The Mookse and the Gripes discussion

Parade by Rachel Cusk (Faber & Faber)

Fourth attempt to create a discussion for Parade. I will tidy this and rename it once I am trusted by the system again.

I'm glad to see Parade shortlisted for a prize. It seems like we've circled around the book all year without really discussing it.

I mentioned Andrea Long Chu's review of Parade: https://www.vulture.com/article/rache.... The article is paywalled, unfortunately.

I would be interested if anyone has thoughts on it.

Before reading Parade, I did a reread of the Outline trilogy. As I commented elsewhere, Outline felt a little dated in terms of gender politics. I didn't mean it as a critique but more of an observation that Outline felt of a time and place (i.e., 2014).

I was a bit surprised when reading Parade that I noticed the same thing. For me, it's not that Cusk's politics are wrong, it's more that they seem to rely on a rather binary view of the world. The milieu of her books are also notably white, upper middle class, and cishet.

On a first pass, I enjoyed Chu's review because it said a lot of the things I felt about Parade. But whereas I see an approach stuck in time (nothing wrong with that), Chu would seem to go farther.

David wrote: "I was a bit surprised when reading Parade that I noticed the same thing. For me, it's not that Cusk's politics are wrong, it's more that they seem to rely on a rather binary view of the world. The milieu of her books are also notably white, upper middle class, and cishet."

Thanks for this. I read Long Chu's article and was contemplating reading the book just to see if I'd agree with Long Chu. But your comment pretty much cemented my decision to pass. Plenty of other stuff to give my time to instead of reading something I'd end up not liking anyways.

David wrote: "I mentioned Andrea Long Chu's review of Parade: https://www.vulture.com/article/rache.... The article is paywalled, unfortunately.

I would be interested if anyone has th..."

I share many of your misgivings about Cusk, I've read a number of her books, enjoyed grappling with them, but they never sit right with me. My impression too, from what I've read about this novel, is that her framing of art and the artworld - based on the artists she's selected - is rather narrow/slightly conservative/dated.

If btw anyone wants to read the Andrea Long Chu article and is stymied by the paywall, then go to the page it's on at Vulture/New York mag, copy and paste the address. Then go to https://12ft.io/

Once there paste the article address into the box and hit 'Clean Webpage' the article will then come up in full.

I must admit to buying the book this morning (although I have already read it) precisely due to the article.

I was impressed with the bookshop I bought it in as they were very excited to tell me it had been shortlisted for the award and knew the other books - although it is a bookshop nearish the Uni.

Gumble's Yard - Golden Reviewer wrote: "I must admit to buying the book this morning (although I have already read it) precisely due to the article.

I was impressed with the bookshop I bought it in as they were very excited to tell me ..."

One thing I'd say about the article is if you're not familiar with Andrea Long Chu is that she has a very particular conception of men/women and identity. So might be worth reading some reviews of Females there's a decent overview in the LARB review or earlier essays like

https://www.nplusonemag.com/issue-30/...

Which was the thing with that article. It is very well written and carefully thought through and does start with praising some of Cusk’s other work. But it did seem to boil down to the author of the article and the author of the book having very different views of gender.

Paul wrote: "Which was the thing with that article. It is very well written and carefully thought through and does start with praising some of Cusk’s other work. But it did seem to boil down to the author of th..."

Also I wondered if there was an issue in terms of interpretation - not necessarily of the novel I haven't read it so can't comment - but Cusk on gender. When, for example, the article suggests that Cusk thinks gender identity isn't worth thinking about/is dismissive of it, it's not what Cusk actually said. The gist of what she said was she felt that she was personally too old for it to have much relevance to her life at this point. The subtext being that Cusk's had a number of relationships, already made certain choices - that can't now be undone - based on the models of gender available to her in key stages of her life. It's not that she's dissing the questioning, reformulating of concepts of gender happening now - at least I didn't think that was the case.

Although from Chu's article does sound as if Cusk has a slightly Lawrentian take on men and women, which I can't personally relate to. I'm more with Chu on women and art that the issues are more related to institutional barriers, patriarchal perspectives etc But I'm surprised at the idea that Cusk sets such store on motherhood, for example, especially after her eloquent takedown in A Life's Work: On Becoming a Mother which I did actually enjoy reading.

It's just interesting to me that a writer like Cusk who is so interested in exploring sex and gender in her fiction would focus that fiction exclusively on a world populated by cishet characters that exhibit the expected traits of their gender. Bubbles like that may still exist in the world but I'm not sure what insights that approach might yield in 2024. I'm not offended by it. I just find it odd, limiting, and curiously provocative.

David wrote: "It's just interesting to me that a writer like Cusk who is so interested in exploring sex and gender in her fiction would focus that fiction exclusively on a world populated by cishet characters th..."

I don't find it that surprising, Cusk went to boarding-school then Oxford, wrote a series of intelligent, upmarket, lit fic novels some of which were semi-autobiographical like Saving Agnes, some of which were the contemporary equivalent of the Hampstead novel like Arlington Park. She also produced memoirs about holidaying in Italy. She had some sort of epiphany and started experimenting with form, perspective etc But there's no reason to suspect that her core values have changed, a certain kind of upper-mid, liberal but bourgeois culture is essentially her milieu. I imagine her interest in art is partly linked to her partner being an artist, or maybe that's what brought them together. But he's also a retail consultant and not a boundary-pushing figure in the artworld.

Cusk's not known for being radical in other senses of the word. Although she was briefly controversial after her book on motherhood. I'm not sure that that's worth worrying about, in the sense that that's the kind of writer she is, those are the kinds of worlds she inhabits, and you either take it or leave it.

If she hadn't moved towards being more daring in terms of structure etc then she'd never have been on Andrea Long Chu's radar. Chu isn't really Cusk's implied reader. I'm not saying that means she can't criticise Cusk but that Cusk was never going to meet the criteria of certain readership expectations.

The art world, as I observe it, seems to be a place of almost radical diversity, particularly with gender, cultural background, and to some extent class. I find it hard to believe that the type of characters at the center of Parade have any cultural currency. Fiction of course need not be believable. It's just an interesting choice to drop us into this world.

I feel like we populate very different worlds David

Gumble's Yard - Golden Reviewer wrote: "I feel like we populate very different worlds David"

That's not a bad thing at all. Cusk may well be addressing a world that exists.

David wrote: "The art world, as I observe it, seems to be a place of almost radical diversity, particularly with gender, cultural background, and to some extent class. I find it hard to believe that the type of ..."

Yes there are diverse radical groupings in British art but that's not the whole scene. There are those who are interested in making cultural/political statements and those who are interested in form. There are lots of fairly conventional artists linked to institutions like the Courtauld. These tend to be painters and they often sell via private views in houses in Notting Hill etc

Painting tends to attract the most conservative groupings, painters are often simply interested in what can be done on a flat surface within a frame, so often focused on form and/or texture and/or colour. And many here exhibit work via small private, upmarket galleries in places like Cork Street and its environs. Their work ends up in the lobbies of expensive hotels, corporate buildings or on the walls of private homes in places like Stoke Newington. Many will happily do commissioned work. The artworld is definitely diverse here but not solely in the way you imagine!

Gumble's Yard - Golden Reviewer wrote: "I feel like we populate very different worlds David"

I was thinking along those lines, although think my world overlaps more with David's, Cusk's world is also very recognisable to me. And let's not forget a significant number of the people working in British publishing still have backgrounds not dissimilar to Cusk's. Cusk draws extensively on her own life/personal preoccupations, interest in Lawrence, Woolf etc She basically writes what she knows and likes to play with form.

This is all helpful. What reads to me as anachronism may not in fact be. Cusk is doing other things in the book, which are of interest, but this was obviously a hurdle for me.

David wrote: "This is all helpful. What reads to me as anachronism may not in fact be. Cusk is doing other things in the book, which are of interest, but this was obviously a hurdle for me."

It's not anachronistic if readership's anything to go by, I don't know who her core buyers are. But - obvs anecdotal - do know plenty of people who read her novels - many are academics, and range in age from around mid-30s upward.

I think the world she writes about is the one in which she lives and indeed many of the artists in the book live - or rather lived. They are mostly real people and eg Eric Rohmer was born in 1920 and died in 2010, Bourgeois 1911-2010, Baselitz 1938-present. I don't think it's supposed to be a commentary on the contemporary modern art scene.

If anything would be a bit odd to me if she did try to write that as it would not be at all true to her.

Incidentally the fact that most of the artists are deceased may not be a coincidence. She has said the New Yorker's lawyers gave her a hard time over the fictionalised Baselitz in the story that became the first part of the book (oddly Cusk was surprised they realised who it was meant to me!)

I agree it wouldn't fit with her profile/preoccupations, although there are many pockets of British contemporary art that are still fairly old-school. I think Chu wants Cusk to be something/someone she's patently not or has ever claimed to be.

I think Cusk's a highly-skilled writer, I find her work very readable, I've enjoyed puzzling out her more recent novels, I can recognise where she's coming from, I just can't entirely relate to it or always endorse it. I suppose that's why I'm keener on writers like Ali Smith who play with form etc but are more relatable to me in terms of the worlds they inhabit.

David wrote: "This is all helpful. What reads to me as anachronism may not in fact be. Cusk is doing other things in the book, which are of interest, but this was obviously a hurdle for me."

Probably completely off-track but wonder if it's the case that in the US, experiments with literary form are more commonly associated with authors who are also politically/culturally radical? There are plenty of successful American writers like Elizabeth Strout, Marilynne Robinson who write, at least tangentially, about gender, certainly in terms of an interest in women's lives, who also tend to focus primarily on cishet, white characters - from what I've read anyway. But I haven't noticed them coming under scrutiny for that, is it the fact that Cusk plays with form that's led to her coming under the microscope?

Has she really come under the microscope other than this one article - which must admit I have only seen mentioned here. The usual microscope she comes under is from the Mumsnet crowd in the opposite direction. And from literary critics who want to know why she can't write 'proper' books with plots and characters arcs.

Interesting to see Strout mentioned as makes me realise I am also being hypocritical in defending Cusk - as one reason Strout's popularity bothers me (alongside her fixation with socks as a key plot device) is because her characters do seem to live in an entirely white world.

It’s not strange to me that this is what Cusk writes about, it seems to be her world and I don’t find any fault in her writing what she knows. As Alwynne said, I think it’s a take it or leave it situation. I think people would be ready to crucify (ok maybe that’s dramatic) if she did attempt something radical beyond form just for the sake of doing it or because she felt like she had to.

But I think it’s exactly what you (Alwynne) said about her playing with form suddenly moving her into a different sphere with readers and critics who are accustomed to seeing more progressive ideas from authors who write in this style and experiment in the way that Cusk does.

Paul wrote: "Has she really come under the microscope other than this one article - which must admit I have only seen mentioned here. The usual microscope she comes under is from the Mumsnet crowd in the opposi..."

I was thinking more broadly in that David seemed to find her perspective puzzling too...And in relation to the sheer number of online discussions about her circulating over the last few weeks/months, all tracing back to Chu's article: various blog posts; newspaper articles - including one in a newspaper in, iirc, Delhi - not to mention various Insta posts, Reddit threads etc Chu is a fairly well-known, much followed writer, her recent Pulitzer has presumably added to that.

Paul wrote: "Has she really come under the microscope other than this one article - which must admit I have only seen mentioned here. The usual microscope she comes under is from the Mumsnet crowd in the opposi..."

I don't think I got as far as the socks! I'm not necessarily consistent on this but in some ways I prefer the writers who stick to their particular worlds - as long as they're not openly racist, homophobic etc - than some of those I've read recently who've obviously shoehorned in a queer and/or BIPOC character because their editor advised them to.

Alwynne wrote: "David wrote: "This is all helpful. What reads to me as anachronism may not in fact be. Cusk is doing other things in the book, which are of interest, but this was obviously a hurdle for me."

Proba..."

Great thread, btw.

Yes, but IMO neither Robinson nor Strout are particularly talked about in US LitFic critic circles. They're fine, but of mid-level fame or significance. You have to matter (more), or be perceived as mattering more, to attract sophisticated scrutiny.

Carol wrote: "Alwynne wrote: "David wrote: "This is all helpful. What reads to me as anachronism may not in fact be. Cusk is doing other things in the book, which are of interest, but this was obviously a hurdle..."

That makes sense Carol, so presumably her literary awards, the fact that her books don't necessarily appeal to readers of conventional fiction, are what makes her a person of interest?

Rachel wrote: "It’s not strange to me that this is what Cusk writes about, it seems to be her world and I don’t find any fault in her writing what she knows. As Alwynne said, I think it’s a take it or leave it si..."

Absolutely Rachel, and thanks for confirming my suspicions!

This all strikes me as correct. I think Cusk's willingness to push boundaries with form and narrative are perhaps in contrast with other aspects of her approach, which do not push boundaries.

Paul wrote: "I think the world she writes about is the one in which she lives and indeed many of the artists in the book live - or rather lived. They are mostly real people and eg Eric Rohmer was born in 1920 and died in 2010, Bourgeois 1911-2010, Baselitz 1938-present. I don't think it's supposed to be a commentary on the contemporary modern art scene."

This seems true as well. In several parts of the book, it was unclear to me when it was set. And for parts set in the past (if they were set in the past) whether there was a critique relevant to the contemporary art scene.

Another hurdle for me was whether Cusk was portraying Rohmer and others, or whether the characters were fictional people set in a more contemporary world. Perhaps she's deliberately blurring the lines there.

From what she's said, she has more started with the real works of art then part imagined/part researched the life stories behind them.

Vasari's Le vite de' più eccellenti pittori, scultori, e architettori seems to have been a key touchstone as well as her own book Last Supper.

David wrote: "Paul wrote: "I think the world she writes about is the one in which she lives and indeed many of the artists in the book live - or rather lived. They are mostly real people and eg Eric Rohmer was b..."

The interview with Cusk centred on Parade here might help - or not seems she's remarkably well-versed in the art of the cryptic. But thought it was interesting in relation to her theories about shifting but all-pervasive forms of violence which were apparently central to the novel:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oVFRQ...

Also thought The Atlantic review was quite useful:

https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/...

Paul wrote: "From what she's said, she has more started with the real works of art then part imagined/part researched the life stories behind them.

Vasari's Le vite de' più eccellenti pittori, scultori, e arc..."

I'd have just gone with 'The Lives of the Artists'!

Alwynne wrote: "I'd have just gone with 'The Lives of the Artists"

Blame ChatGPT when asked to tell me what Italian book she might have mentioned that was study of renaissance art using the biographies of the artists!

Alwynne wrote: "The interview with Cusk centred on Parade here might help"

Thanks. I listened to the Shakespeare and Co podcast interview that the Chu linked to, which is also with Adam Biles. They aren't the same as the S&Co one was at the bookshop in Paris, but around same time and from a quick look at the Youtube transcript cover similar ground

https://www.shakespeareandcompany.com...

Very soon after Biles did another with Catherine Lacey on The Biography of X, which I think several of us have read. Interestingly in that Lacey explains the alternative-history in her book as not an end in itself (which explains why it isn't really developed) but simply a narrative device so that she could write what purports to me a biography of a 20th century female artist written by another woman in the 20th century, but without having to explain the struggles of either to be taken seriously.

Strikes me as an interesting contrast with Cusk but to the same end. Cusk, as David said, doesn't "push boundaries" in terms of cultural issues and really writes of a world as largely is. Lacey has literallly picked the boundary up and moved it to the southern states of the US, then set her book in a liberalised north. Both rather duck questions and fail to challenge our current world in their books, but both would say that isn't what they are trying to achieve.

(That 2nd podcast https://www.shakespeareandcompany.com...)

One other thing that struck me from both Cusk interviews was the numbers of references she made to Edouard Louis - wasn't sure if she'd just read a book of his, or if he's a wider influence.

Fascinating thread for me as it plays into my thoughts on two books I am currently reading -- All Fours by Miranda July and Ladder of Years by Anne Tyler. To me, both are about a woman's "midlife crisis," but their worlds are completely different. I can relate to Tyler's but July's is so different from mine. And I find July's world weird and her character over-the-top. I just cannot imagine living like that. The books were written 29 years apart, so that's a big part of the difference. And the authors are 33 years apart in age. I am more than two decades older than July while a decade younger than Tyler so I suspect my dislike of July's book and like of Tyler's book has a lot to do with my world experience.

And that relates, I think, to my like of Parade. While I am challenged by the art I relate to the world.

Paul wrote: "Alwynne wrote: "The interview with Cusk centred on Parade here might help"

Thanks. I listened to the Shakespeare and Co podcast interview that the Chu linked to, which is also with Adam Biles. The..."

Thanks Paul, all very pertinent points. Your observation about Lacey and the American South is something I've been wondering about. I recently finished a book by an Irish academic Miranda Corcoran which ties various manifestations of American gothic from Poe onwards to the regions in which the work arose. She reflects on the ways in which the South seems to function as a repository for those things that liberal America would rather not own/confront from shameful histories to contemporary social divides.

Long story from Cusk in the Yale Review - in the style of Parade but I don’t think it is from the book (but has been quite a while since I read it)

https://yalereview.org/article/rachel...

Yale Review generally work checking out - Katie Kitamura and Sarah Bernstein also in this issue.