Sunday, June 5, 2022

Subway Odyssey

by
Paul Theroux









New Yorkers say some terrible things about the subway - that they hate it, or are scared stiff of it, or that it deserves to go broke. ''I haven't been down there in years,'' is a common enough remark from a city dweller. Even people who ride it seem to agree that there is more original sin among subway passengers. And more desperation, too, making you think of choruses of ''O dark dark dark. They all go into the dark. ...''

''Subway'' is not its name, because, strictly speaking, about half of it is elevated. But which person who has ridden it lately is going to call it by its right name, ''the Rapid Transit''?

You can wait a long time for some trains and, as in T.S. Eliot's ''East Coker,'' often ... an underground train, in the tube, stops too long between stations And the conversation rises and slowly fades into silence And you see behind every face the mental emptiness deepen Leaving only the growing terror of nothing to think about. (From ''East Coker'' in ''Four Quartets,'' copyright c 1943 by T.S. Eliot; copyright c 1971 by Esme Valerie Eliot. Reprinted by permission of Harcourt Brace Jovanovich Inc.).

The subway is frightful looking. It has paint and signatures all over its aged face. It has been vandalized from end to end. It smells so hideous you want to put a clothespin on your nose, and it is so noisy the sound actually hurts. Is it dangerous? Ask anyone, and, without thinking, he will tell you there must be about two murders a day on the subway.

You have to ride it for a while to find out what it is and who takes it and who gets killed on it. I spent a freezing week in December doing little else except riding the subway. Having already ridden the subways of a dozen cities, each one typifying the city above it - the dusty charm of the Buenos Aires Subterranean, the marmoreal splendor of the Washington Metro - I wondered if the system of tunnels underneath New York reflected the city's unique neuroticism.

I like the wildness of New York. But to write about its subway I would have to penetrate that wildness. It would be like exploring the labyrinthine Mato Grosso of Brazil. I mounted a series of expeditions to discover a way through that labyrinth.

Each morning, I decided on a general direction, and then I set off, sometimes sprinting to the end of the line and making my way back slowly; or else stopping along the way and va rying my route back. I went from midtown to Jamaica Estates in Queen s, and returned via Coney Island. You can get anywhere you want i n New

York on the subway. There are 230 route miles on the system - twice as many as the Paris Metro - and there are 458 stations. I saw most of those stations. The trains run all night - in London they shut down before midnight. (The New York subway isn't the only system with 24-hour daily service; the trains in Chicago and Philadelphia also run all night.) New York's one-price token system is one of the fairest and most sensible in the world; London's multifare structure is clumsy, ridiculous and a wasteful sop to the unions; Tokyo's, while just as complicated, is run by computers which spit tickets at you and then belch out your change.

The Moscow Metro has grandiose chandeliers to light some stations, but the New York subway has hopeful signs, like the one at 96th Stree t and Br oadway: ''New tunnel lighting is being installed at thisarea as part of a Major Rehabilitation Program. Completion is expected in t he summer of 1980.'' They are over a year late in finishing, bu t at least they know there's a problem.

The subway is full of surprises. It has what are probably the longest rides of any subway in the world, the biggest stations, the most track, the most police officers. It is a gift to any connoisseur of dubious superlatives: It has the filthiest trains, the most bizarre graffiti, the noisiest wheels, the craziest passengers, the most macabre crimes.

Three and a half million fares a day pass through it, and in 1981 the total number of murder victims on the subway amounted to 13. This figure does not include suicides (one a week) or ''space cases'' - people who quite often get themselves jammed between the train and the platform.

The subway looks like a deathtrap. It's not at all like the BART system in San Francisco, where people are constantly chattering, saying, ''I'm going to my father's wedding,'' or ''I'm looking after my Mom's children,'' or ''I've got a date with my fiancee's boyfriend.'' The New York subway is a serious matter - the rackety train, the silent passengers, the occasional scream.

No one speaks except to the person on his immediate right or left, and only then if they are very old friends or else married. Avoiding the stranger's gaze is what the subway passenger does best. Most sit bolt upright, with fixed expressions, ready for anything. As a New York City subway passenger, you are J. Alfred Prufrock - you ''prepare a face to meet the faces that you meet.'' Those new to the subway have the strangest expressions, like my English friend who told me there was only one way to survive the subway: ''You have to look as if you're the one with the meat cleaver. You have to go in with your eyes flashing.''

To appear inconspicuous on the subway, many people read. Usually they read The Daily News, and a few read Nowy Dziennik, which is the same thing in Polish; The New York Times is less evident, maybe because it takes two hands to read it. But the Bible is very popular, along with religious tracts and the Holy Koran and Spanish copies of The Watchtower; lots of boys study for their bar mitzvah on the F line in Queens. I saw ''The Bragg Toxicless Diet'' on the B train and ''La Pratique du Fran,cais Parle'' on the RR.

All over the system riders read lawbooks: ''The Interpretation of Contracts,'' ''The Law of Torts,'' ''Maritime Law.'' The study of law is a subway preoccupation, and it is especially odd to see all these lawbooks in this lawless atmosphere. The Transit Authority's police officers on the vandalized trains create the same impression of incongruity. When I first saw the police, they looked mournful to me, but after I got to know them I realized that most of them are not mournful at all, just overworked and doing a thankless job.

We were at Flushing Avenue, on the GG line, talking about rules for riding the subway. You need rules: The subway is like a complex - and diseased - circulatory system. Some people liken it to a sewer and others hunch up their shoulders and mutter about being in the bowels of the earth.

I said, ''Keep away from isolated cars, I suppose,'' and one of the two plainclothes transit policemen I was with said, ''Never display jewelry.''

Just then, a man walked by, and he had Chinese coins - the old kind with a hole through the middle - woven somehow into his hair. There were enough coins in that man's hair for a swell night out in old Shanghai, but robbing him would have involved scalping him.

There was a woman at the station, too. She was clearly crazy. She was saying, ''I'm a member of the medical profession.'' She had no teeth, and plastic bags were taped around her feet. I glanced at her and made sure she kept her distance. (The previous day, a crazy old lady like her came at me and shrieked, ''Ah'm goin' cut you up!'' This was at Pelham Parkway, on the No. 2 IRT line in the Bronx. I left the car at the next stop, Bronx Park East, where the zoo is, though who could be blamed for thinking that, in New York City, the zoo is everywhere?) Then a Moslem unflapped his prayer mat and spread it on the platform and knelt on it, just like that, and was soon on all fours, beseeching Allah and praising the Prophet Moh ammed. This is not remarkable. People pray or sell religion on t he subway all the time. ''Hallelujah, brothers and sisters,'' the man with the leaflets says on the BMT-RR line at Prospect Avenue in Broo klyn. ''I love Jesus! I used to be a wino!'' And Moslems beg and push their green plastic cups at passengers, and try to sell them copi es of something called ''Arabic Religious Classics.'' It is winter a nd Brooklyn, but the menare dressed for the Great Nafud Desert, or Ji dda or Medina - skullcap, galabia, sandals.

''And don't sit next to the door,'' the second police officer said. We were still talking about rules. ''A lot of these snatchers like to play the doors.'' The first o fficer said, ''It's a good idea to keep near the conductor. He 's got a telephone. So does the man in the token booth. At night, sti ck around the token booth until the train comes in.''

''Although,'' the second officer said, ''a few years ago, some kids filled a fire extinguisher with gasoline and pumped it into a token booth at Broad Channel. There were two ladies inside, but before they could get out the kids set the gas on fire. The booth just exploded like a bomb, and the ladies died. It was a revenge thing. One of the kids had gotten a summons for theft of service - not paying his fare.'' (One of the teen-agers got a prison term of up to four years for cooperating with the police; the other two were given sentences of 15 years to life imprisonment.)

Just below us, at Flushing Avenue, there was a stream running between the tracks. It gurgled and glugged down the whole length of the long platform. It gave the station the atmosphere of a sewer - dampness and a powerful smell. And there was a rat. It was only my third rat in a week of riding the subway, but this one was twice the size of rats I've seen elsewhere. I thought, Rats as big as cats.

''Stay with the crowds. Keep away from quiet stairways. The stairways at 41st and 43d are usually quiet, but 42d is always busy - that's the one to use.''

So many rules! It's not like taking a subway at all; it's like walking through the woods - through dangerous jungle, rather. Do this; don't do that.

''Last May,'' the first officer said, ''six guys attempted to murder someone at Forest Parkway, on the J line. It was a whole gang against this one guy. Then they tried to burn the station down with Molotov cocktails. We stopped that, too.''

The man who said this was 6 feet 4, 281 pounds. He carried a .38 in a shoulder holster and wore a bulletproof vest. He had a radio, a can of Mace and a blackjack.

The other day a teen-ager - 5 feet 6, 135 pounds -tried to mug him. The boy slapped the plainclothesman across the face while he was seated on a train, minding his own business. The boy said, ''Give me your money.'' He threatened him and kept punching. Finally, the plainclothesman stood up; the boy was still saying, ''Give me all your money!'' The plainclothesman took out his badge and his pistol and said, ''I'm a police officer and you're under arrest.'' ''I was just kidding!'' the boy said, but it was too late.

I laughed at the thought of someone trying to mug this well-armed giant. ''Rule One for the subway,'' he said. ''Want to know what it is?'' He looked up and down the Flushing Avenue platform, at the old lady and the Moslem and the running water and the vandalized signs. ''Rule One is - don't ride the subway if you don't have to.''

A lot of people say that. I did not believe it when he said it, and after a week of riding the trains I still don't. The subway is New York City's best hope. The streets are impossible; the highways are a failure; there is nowhere to park. The private automobile has no future in this city whatsoever. This is plainest of all to the people who own and, frightened of the subway, use cars in the city; they know, better than anyone, that the car is the last desperate old-fangled fling of a badly planned transport system. What is amazing is that back in 1904 a group of businessmen solved New York's transport problems for centuries to come. What an engineering marvel they eventually created in this underground railway! And how amazed they would be to see what it has become, how foul-seeming to the public mind.

Yet, while some New Yorkers seldom set foot in the subway, other New Yorkers live there, moving from station to station, whining for money and eating yesterday's bagels and sleeping on benches. The police in New York call such people ''skells'' and are seldom harsh with them. ''Wolfman Jack'' is a skell, living underground at the Hoyt-Schermerhorn station in Brooklyn, on the GG line. The police there give him food and clothes, and if you ask him how he is, he says, ''I'm getting some calls.'' Call them colorful characters and they don't look so dangerous or pathetic.

These ''skells'' are not merely down and out. Many are insane, chucked out of New York hospitals in the earl y 1970's when it was decided that long-term institutionalization was doing them little good. ''They were resettled in rooms or hotels,'' said Ruth Cohen, a psychiatric social worker at Bellevue Hospital. ''But many of them can't follow through. They get lost, they wander the streets. They're not violent, suicidal or dangerous enough for Bellevue -this is an acute-care hospital. But these people w ho wander the subway - once they're on their own, they begin to decompensate.''

Ah' m goin' cut you up: That woman who threatened to slash me was decompensating. Here are a few more decompensating - one is weeping on a wooden bench at Canal Street; another has wild hair and is spitting into a Coke can. One man - who is decompensating in a useful way - has a bundle of brooms and begins to sweep the whole of the change area a t Grand Central; another is scrubbing the stairs with scraps of paper at 14th Street. They drink, they scream, they gibber like monkeys. They sit on subway benches with their knees drawn up, just as patients used to do in mental hospitals. A police officer told me, ''There are more serious things than people screaming on trains.'' This is so, and yet the deranged person who sits next to you and begin s howling at you seems at the time very serious indeed.

The subway, which is many things, is also a madhouse. The subway is frightening - and what makes it even more frightening is the fact that it is so very easy for a passenger to get lost on it.

There is nearly always a bus stop near the subway entrance. People waiting for the bus have a special pitying gaze for people entering the dark hole in the sidewalk that is the subway entrance. It is sometimes not pity, but fear; often they look like miners' wives watching their menfolk going down the pit.

The stranger's sense of disorientation down below is immediate. The station is all tile and iron and dampness; it has bars and turnstiles and steel grates. It has the look of an old prison or a monkey cage. Buying a token, the stranger may ask directions, but the token booth - reinforced, burglarproof, bulletproof - renders the reply incoherent. And subway directions are a special language.

''A train ... downtown ... express to the shuttle ... change at 96th for the 2 ... uptown ... the Lex ... CC ... LL ... the local ...''

Most New Yorkers refer to the subway by the now-obsolete forms: IND, IRT, BMT. No one intention-ally tries to confuse the stranger; it is just that, where the subway is concerned, precise directions are very hard to convey. Verbal directions are incomprehensible; printed ones are defaced. The signboards and subway maps are not decipherable beneath layers of graffiti.

People who don't take the subway say that these junky pictures are folk art, a protest against the metropolitan grayness, and what a wonderful sense of color these scribblers have - which is complete nonsense. The graffiti are bad, violent and destructive; they are antiart, and the people who praise them are either malicious or lazy-minded. The graffiti are so extensive and so dreadful it is hard to believe that the perpetrators are not the recipients of some enormous foundation grant.

That Andy Warhol, the stylish philistine, has said, ''I love graffiti,'' is almost reason enough to hate them. One is warier still of Norman Mailer, who naively encouraged this public scrawling in his book ''The Faith of Graffiti.''

Displacing signs and maps, blacking out train windows and obliterating instructions, subway graffiti are deeply menacing. ''In case of emergency'' is crosshatched with a felt tip; a yard-long signature obscures ''These seats are for the elderly and disabled''; ''The subway tracks are very dangerous. If the train should stop, do not -'' the rest is black and unreadable.

There are few cars out of the 6,500 on the system in which the maps have not been torn out or defaced. Assuming the stranger has boarded the train, he (irrespective of his race) can only feel panic when, searching for a clue to his route, he sees in the map frame the message, ''Guzman - Ladron y Asesino.''

He gets off the train, and then his troubles really begin. He may be in the South Bronx or the upper reaches of Broadway on the No. 1 line, or on any one of a dozen lines that traverse Brooklyn. He gets off the train, which is covered with graffiti, and steps onto a station platform, which is covered with graffiti. It is possible that none of the signs will be legible. Not only will the stranger not know where he is, but the stairways will be splotched and stinking -no ''uptown,'' no ''downtown,'' no ''exit.'' It is also possible that not a single soul will be around, and the most dangerous stations - ask any transit police officer - are the emptiest. Of course, the passenger might just want to sit on a broken bench and, taking Mailer's word for it, contemplate the macho qualities of the graffiti; on the other hand, he is more likely to want to get the hell out of there.

This is the story that most people tell of subway fear - the predicament of having boarded t he wrong train and gotten off at a distant station; of being on the empty platform, waiting for a train that shows no sign of coming. Then the vandalized station signs, the crazy semiliterate messages, the monkey scratches on the walls, the dampness, the neglect, the visible evidence o f destruction and violence - they combine to produce a sense of disgust and horror.

In every detail it is like a nightmare, complete with rats and a tunnel and a low ceiling. It is manifest suffocation straight out of Poe. And some of these stations have long platforms - you have to squint to see what is at the far end. These distances intensify a person's fear, and so do all the pillars behind which any ghoul could be lurking. Is it any wonder that, having once strayed into this area of subterranean gothic, people decide that the subway is not for them?

But those who tell this story seldom have a crime to report. They have experienced shock and fear and have gone weak in the knees, but it has been a private little horror. In most cases the person will have come to no harm. Yet he will undoubtedly remember his fear on that empty station for the rest of his life.

When New Yorkers recount an experience like this they are invariably speaking of something that happened on another line, not their usual route. Their own line is fairly safe, they'll say; it's cleaner than the others, it's got a little charm, it's kind of dependable, they've been taking it for years. This sense of loyalty to a regularly used line is the most remarkable thing about the subway passenger in New York. It is, in fact, a jungle attitude.

''New York is a jungle,'' the tourist says, and he believes he has made a withering criticism. But all very large cities are jungles: They are hard to read, hard to penetrate; strange people live in them; and they contain mazy areas of great danger. The jungle aspect of cities (and of New York City in particular) is the most interesting thing about them - the way people behave in this jungle, and adapt to it; the way they change it or are changed by it.

In any jungle, the pathway is a priority. Most subway passengers were shown how to ride it by parents or friends. Habit becomes instinct. The passenger knows where he is going because he seldom diverges from his usual route. But that is also why, unless you are getting off at precisely his stop, he cannot tell you how to get where you're going.

The only other way of learning how to use the subway is by teaching yourself. This is very hard work and requires imagination and intelligence. It means navigating in four dimensions. No one can do it idly, and I doubt that many people take up subway riding in their middle years.

Riders even assign a specific character to each line. For some people, the IRT - the oldest line - is dependable, with patches of elegance (those beaver mosaics at Astor Place commemorating John Jacob Astor's fur business); for others, it is dangerous and dirty. One person praises the IND; another damns it. ''I've got a soft spot for the BMT,'' a woman told me, but found it hard to explain why. ''Take the A train,'' I was told. ''That's the best one, like the song.'' But some of the worst stations are on the (very long) A line. The CC, Eighth Avenue local, was described to me as ''scuzz'' - disreputable -but this train, running from Bedford Park Boulevard, the Bronx, via Manhattan and Brooklyn, to Rockaway Park, Queens, covers a distance of 32.39 miles. For some of these miles, it is pleasant and for others it is not.

There is part of the No. 2 IRT line - from Nostrand to New Lots Avenue in Brooklyn - that is indisputably bad. It is dangerous and ugly, and when you get to New Lots Avenue you cannot imagine why you went. The transit police call this line ''the Beast.'' But people in the know - the police, the Transit Authority, the people who travel throughout the system - say that one line is much like another.

''Is this line bad?'' I asked Robert E. Huber of the Transit Authority, and pointed to the map in his office. ''The whole system is bad,'' he said. ''From 1904 until just a few years ago it went unnoticed. People took it for granted. In 1975, the first year of the fiscal crisis, Mayor Beame ordered cutbacks. They started a program of deferred maintenance - postponed servicing - and just attended to the most serious deficiencies. After four or five years of deferred maintenance, the bottom fell out. In January-February 1981, 25 percent of the trains were out of service, and things got worse - soon a 30-minute trip was taking an hour and a half. No one was putting any money into it. But of course they never had. It was under-capitalized from the beginning. Now there is decay everywhere, but there is also a real determination to reverse that trend and get it going right.''

That determination may be there, but last year long-delayed maintenance of aging equipment exacted a terrible toll. In July, when an antiquated signal system failed, a Manhattan-bound IRT train slammed into the rear of a second train that had halted because of signal trouble in a darkened tunnel in Brooklyn. A motorman was killed and 135 passengers were injured.

On Dec. 15, just south of the Times Square station, a motor on a West Side IRT train fell from its bracket, snagged on a track switch, causing the car behind it to skid off the tracks and tear through nine steel tunnel supports. The derailment, which occurred at5:50 A.M., injured 10 of the 50 persons on board and tied up service on the heavily traveled route for most of the day. If it had happened an hour later, during the rush, the accident would have been catastrophic. It was the third time in 1981 t hat a motor had dropped from a moving train onto the tracks.

Feelings of foreboding notwithstanding, the Permanent Citizens Advisory Committee to the Metropolitan Transportation Authority last year ranked the New York subway system as the second safest in the country - behind the Metro in Washington. (The last passenger fatality in a New York subway collision took place in 1970 when a disabled IND train smashed into a crowded morning rush-hour train while switching tracks near the Roosevelt Avenue station in Queens. Two passenger s were killed and 60 injured.) That a spanking-new system like t he Washington Metro is not immune to fatal accidents was sadly brought home earlier this month when a rush-hour crash killed three persons and injured 25. It was the Washington system's first fatal accident in its six years of operation.

It is the obvious decay and vandalism on the subways that conveys the feeling of lawlessness. Indeed, the first perception of subway crime came with the appearance of widespread graffiti in 1970. It was then that passengers took fright, and ridership, which had been declining slowly since the 1950's, dropped rapidly. Passengers felt threatened, and newspapers gave prominence to subway crime.

Today, all the trains carry crime with them, picking it up in one area and carrying it to another. The South Bronx is regarded as a high-risk area, but seven lines pass through it, taking vandals and thieves all over the system. There is a species of vandalism that was once peculiar to the South Bronx: Boys would swing on the stanchions - those stainless-steel poles in the center of the car - and, raising themselves sideways until they were parallel with the floor, they would kick hard against a window and burst it. Now this South Bronx window-breaking technique is endemic throughout the system.

Except for the people who have the misfortune of traveling on ''the Beast,'' no one can claim that his train is much better or worse than any other.

The majority of subway crime is theft - bag snatching and pickpocketing. This is followed by robbery - the robber using a gun or knife. There are about 32 robberies or snatchings a day in the system, and one or two cases of aggravated assault a day. This takes care of many ''Part 1 Offenses'' - the serious ones.

Serious crimes in the subways ran 60 percent to 65 percent higher last December than for December 1980. That increase was not the largest for a month, said Edward J. Silberfarb, a spokesman for the New York Transit Authority police. The record was the 80 percent rise of August 1980 over August 1979, when - because of the high price of gold - there was a sudden spurt of chain snatchings. (The 15,812 felonies reported in the transit system in 1981 represented an increase of 13.7 percent over the preceding year.)

People do get mugged. I asked a uniformed Transit Authority police officer what reaction he got upon entering a car. ''A big sigh of relief,'' he said. ''You can actually hear it. People smile at me. They're relieved. But the ones who are the most pleased to see me are the handicapped people and the old people. They're the ones who get mugged mostly.''

That is the disgraceful part: The victims of subway crime, according to some transit policemen I talked to, are most often the old, the mentally retarded, the crippled, the blind, the weak. The majority of victims are women. Minorities constitute the next largest category of victim: a black person in a white area, a Hispanic in a black area, a white in a Hispanic area. Of course, the old and handicapped are also minorities, regarded as easy targets and defenseless. But cities can turn people into members of a minority group quite easily. What makes the New Yorker so instinctively wary is perhaps the thought that anyone who boards the wrong train, or gets off at the wrong stop, is capable of being in the minority.

Of course, many crimes on the subway go unreported, but this is also true outside the transit system. In one precinct, there might be 77 murders in a year, which makes the 13 in the subway in 1981 look mild by comparison. There were 35 rapes and rape attempts last year, which, while nothing to crow about, is not as bad as is widely believed (''I'll bet they have at least one rape a day,'' a woman told me, and for that reason she never took the subway).

The perception of crime is widespread, despite the fact that statistically the experience of it is quite small. The whiff of criminality, the atmosphere of viciousness, is so strong in the stations and trains that it does little good to say that, relatively speaking, crime is not that serious in the subway. ''What do those statistics matter to someone who is in a car and a gang of six guys starts teasing and then threatening the passengers?'' said Arthur S. Penn, a New York lawyer. ''Or that other familiar instance - you get into a car and there's one guy way down at the end sitting all by himself, and the rest of the people are crowded up at this end of the car. You know from experience that the man who's sitting alone is crazy, and then, when the train pulls out, he starts screaming. ...''

The most frequent complaint of subway passengers, however, is not about crime. It is, by a wide margin, about delayed trains and slow service. The second largest category of complaint is about the discourtesy of conductors or token sellers; and the third concerns unclean stations. ''Mainly the smell of urine -it's really horrible at some stati ons,'' said Robert Huber of the Transit Authority.

Discomfort, anxiety, fear - these are the responses of most passengers. No wonder people complain that the trains are too slow: When one is fearful, every trip takes too long. No matter that these are among the fastest subway trains in the world. Stan Fischler, in his enthusiastic history of the system, ''Uptown, Downtown,'' gives 55 miles per hour as the speed of an IRT Seventh Avenue express as it careens through the tunnel between the 14th Street and Chambers Street stations. The train going by sounds as if it is full of coal, but when one is inside, it can feel like a trip on ''The Wild Mouse'' at Coney Island.

The most-mugged man in New York must be the white-haired creaky looking fellow in Bedford-Stuyvesant who has had as many as 30 mugging attempts made on him in a single year. And he still rides the subway trains. He's not as crazy as he looks: He is a plainclothesman who works with the transit-police task force in the district once designated ''Brooklyn North.'' He is frequently a decoy. In the weeks before Christmas, he rode the J and the GG and the No. 2 lines looking like a pathetic old man, with two festively wrapped parcels in his shopping bag. He was repeatedly ambushed by unsuspecting muggers; he would pull out his badge and handcuffs and arrest them.

Muggers are not always compliant. In that case, the transit-police officer unholsters his pistol, but not before jamming a colored headband over his head to alert any nearby uniformed officer. Before the advent of headbands, many plainclothesmen were shot by their colleagues in uniform.

''And then we rush in,'' said Sgt. Robert Donnery, who was until early this month the squad commander of the transit-police mobile task force. (He is now a squad sergeant of what has been renamed ''the task force'' - the combined mobile and robbery task forces of 80 plainclothesmen and two detectives.) ''Ninety percent of the guys out there can flatten me, one on one. You've got to come on yelling and screaming: 'You so-and-so! I'm going to kill you!' Unless the suspect is deranged and has a knife or something. In that case, you might have to talk quietly. But if the guy's tough and you go in meek you get sized up very fast.''

The transit police force has 3,000 officers and 13 dogs. It is one of the biggest police forces in the United States and is separate from the New York City police, although the pay and training are exactly the same. It is so separate the men cannot speak to each other on their radios, which many Transit Authority police find inconvenient when chasing a suspect up the subway stairs into the street.

What about the dogs? ''Dogs command respect,'' I was told at transit-police headquarters. ''Think of them as a tool, like a gun or a nightstick. At the moment it's just a test program for high-crime stations, late-night hours, that kind of thing.''

I wondered aloud whether it would work, and the reply was: ''A crime is unlikely to be committed anywhere near one of these dogs.'' The canine squad, doing its part toward taking a bite out of crime, is headquartered on the same floor as the transit-police task force on the mezzanine of the Metropolitan Avenue station of the GG line. Last December, the bulletin board on the plainclothesmen's side was plastered with unit citations and merit awards, and Sergeant Donnery had been made ''Cop of the Month'' in May for a particularly courageous set of arrests. The motto of the mobile task force was ''Soar With the Eagles.'' A sheaf of admiring newspaper clippings testified to their effectiveness. As we talked, the second shift was preparing to set out for the day.

''Morale seems very high,'' I said. The men were joking, watching the old-man decoy spraying his hair and beard white. ''Sure, morale is high,'' Sergeant Donnery said. ''We feel we're getting something accomplished. It isn't easy. Sometimes you have to hide in a porter's room with a mop for four days before you get your man. We dress up as porters, conductors, motormen, track workers. The idea is to give the appearance of being workers. We've got all the uniforms.''

''Plainclothesmen'' is something of a misnomer for the task force, which has enough of a theatrical wardrobe to mount a production of ''Subways Are for Sleeping.''

Standing on the platform at Nassau Avenue on the GG line, Howard Haag and Joseph Minucci looked for all the world like a pair of physical-education teachers on their way to the school gym. They looked tough, but not aggressively so. They a re healthy and well built - but this day some of that was padding : They both wore bulletproof vests. Underneath the ordinary clothes, the men were well armed. Each man carried a .38, a blackjack and a can of Mace. Minucci had a two-way radio.

Haag has been on the transit police force for 17 years; Minucci, for almost seven. Neither has in that time ever fired his gun, though each has an excellent arrest record and a pride in detection. They are funny, alert and indefatigable, and together they make Starsky and Hutch look like a pair of hysterical cream puffs. Their job also seems much ha rder than any city cop's. I had been told repeatedly that the aver age city cop would refuse to work in the conditions that the transit police endure every day. At Nassau Avenue, Minucci told me why.

''Look at the stations! They're dirty, they're cold, they're noisy. If you fire your gun, you'll kill 10 innocent people - you're trapped here. You stand here some days and the cold and the dampness creeps into your bones and you start shivering. And that smell - smell it? - it's like that all the time, and you've got to stand here and breathe it in. Bergen Street station - the snow comes through the bars and you freeze. They call it 'the Ice Box.' Then some days, kids recognize you - they've seen you make a collar - and they swear at you, call you names, try to get you to react, smoke pot right under your nose. 'Here come the D.T.'s' - that's what they call us. It's the conditions. They're awful. You have to take so much from these school kids. And your feet are killing you. So you sit down, read a newspaper, drink coffee, and then you get a rip from a shoefly. ...''

Minucci wasn't angry; he said all this in a smiling, ironical way. Like Howie Haag, he enjoys his work and takes it seriously. A ''shoefly,'' he explained, is a transit-police inspector who rides the subway looking for officers who are goldbricking -although having a coffee on a cold day hardly seemed to me like goldbricking. ''We're not supposed to drink coffee,'' Minucci said, and he went on to define other words of the transit police vocabulary: ''lushworker'' (a person who robs drunks or sleeping passengers); ''flop squad'' (decoys who pretend to be asleep, in order to attract lushworkers).

Just then, as we were talking at Nassau, the station filled with shouting boys -big ones, anywhere from 15 to 18. There seemed to be hundreds of them, and with them came the unmistakable odor of smoldering marijuana. They were boys from Automotive High School, heading south on the GG. They stood on the platform, most of them howling and screaming and sucking smoke out of their fingers, and when the train pulled in they began fighting toward the doors.

''You might see one of these kids being a pain in the neck, writing graffiti or smoking dope or something,'' Howie Haag said. ''And you might wonder why we don't do anything. The reason is we're looking for something serious - robbers, snatchers, assault, stuff like that.''

Minucci said, ''The vandalism squad deals with window kickers and graffiti. Normally we don't.'' Once on the train, the crowd of yelling boys thinned out. I had seen this sort of activity before: Boys get on the subway train and immediately begin walking - they leave the car immediately, saunter through the connecting doors and walk from car to car. I asked Minucci why this was so.

''They're marking the people. See them? They're looking for an old lady near a door or something they can snatch or a pocket they can pick. They're sizing up the situation. They're also heading for the last car. That's where they hang out on this train.''

Howie said, ''They want to see if we'll follow them. If we do, they'll mark us as cops.'' Minucci and Haag did not follow, though at each stop they took cautious looks out of the train, using the reflections in mirrors and windows and seldom looking directly at the rowdy students.

''They play the doors when it's crowded,'' Minucci said. ''Look at that old lady. She's doing everything wrong.'' The woman, in her late 60's, was sitting next to the door. Her wristwatch was exposed and her handbag dangled from the arm closest to the door. Minucci explained that one of the commonest subway crimes was inspired by this posture. The snatcher reaches through the door from the platform and, just before the door shuts, he grabs the bag or watch, or both, and then he is off, the train pulling out with the victim trapped on board.

I wondered if the plainclothesmen would warn her. They didn't. But they watched her closely, and when she got off they got off, too. The woman never knew how well-protected she was.

There were men on the train, drinking wine out of bottles sheathed in paper bags. ''The winos don't cause much trouble,'' Minucci said. ''It's the kids coming home from school. They're the majority of snatchers and robbers.''

Subway crime to a large extent is schoolboy crime. While most crimes are committed between noon and 8 P.M., the greatest number of them take place between 4 P.M. and 7 P.M. For instance, Minucci said,''On the LL line, on Grand Street, there's much more crime than before, because Eastern District High School relocated there. It's mostly larceny and bag snatches.''

It was a salutary experience for me, riding through Brooklyn with Officers Minucci and Haag. Who except a man flanked by two armed plainclothesmen would travel from one end of Brooklyn to the other, walking through housing projects and derelict areas, and waiting for hours at subway stations? It was a perverse hope of mine that we would happen upon a crime, or even be the victims of a mugging attempt. We w ere left alone; things were quiet.

But for the first time in my life I was traveling the hinterland of New York City with my head up, looking people in the eye with curiosity and lingering scrutiny and no fear. It was a shocking experience. I felt at first, with bodyguards, like Haile Selassie, and then I seemed to be looking at an alien land - I had never had the courage to gaze at it so steadily. It was a land impossible to glamorize and hard to describe. It was beat up, with patches of beauty, like a cityscape in China or India - futuristic in a ruined and unpromising way.

Backed up by the plainclothesmen, unafraid, and sticking near the subway, I saw New York in a way I had never seen it before. What surprised me most, after seeing the housing projects and the desperate idleness and the rather fierce and drugged-looking people on these derelict frontiers, was that they had not wrecked more of the subway or perhaps even destroyed it utterly. Uniformed Transit Authority Police Officer John Burgois is in his mid-30's and describes himself as ''of Hispanic origin.'' He has had four citations. Normally he works with the strike force out of midtown Manhattan in areas considered difficult - 34th and Seventh, 34th and Eighth, and Times Square. Officer Burgois told me that the job of the uniformed transit cop is to reassure people by being an obvious presence. The transit cop in uniform also deals with loiterers and fare evaders, assists injured people and lost souls, keeps a watch on public toilets (''toilets attract a lot of crime''). As for drunks: ''We ask drunks to remove themselves.''

I asked Officer Burgois whether he considered his job dangerous. ''Once or twice a year I get bitten,'' he replied. ''Bites are bad. You always need a tetanus shot for human bites.'' One of the largest and busiest change areas on the subway is at Times Square. It is the junction of four main lines, including the shuttle, which operates with wonderful efficiency between Times Square and Grand Central. This, for the Christmas season, was John Burgois's beat. I followed him and for an hour I made notes, keeping track of how he was working.

4:21 - Smoker is warned (smoking is forbidden in the subway, even on ramps and stairs). 4:24 - Panicky shout from another cop: ''There's a woman with a gun downstairs on the platform.'' Officer Burgois gives chase, finds the woman. She is drunk and has a toy pistol. Woman is warned.

4:26 - ''Which way to the Flushing line?'' 4:29 - ''How do I transfer here?'' 4:30 - ''Is this the way to 23d Street?'' 4:37 - ''Donde es Quins Plaza?'' 4:43 - ''Where is the A train?'' As Officer Burgois answers this question, a group of people gather around him. There are four more requests for directions. Since the maps have been vandalized, the lost souls need very detailed directions.

4:59 - Radio call: There is an injured passenger at a certain token booth - a gash on her ankle. Officer Burgois lets another cop attend to it.

5:02 - ''Where ees the shuffle?'' asks a boy carrying an open can of beer. ''Over there,'' Officer Burgois says, ''and dispose of that can. I'm watching you.''

5:10 - Radio call: A man whose wallet has been stolen is at the transit-police cubicle on the Times Square concourse. Officer Burgois steps in to observe. Man: ''What am I going to do?''

Officer: ''The officer in charge will take down the information.''

Man: ''Are you going to catch him?'' Officer: ''We'll prosecute if you can identify him.'' Man: ''I only saw his back.'' Officer: ''That's too bad.'' Man: ''He was tall, thin and black. I had $22 in that wallet.'' Officer: ''You can kiss your money goodbye. Even if we caught him he'd say, 'This is my money.' '' Man: ''This is the first time anything like this has ever happened to me.'' 5:17 - Seeing Officer Burgois, a member of the public says, ''There's two kids on the train downstairs snatching bags - go get them!'' Officer Burgois runs and finds the boys hanging over the gate between trains, the favorite spot for snatching bags from passengers on the platform. Officer Burgois apprehend s t hem. The boys, Troy and Sam, are from the Bronx. They can't remember when they were born; they seem to be about 14 or 15. They deny the y were snatching bags. Each boy has about $35 in his pocket. They ar e sullen, but not at allafraid. Officer Burgois gives them a youth di vision form and says, ''If I catch you again, your mother's going t o pick you up from the station. ...''

5:28 - ''Hey, officer, how do I get to ... ?'' At this point I stopped writing. I could see that it would be repetitious - and so it was, dreary questions, petty crime and obstinate sneaks. But no one bit Officer Burgois. He has been doing this every hour of every working day for 12 1/2 years, and will go on doing it, or something very much like it, for the rest of his working life.

It costs about $25 - and takes about 45 minutes if there is light traffic - to go by taxi from midtown to Kennedy International Airport. For $5 it is possible to go by subway, on the JFK Express - which usually has a transit policeman on board - and the trip takes about 40 minutes (it's another 20 minutes by bus from the last JFK Express subway stop, Howard Beach, to the airline terminals). Critics of this service would like to see it withdrawn, because so few people use it. If that happens, there is another option - the express on the A line to Howard Beach, which takes under an hour and costs 75 cents.

There are ducks at Howard Beach, and herons farther on at Jamaica Bay, and odd watery vistas all the way from Broad Channel to Far Rockaway. The train travels on a causeway past what looked like sleepy villages and wood-frame houses, and it's all ducks and geese until the train reaches the far side of the bay, where the dingier bungalows and the housing projects begin. Then, roughly at Frank Avenue station, the Atlantic Ocean pounds past jetties of black rocks, not far from the tracks, and at Mott Avenue is the sprawling two-story town of Far Rockaway, with its main street and its slaphappy architecture and its ruins. It looks like its sister cities in Ohio and Rhode Island, with just enough trees to hide its dullness, and though part of it is in a state of decay it looks small enough to save.

That was a pleasant afternoon, when I took the train to the Rockaways. Out-of-season Coney Island, on the other hand, was populated by drunks and transvestites and troglodytes, and the whole place looked as if it had been insured and burned. Though it is on the other side of Rockaway Inlet, it is a world away from Rockaway Park.

The subway stations usually reflect what is above ground: Spring Street is raffish, Forest Hills smacks of refinement, Livonia Avenue on the LL looks bombed. People aspire to Bay Ridge and some people say they wouldn't be caught dead in East Harlem - though others are. The Fort Hamilton station leads to the amazing Verrazano-Narrows Bridge and the IRT No. 1 to a ferry landing. By the time I reached 241st Street on the 2, I thought I had got to somewhere near Buffalo, but returning on the 5 and dropping slowly through the Bronx to Lexington Avenue and then to lower Manhattan and across on the 4 to Flatbush, I had a sense of unrelieved desolation.

Not long ago, The Daily News ran a series about the subway called ''The Doomsday Express.'' It was about all the catastrophes that are possible on the New York system - spectacular crashes and floods with heavy casualties.

It is easy to frighten people with catastrophes - much harder to convince them that decay and trivial-seeming deterioration can be inexorable. The New York subway system is wearing out, and certain sections are worn out; a large part of it looks hopeless.

There is a strong political commitment to the subway, particularly among down-market Democrats anxious to identify with blue-collar commuters who have no choice but to take the subway. But only money can save it. To this end there is a plan called the ''Five-Year Capital Program'' of $5.8 billion, which won approval from a New York State review panel late last year. The money is to be raised through M.T.A. bonds and will also include Federal, state and city grants. It will be the largest infusion of capital in the history of the city's bus and subway system, and will involve fixing and buying cars and buses, retiling and cleaning and lighting stations, restoring maps, windows and signs, repairing tracks and elevated structures - all the day-to-day things which, because they have been ignored, have given the subway and bus system a bad case of arteriosclerosis.

Vital infusions of money aside, there is still the matter of the subway passenger. Most people who live in New York act as if they own the city: It makes some people respectful and turns others into slobs - and that is how they treat the subway. ''I pity you,'' people said when I told them what I was doing. But I ended up admiring the handiwork of the system and hating the people who misused it, the way you hate kids who tear the branches off saplings.


Credits:  This piece was originally published in 1982 in The New York Times.





Friday, May 27, 2022

Sins of the Nins

by
Katha Pollitt





MY idea of hell is to be stranded on a desert island with nothing to read but Anais Nin's diaries, but some people, apparently, can't get enough of them. Her publishers, for instance. Having brought out seven volumes drawn from Nin's adult journals (1931-74) and supplemented those with four early volumes covering her teens and 20's, they are starting all over again with "unexpurgated" versions of the same material.


Carroll Tyson

"Incest," the second volume in this new series (it follows "Henry and June"), displays all the hallmarks of Nin's style -- tremulous and vaporous prose, staggering self-absorption and endless analysis of this or that tiny flutter of emotion. But like all unexpurgated books it is an improvement on the bowdlerized version, if only because it has more sex.

A lot of sex. "Incest" finds Nin living outside Paris and conducting overlapping affairs with Henry Miller, Antonin Artaud and both of her psychoanalysts, Rene Allendy and Otto Rank -- as well as vague and complicated flirtations with Henry's wife, June, Henry's roommate, Fred Perles, and just about every other man mentioned in the index. How she managed to accomplish all this while keeping her banker husband, Hugh Guiler, in the dark is left rather mysterious, especially given that Miller seems to have moved in every time her husband left town, and sometimes when he was home. "When is that fellow Henry going to leave?" he asks plaintively at one point.

These affairs all follow the same pattern: outrageous hero worship and masochistic self-abasement ("I give the woman's only gift: love, love, love") lead to suppressed resentment ("I must always make myself believe I am making a sacrifice for somebody"), disillusionment and a new infatuation with someone else. I found myself losing patience with this cycle, which Nin tended to attribute to the emotional insufficiency of everyone but herself: only she is capable of love, love, love.

But no question about it, Nin is much more readable as a female Don Juan than she was as the dreamy princess in the tower depicted in the earlier series of diaries. When she is not rhapsodizing about her feelings, she can write earthily and entertainingly about sex, although unfortunately not in a way that can be quoted in a family newspaper.

The central "unexpurgated" event of "Incest" is, well, incest. Nin had an affair with her father. It is not quite as horrifying as it sounds: she had seen her father, a well-known pianist and composer, only once in the 20 years following his desertion of the family when she was 11. As depicted here, father and daughter are a matched pair: equally self-infatuated and self-mythologizing, equally sex-obsessed and equally crazy. Her steamy account of their trysts exudes a sense of triumph: at last the cold, aloof father who destroyed her childhood appreciates her at her true worth! But eventually father, too, is found wanting -- as indeed he was.

I was less impressed by the other revelation uncovered in "Incest": the gruesome stillbirth described in the earlier published version of this diary was actually a late-term abortion (Miller was the father). That Nin would have disguised this fact when she published the passage in 1966 is, I think, significant: it shows that she was hardly the bold truth-teller of women's secret experiences that she claimed to be. She knew just how far she could go without risking real controversy and calling into question her image of ethereal femininity and selfless nurturance. In the 1960's, when abortion was illegal, it would have done some good for a well-known older woman to have gone public about her abortion. Now, no thanks to Nin, it's old news.

The history of the abortion passage does, however, raise the question of reliability: how far should we trust the "unexpurgated" diary? After all, we were led to believe that the first series of diaries constituted an amazingly veracious document, in which a woman laid bare her inner life and the mysteries of womanhood. Now we are asked to accept "Henry and June" and "Incest" on the same grounds, although in important respects they falsify the earlier volumes. Like its predecessor, however, the new series consists merely of extracts of the voluminous original manuscript, so how do we know that it, too, is not a carefully crafted cut-and-paste job that omits whatever material undermines the image of Nin that her executors wish the world to see?

The answer is that we do not know. "Incest" should probably be read as middling autobiographical fiction that sometimes rises to the level of first-rate pornography. For the real Anais Nin, and the real story told in the diary, we'll have to wait for her biography. SOME SENSE OF GUILT WEIGHED DOWN ON MY JOY

"I don't feel toward you as if you were my daughter."

"I don't feel as if you were my father."

"What a tragedy. What are we going to do about it? I have met the woman of my life, the ideal, and it is my daughter! I cannot even kiss you as I would like to. I'm in love with my own daughter!"

"Everything you feel, I feel." . . .

Then I wanted to leave him. Still, in some remote region of my being, a revulsion. And he feared the reaction in me. I wanted to run away. I wanted to leave him. But I saw him so vulnerable. And there was something terrible about his lying on his back, crucified, while yet so potent -- something compelling. And I remembered how in all my loves there has been a reaction away -- that I had always been so afraid. And this flight, I would not hurt him with. No, not after the years of pain my last rejection had caused him. But at this moment, after the passion, I had at least to go to my room, to be alone. I was poisoned by this union. I was not free to enjoy the splendor of it, the magnificence of it. Some sense of guilt weighed down on my joy and continued to weigh down on me, but I could not reveal this to him. He was free -- he was passionately free -- he was older and more courageous. I would learn from him. I would at last be humble and learn something from my father!

We spent another day in his room. He moved with great difficulty and pain, yet he shaved and bathed. He sat in an armchair and read me his manuscript on musical opinions and sketches. In between, there were autobiographical sketches and poems -- romantic poems. The whole book was romantic, idealistic, not as muscular or as dynamic as his own life. It is his own life which is a masterpiece.

At night -- caresses. He begs me to undress and lie at his side. His caressing suppleness and mine, the feelings which run from head to toes -- vibrations of all the senses, a thousand new vibrations . . . a new union, a unison of delicacies, subtleties, exaltations, keener awareness and perception and tentacles. A joy which spreads in vast circles, a joy for me without climax because of that deeper, inner holding back. Yet missing only the climax and revealing by this very absence what intensity he and I could bring to the envelopment, to the radius and rainbows of a climax.

We sat up until two or three, talking. "What a tragedy that I find you and cannot marry you." It was he who was preoccupied with enchanting me. It was he who talked, who was anxious, who displayed all his seductions. It was I who was being courted, magnificently. And he said, "How good it is that I should be courting you. Women have always sought me out, courted me. I have only been gallant with them."

Endless stories about women. Exploits. Teaching me at the same time the last expertness in love -- the games, the subtleties, new caresses. I had at moments the feeling that here was Don Juan indeed, Don Juan who had possessed more than a thousand women, and I was lying there learning from him, and he was telling me how much talent I had, how amazing an amorous sensibility, how beautifully tuned and responsive I was. . . . "You walk like a courtesan from Greece. You seem to offer your sex when you walk." -- From "Incest."

Credits:  This article originally appeared in 1992 in The New York Times.

Monday, April 18, 2022

the mother by Gwendolyn Brooks




Abortions will not let you forget.
You remember the children you got that you did not get,
The damp small pulps with a little or with no hair,
The singers and workers that never handled the air.
You will never neglect or beat
Them, or silence or buy with a sweet.
You will never wind up the sucking-thumb
Or scuttle off ghosts that come.
You will never leave them, controlling your luscious sigh,
Return for a snack of them, with gobbling mother-eye.

I have heard in the voices of the wind the voices of my dim killed children.
I have contracted. I have eased
My dim dears at the breasts they could never suck.
I have said, Sweets, if I sinned, if I seized
Your luck
And your lives from your unfinished reach,
If I stole your births and your names,
Your straight baby tears and your games,
Your stilted or lovely loves, your tumults, your marriages, aches, and your deaths,
If I poisoned the beginnings of your breaths,
Believe that even in my deliberateness I was not deliberate.
Though why should I whine,
Whine that the crime was other than mine?—
Since anyhow you are dead.
Or rather, or instead,
You were never made.
But that too, I am afraid,
Is faulty: oh, what shall I say, how is the truth to be said?
You were born, you had body, you died.
It is just that you never giggled or planned or cried.

Believe me, I loved you all.
Believe me, I knew you, though faintly, and I loved, I loved you
All.




Credits: This poem appears online at Poets.org,

Tuesday, April 5, 2022

With Mercy for the Greedy (For my friend, Ruth, who urges me to make an appointment for the Sacrament of Confession)

 by

Anne Sexton






Dora Maar


Concerning your letter in which you ask
me to call a priest and in which you ask
me to wear The Cross that you enclose;
your own cross,
your dog-bitten cross,
no larger than a thumb,
small and wooden, no thorns, this rose—

I pray to its shadow,
that gray place
where it lies on your letter ... deep, deep.
I detest my sins and I try to believe
in The Cross. I touch its tender hips, its dark jawed face,
its solid neck, its brown sleep.

True. There is
a beautiful Jesus.
He is frozen to his bones like a chunk of beef.
How desperately he wanted to pull his arms in!
How desperately I touch his vertical and horizontal axes!
But I can’t. Need is not quite belief.

All morning long
I have worn
your cross, hung with package string around my throat.
It tapped me lightly as a child’s heart might,
tapping secondhand, softly waiting to be born.
Ruth, I cherish the letter you wrote.

My friend, my friend, I was born
doing reference work in sin, and born
confessing it. This is what poems are:
with mercy
for the greedy,
they are the tongue’s wrangle,
the world's pottage, the rat's star.


Credit:  This poem can be found online at Poetry Foundation.

Sunday, January 2, 2022

Magical Materialism




by
Kathryn A. Kopple




Salvador Dalí



I’m spread out in front of the television watching Nature in high definition. There’s something heroic and tragic about the swishing lizard, the way it risks a dune, the tiny sawing tail erasing its footprints. A blur. I should really call the occultist. Instead, I’ve spent all day collecting empty bottles to string up as makeshift wind chimes—now I’ve decided to consign them all to the trash. If I had a new prescription, I could search the Yellow Pages. Instead, it too goes into the bin. It’s not as if I don’t see the problem. Surely, I mean oculist. Surely, I don’t mean, a second kind of sight is what is needed here.



Credits:  This poem first appeared in the 2016 edition of concīs.

Tuesday, December 7, 2021

A Conversation with Theodor W. Adorno (Spiegel, 1969)






Years and years ago, the host of this blog went to a conference on literature at which the keynote speakers were poet Charles Bernstein and philosopher Jürgen Habermas. There was a liveliness in the air, a hilarity, that lingered after Bernstein finished speaking. What can you say? He was extremely funny. We were still wiping the tears from our eyes and giggling audibly when Habermas took the stage, shuffled some papers, looked out into the audience and said: "Time to hunker down." It made us laugh harder because... well, Habermas. The Frankfurt School. Critical apparatus heavier than lead and yet illuminating. Never was this more true than of the Frankfurt School's Theodor Adorno, who explained his position on hunkering down versus action in this interview with the magazine staff of Der Spiegel.








SPIEGEL: Professor Adorno, two weeks ago, the world still seemed in order. . .

ADORNO: Not to me.

SP: You said that your relations with the students were not strained. In your courses, you said, discussions were fruitful, sober, and untainted by personal disturbances. But now you have cancelled your lecture.

A: I did not cancel my lecture for the entire semester, but only un­til further notice. I hope to start up again in a few weeks. All colleagues do this when their lectures are so massively disrupted.

SP: Were you subjected to violence?

A: Not physical violence, but so much noise was made that my lec­ture would have been drowned by it. That was obviously the plan.

SP: Are you repulsed only by the manner in which students today take action against you—students who once were on your side—or did their political goals also disturb you? After all, it is fair to say that there used to be agreement between you and the rebels.

A: That is not the dimension in which our differences play them­selves out. Recently I said in a television interview that, even though I had established a theoretical model, I could not have foreseen that people would try to implement it with Molotov cocktails. This sentence has been cited numerous times, but it requires substantial interpretation.

SP: How would you interpret it today?

A: In my writings, I have never offered a model for any kind of ac­tion or for some specific campaign. I am a theoretical human being who views theoretical thinking as lying extraordinarily close to his artistic in­tentions. It is not as if I had turned away from praxis only recently; my thinking always has stood in a rather indirect relationship to praxis. My thinking has perhaps had practical consequences in that some of its mo­tifs have entered consciousness, but I have never said anything that was immediately aimed at practical actions. Ever since the first bedlam was organized against me in 1967 in Berlin, certain student groups have time and again attempted to force me into solidarity, demanding practical ac­tions of me. I have refused.

SP: But Critical Theory does not wish to keep conditions as they are. The SDS students learned this from you. You, Professor Adorno, now refuse practical action. Are you not cultivating a mere “liturgy of cri­tique,” as Dahrendorf claims? 

A: In the case of Dahrendorf, a tone of fresh and cheerful convic­tion reigns supreme: If only you change little things here and there, then perhaps everything will be better.  I cannot accept this presupposition. But among the APO, I always encounter the compulsive pressure to de­liver oneself, to join in; this is something I have resisted since my earliest youth. And in that area nothing has changed in me. I attempt to put into words what I see and what I think. But I cannot predicate this on what will be done with it or what will become of it.

SP: Scholarship in the ivory tower, then?

A: I am not at all afraid of the term “ivory tower.” This term has cer­tainly seen better days, as when Baudelaire employed it. But since you bring up the ivory tower: I believe that a theory is much more capable of having practical consequences owing to the strength of its own objec­tivity than if it had subjected itself to praxis from the start. Today’s un­fortunate relationship between theory and praxis consists precisely in the fact that theory is subjected to a practical pre-censorship. For in­stance, people wish to forbid me to put into words simple things that show the illusionary character of many of the political goals that certain students have.

SP: But these students apparently have a large following.

A: A small group of students succeeds time and again in enforcing loyalty, something which the vast majority of leftist students may not fully resist. But I wish to emphasize again the following: They simply cannot refer to models of action that I allegedly gave them in order then to place me at odds with these models. There are no such models.

SP: Yet it is the case that students refer, at times very directly, at other times indirectly, to your critique of society. Without your theories, the student protest movement might not even have developed.

A: I do not wish to deny that. Nevertheless, it is difficult for me to assess this connection fully. I would like to believe, for instance, that a critique of the manipulation of public opinion—which I consider legiti­mate even in its demonstrative form—would not have been possible without the chapter on the culture industry in the Dialectic of Enlighten­ment by Horkheimer and myself. But I think that one often conceives the connection between theory and praxis too reductively. If one has taught and published for twenty years with the intensity that I have, it does en­ter into general consciousness.

SP: And thus also into praxis?

A: Possibly, but not necessarily so. In our writings, the value of so-called individual actions is delimited by an emphasis on societal totality.

SP: But how would one go about changing societal totality without individual action?

A: This is asking too much of me. In response to the question “What is to be done?” I usually can only answer “I do not know.” I can only analyze relentlessly what is. In the process, I am reproached in the fol­lowing manner: “If you criticize, you have to say how to do better.” But I consider this a bourgeois prejudice. Historically, there have been countless instances in which precisely those works that pursued purely theoretical intentions altered consciousness and, by extension, societal reality.

SP: But in your writings you have set Critical Theory apart from other kinds of theory. It should not merely describe reality empirically, but also should consider [mit bedenken] the proper organization of society.

A: Here, I was concerned with a critique of positivism. Note that I said also consider [mit bedenken]. In no way does this sentence suggest that I would be so presumptuous as to tell people how to act.

SP: You once said, however, that Critical Theory should “lift the rock under which barbarism breeds.” If the students are now throwing this rock—is this so incomprehensible?

A: Certainly not incomprehensible. I believe that their actionism [Aktionismus] can essentially be traced back to despair, because peo­ple sense how little power they actually have to change society. But I am equally convinced that these individual actions are predestined to fail; this also proved to be the case during the May revolt in France. 

SP: So if individual actions are pointless, is not the “critical impo­tence,” of which the SDS has accused you, the only thing that remains?

A: There is a sentence by Grabbe that reads: “For nothing but de­spair can save us.” This is provocative, but not at all dumb. I cannot fault someone living in our world today for feeling despairing, pes­simistic, and negative. Those who compulsively shout down their objec­tive despair with the noisy optimism of immediate action in order to lighten their psychological burden are much more deluded. 

SP: Your colleague Jürgen Habermas, also a proponent of Critical Theory, has now conceded in an essay that the students have developed an “imaginative provocationism” and have really managed to change some things. 

A: I would agree with Habermas on this point. I believe that the uni­versity reform, of which we incidentally do not yet know the outcome, would never have been set into motion without the students. I believe that the general attention to processes of dumbing down, which are prevalent in our present society, would never have crystallized without the student movement. And furthermore, to mention something very concrete, I believe that it was only through the investigation, led by Berlin students, of the murder of Ohnesorg that this horrifying story pen­etrated public consciousness at all. With this I wish to say that I in no way close myself off to practical consequences as long as they are trans­parent to me.

SP: And when have they been transparent to you?

A: I participated in demonstrations against Emergency Laws [Not­standsgesetze] , and I have done what I could in the area of criminal law reform. But there is a decisive difference between doing something like that and taking part in the half-crazed activity of throwing rocks at uni­versity institutes.

SP: How would you determine whether or not an action is worth­while?

A: For one thing, this decision depends in large measure on the con­crete situation. For another, I have the strongest reservations against any use of violence. I would have to disown my entire life—my experiences under Hitler and what I have observed of Stalinism—if I did not refuse to participate in the eternal circle of using violence to fight violence. The only meaningfully transformative praxis that I could imagine would be a non-violent one.

SP: Even under a Fascist dictatorship?

A: There certainly may be situations in which things would look dif­ferent. To a real Fascism, one can only react with violence. I am anything but rigid on this point. But I refuse to follow those who, after the murder of countless millions in the totalitarian states, still preach violence today. That is the decisive threshold.

SP: Did students cross that threshold when they attempted to pre­vent the delivery of Springer newspapers through sit-down strikes? 

A: I consider this sit-down strike legitimate.

SP: Was this threshold crossed when students disrupted your lec­tures with noise and sexual theatrics?

A: To think that they did this to me, of all people, someone who has always opposed any kind of erotic repression and sexual taboo! To mock me and to loose three girls dressed up as hippies on me! I found that repulsive. The comic effect achieved by this was nothing more than the reaction of a philistine (Spießbürger) who giggles “he-he!” (der Hihi! kichert) at the sight of a girl with naked breasts. This nonsense was nat­urally planned in advance.

SP: Was this unusual act perhaps intended to ruffle your theory?

A: It seems to me that these actions against me have little to do with the content of my lectures; what is more important to the extreme wing is the publicity. They suffer from the fear of being forgotten. In this way they become slaves of their own publicity. A lecture such as mine, which is attended by about 1000 people, is obviously a magnificent forum for activist propaganda.

SP: Can this deed not also be interpreted as an act of despair? Per­haps the students felt left in the lurch by a theory that they had consid­ered at least capable of being translated into societal praxis?

A: The students did not even attempt to have a discussion with me. What makes my dealings with students so much more difficult today is the prioritization of tactics. My friends and I have the feeling that we have been reduced to mere objects in precisely calculated plans. The idea of minority rights, which after all is constitutive of freedom, no longer plays any role whatsoever. One blinds oneself to the objectivity of the matter [Objektivität der Sache].

SP: And in the face of such abuses you make do without a defen­sive strategy?

A: My interests are turning increasingly toward philosophical the­ory. If I were to give practical advice, as Herbert Marcuse has done to a certain degree, it would detract from my productivity. Much can be said against the division of labor; but even Marx, who in his youth at­tacked it vehemently, later on conceded that we cannot do without the division of labor after all. 

SP: You have chosen for yourself the theoretical part, then, leaving the practical part to others; indeed, they are already working on it. Would it not be preferable if theory simultaneously reflected praxis? And, by extension, also the present actions?

A: There are situations in which I would do this. At the moment, however, it seems much more important to me to think through the anat­omy of actionism.

SP: So, mere theory again?

A: I value theory more highly at this point. I dealt with these issues—especially in my Negative Dialectic—long before the current conflict erupted.

SP: In Negative Dialectic, we find the following resigned observa­tion: “Philosophy, which once seemed passé, remains alive because the moment of its realization was missed.” All conflicts aside, does such a philosophy not become “foolishness”? A question that you have asked yourself.

A: I still believe that one should hold on to theory, precisely under the general coercion toward praxis in a functional and pragmatized world. And I will not permit even the most recent events to dissuade me from what I have written.

SP: So far, as your friend Habermas once put it, your dialectic has, at its “blackest spots” of resignation, surrendered to “the destructive pull of the death drive.” 

A: I would rather say that the compulsive clinging to what is posi­tive stems from the death drive.

SP: Then, would it be the virtue of philosophy to look the negative in the eye but not to change it? 

A: Philosophy cannot in and of itself recommend immediate mea­sures or changes. It effects change precisely by remaining theory. I think that for once the question should be asked whether it is not also a form of resistance when a human being thinks and writes things the way I write them. Is theory not also a genuine form of praxis?

SP: Are there not situations, for example in Greece, in which you endorse action that goes beyond critical reflection? 

A: It goes without saying that in Greece I would approve of any kind of action. The situation that prevails there is totally different. But for someone who is ensconced in safety to advise others to start a revolution is so ridiculous that one ought to be ashamed of oneself.

SP: So, you continue to view the advancement of an analysis of so­cietal conditions as the most meaningful and necessary aspect of your ac­tivities in the Federal Republic?

A: Yes, and to immerse myself in very specific individual phenom­ena. I am not in the least ashamed to say very publicly that I am working on a major book on aesthetics. 

SP: Professor Adorno, we thank you for this conversation.


Credits:  This interview has been excerpted from a longer piece published by cominsitu in March 2016.

Wednesday, December 1, 2021

A Dark Prairie Requests My Presence




by José Lezama Lima
translated by Andres Rojas



A dark prairie requests my presence;
its tablecloths, stable and taut,
whirl around me, fall asleep in my balcony.
They rule its expanse; its endless
alabaster dome recreates itself.
Over the waters of the mirror,
its voice brief amid one hundred paths,
my memory prepares its surprise:
fallow deer in the sky, dew, the glow of flames.
Without sensing I am being called
I enter the prairie slowly,
self-sure in a new, molten labyrinth.

There I see distinguished remains,
a hundred heads, bugles; a thousand purposes
open their sky, their quiet sunflower.
Strange, this sky’s surprise,
where, without desiring to, footsteps return
and voices sound in its swollen center.
A dark prairie is passing by.
Of the two, wind or thin paper,
wind — a wind wounded with this
magical death, one and a farewell.
A bird and then another no longer quiver.


UNA OSCURA PRADERA ME CONVIDA

Una oscura pradera me convida,
sus manteles estables y ceñidos,
giran en mí, en mi balcón se aduermen.
Dominan su extensión, su indefinida
cúpula de alabastro se recrea.
Sobre las aguas del espejo,
breve la voz en mitad de cien caminos,
mi memoria prepara su sorpresa:
gamo en el cielo, rocío, llamarada.
Sin sentir que me llaman
penetro en la pradera despacioso,
ufano en nuevo laberinto derretido.

Allí se ven, ilustres restos,
cien cabezas, cornetas, mil funciones
abren su cielo, su girasol callando.
Extraña la sorpresa en este cielo,
donde sin querer vuelven pisadas
y suenan las voces en su centro henchido.
Una oscura pradera va pasando.
Entre los dos, viento o fino papel,
el viento, herido viento de esta muerte
mágica, una y despedida.
Un pájaro y otro ya no tiemblan
.


Credits:  The above poem was found in translation at Teoppoet Poetteop.

Burning Down the House: Simone Weil's Act of Literary Faith

by Kathryn Kopple Bridget Bate Tichenor One fine evening, while doing the washing up, it gloomily occurred to me: if the French philosopher ...