatrist. How does this unreliability play out differently in short fiction, as compared with a novel?

That’s tricky, the unreliability thing, which is in so many ways just a synonym for a first-person narrator, but I get what you’re talking about — there are narrators you would take directions to the subway from, and others maybe less so. But there’s always this ironic gap, between what a character knows and the additional knowledge the reader feels they have over the character — the don’t-do-it-Oedipus-she’s-your-mother feeling — and this gap can be accordioned, and that weird polka-music sound is actually a major mechanism of literature I think. Maybe this means the short story is a kind of two-minute chicken-dance polka? But what does that leave a novel as? I guess it exposes the brick wall of metaphor.

From “American Innovations”:

My hand moved to the mass. The mass liked being touched. I lifted my shirt. I would say what I saw was a wow. Even though it was modest, maybe a B cup in size. It didn’t need support. It manifested all the expected anatomy, the detailing of which I feel is private. What I saw was really textbook. Safe for its location, there on my back. As if to hide from me. Or as if to discreetly maintain an unacknowledged child. Though the discreetness would work only in a world in which we meet one another exclusively head-on, or possibly in three-quarters profile. Because in profile the anatomy really could not be denied.

I pulled my shirt back down. It was fitted but, thankfully, long.

5. In the title story, the narrator finds that she has suddenly grown a breast on her lower back. Surreal twists are common in these stories — what is the appeal of the surreal, for you?

It’s pretty much always about emotional realism. This idea that sometimes the straight facts occlude the truth, instead of reveal it. For example, I think if a story was, say, about a woman who because she was flat-chested or overweight or whatever, felt that her body was unacceptable and deformed but had made her peace with that, then came across what other people were saying about her body . . . well, I’m pretty sure we’d all just sigh and not read that story or feel like we were stuck at the dentist office reading articles about people whining.

I felt like the surreal gave a chance in this story to see something that is so ubiquitous, so common, that it’s invisible to us. Even if we read about it and talk about it, we’re not actually in touch with it. Not that that’s what the story is about! But it isn’t not about that either.

6. Has teaching in the MFA program at Columbia influenced your writing, or the way you think about literature?

I only ever teach seminars, usually a fiction seminar in the fall and a nonfiction one in the spring. I recognize that I’m supposed to feel enervated and depressed about teaching, but I don’t. I love the pressure of having to think very seriously about a book, and then to get to talk about it with other people who have, for the most part, also thought seriously about the book. How often does it happen in everyday life that our friends or acquaintances have read the same books as us, and then we think about them together? It’s much easier in a social setting to find common ground in talking about movies or TV. So I guess the main way teaching influences the way I think about literature is that it enables me to think more about literature.

Share
Single Page

Get access to 167 years of
Harper’s for only $45.99

United States Canada

CATEGORIES

THE CURRENT ISSUE

December 2017

Document of Barbarism

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

Destroyer of Worlds

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

Crossing Guards

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

“I am Here Only for Working”

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

Dear Rose

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

The Year of The Frog

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

view Table Content

FEATURED ON HARPERS.ORG

Article
Destroyer of Worlds·

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

In February 1947, Harper’s Magazine published Henry L. Stimson’s “The Decision to Use the Atomic Bomb.” As secretary of war, Stimson had served as the chief military adviser to President Truman, and recommended the attacks on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The terms of his unrepentant apologia, an excerpt of which appears on page 35, are now familiar to us: the risk of a dud made a demonstration too risky; the human cost of a land invasion would be too high; nothing short of the bomb’s awesome lethality would compel Japan to surrender. The bomb was the only option. Seventy years later, we find his reasoning unconvincing. Entirely aside from the destruction of the blasts themselves, the decision thrust the world irrevocably into a high-stakes arms race — in which, as Stimson took care to warn, the technology would proliferate, evolve, and quite possibly lead to the end of modern civilization. The first half of that forecast has long since come to pass, and the second feels as plausible as ever. Increasingly, the atmosphere seems to reflect the anxious days of the Cold War, albeit with more juvenile insults and more colorful threats. Terms once consigned to the history books — “madman theory,” “brinkmanship” — have returned to the news cycle with frightening regularity. In the pages that follow, seven writers and experts survey the current nuclear landscape. Our hope is to call attention to the bomb’s ever-present menace and point our way toward a world in which it finally ceases to exist.

Illustration by Darrel Rees. Source photographs: Kim Jong-un © ITAR-TASS Photo Agency/Alamy Stock Photo; Donald Trump © Yuri Gripas/Reuters/Newscom
Article
Crossing Guards·

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

The Ambassador Bridge arcs over the Detroit River, connecting Detroit to Windsor, Ontario, the southernmost city in Canada. Driving in from the Canadian side, where I grew up, is like viewing a panorama of the Motor City’s rise and fall, visible on either side of the bridge’s turquoise steel stanchions. On the right are the tubular glass towers of the Renaissance Center, headquarters of General Motors, and Michigan Central Station, the rail terminal that closed in 1988. On the left is a rusted industrial corridor — fuel tanks, docks, abandoned warehouses. I have taken this route all my life, but one morning this spring, I crossed for the first time in a truck.

Illustration by Richard Mia
Article
“I am Here Only for Working”·

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

But the exercise of labor is the worker’s own life-activity, the manifestation of his own life. . . . He works in order to live. He does not even reckon labor as part of his life, it is rather a sacrifice of his life.

— Karl Marx

Photograph from the United Arab Emirates by the author. This page: Ruwais Mall
Article
The Year of The Frog·

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

To look at him, Sweet Macho was a beautiful horse, lean and strong with muscles that twitched beneath his shining black coat. A former racehorse, he carried himself with ceremony, prancing the field behind our house as though it were the winner’s circle. When he approached us that day at the edge of the yard, his eyes shone with what might’ve looked like intelligence but was actually a form of insanity. Not that there was any telling our mother’s boyfriend this — he fancied himself a cowboy.

“Horse 1,” by Nine Francois. Courtesy the artist and AgavePrint, Austin, Texas
Article
Dead Ball Situation·

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

What We Think About When We Think About Soccer, by Simon Critchley. Penguin Books. 224 pages. $20.

Begin, as Wallace Stevens didn’t quite say, with the idea of it. I so like the idea of Simon Critchley, whose books offer philosophical takes on a variety of subjects: Stevens, David Bowie, suicide, humor, and now football — or soccer, as the US edition has it. (As a matter of principle I shall refer to this sport throughout as football.) “All of us are mysteriously affected by our names,” decides one of Milan Kundera’s characters in Immortality, and I like Critchley because his name would seem to have put him at a vocational disadvantage compared with Martin Heidegger, Søren Kierkegaard, or even, in the Anglophone world, A. J. Ayer or Richard Rorty. (How different philosophy might look today if someone called Nobby Stiles had been appointed as the Wykeham Professor of Logic.)

Tostão, No. 9, and Pelé, No. 10, celebrate Carlos Alberto’s final goal for Brazil in the World Cup final against Italy on June 21, 1970, Mexico City © Heidtmann/picture-alliance/dpa/AP Images

Factor by which single Americans who use emoji are more likely than other single Americans to be sexually active:

1.85

Brontosaurus was restored as a genus, and cannibalism was reported in tyrannosaurine dinosaurs.

Moore said he did not “generally” date teenage girls, and it was reported that in the 1970s Moore had been banned from his local mall and YMCA for bothering teenage girls.

Subscribe to the Weekly Review newsletter. Don’t worry, we won’t sell your email address!

HARPER’S FINEST

Report — From the June 2013 issue

How to Make Your Own AR-15

= Subscribers only.
Sign in here.
Subscribe here.

By

"Gun owners have long been the hypochondriacs of American politics. Over the past twenty years, the gun-rights movement has won just about every battle it has fought; states have passed at least a hundred laws loosening gun restrictions since President Obama took office. Yet the National Rifle Association has continued to insist that government confiscation of privately owned firearms is nigh. The NRA’s alarmism helped maintain an active membership, but the strategy was risky: sooner or later, gun guys might have realized that they’d been had. Then came the shootings at a movie theater in Aurora, Colorado, and at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut, followed swiftly by the nightmare the NRA had been promising for decades: a dedicated push at every level of government for new gun laws. The gun-rights movement was now that most insufferable of species: a hypochondriac taken suddenly, seriously ill."

Subscribe Today