I first heard about the existence
of Asymmetry in a radio interview in which Lisa Halliday’s affair with
Philip Roth came up. Who made this public knowledge? Did she? At any rate,
surely she was aware that having her novel’s main character engage in a sexual
relationship with a prestigious (and forty-plus years older) author would be a
selling point. Readers will, despite any protests by Halliday, take this to be
a roman a clef. What is Philip Roth (in the guise of Ezra Blazer) really
like, especially in bed? — inquiring minds want to know. It’s this aspect that
caused publishing houses to engage in a bidding war for rights to the novel.
But any form of expose about
a prominent person carries with it a degree of smarminess. Not that Halliday
portrays Blazer in a negative light. He’s intelligent, witty, generous, kind.
An interesting person. Though he’s not in good shape physically — he has an
array of serious health problems — he wants a sex life, and one of his
outstanding features is a seductiveness. It’s obvious that he’s a
long-practicing seducer of women. And he seduces Alice. Easily.
What induces her to have an affair
with him? In the opening scene of Asymmetry Alice (who’s an editorial
assistant at a publishing firm) is sitting in a park, reading a book and
thinking about writing one herself. When Ezra approaches her she immediately
recognizes him, and her cheeks turn “watermelon pink.” Years later, as she and
Ezra are strolling in the same park, “Alice saw what she supposed other people
would see: a healthy young woman losing time with a decrepit old man. Or were
other people more imaginative and sympathetic than she thought? Might they
acknowledge that everything was still more interesting with him than without,
and perhaps even that her gameness and devotion were qualities that the world
needed more of, not less?” People are cynics, especially when they have the
facts. If they knew that the decrepit old man was a famous author, and the
healthy young woman an aspiring writer, they’d conclude that her gameness and
devotion were dispensed in an effort to advance her career. Not just any
decrepit old man, no matter how interesting, would get the treatment Blazer
does.
The fictional Blazer is generous to
Alice. He showers expensive gifts on her (how about paying off her $6000
Harvard student loan?). And he encourages her aspirations to write. I don’t
know if Roth was similarly helpful to Halliday. Did he open doors in the
literary world for her? In the years they were together, he surely didn’t hide
her under the rug. At any rate, I doubt if he was happy with being the subject
(however lightly disguised) for her novel. Halliday says she sent him the
manuscript, and he raised no objections. But would his objections have caused her
to shelve the book? — I think not. Nor did she need his help in getting it
published — her real-life affair with him had occurred, and that made it
commercially viable. Of course, for those inquiring minds, she had to include
sex.
There are, thank goodness, no
explicit descriptions of the seventy-something body of Ezra having Viagra-aided
sex with Alice. I’d find them distasteful. (And were they distasteful, one
wonders, for Alice?) But what Halliday does provide are kinky teasers. During a
sex act, this man who has had a full and sophisticated sex life exclaims, “
‘Oh, God. Oh, Jesus. Oh, Christ. What are you doing? Do you . . . know . . .
what you’re doing?’ ” (What she does is never disclosed.) And why is a
dildo hanging on the vanity of Ezra’s bathroom? Something odd is going on. I’m
fine with the non-disclosure part, but I could do without the teasers.
The “Folly” section of the novel is
devoted to the affair, and not much else. Alice remains indistinct. As for her
job, there’s almost nothing. She has a bothersome gaga neighbor who knocks too
often on her door and repeatedly asks Alice if she’s lonely, if she has a
boyfriend. (Does Alice have a life outside her relationship with Ezra?
We never know, though I suspect the answer is yes.) As for Ezra, he’s Ezra,
over and over: jokester, benefactor, instructor in what books to read, what
music to listen to, what movies to watch. And from the beginning he has asked
Alice to run errands for him. For her to bring him a certain type of food, or get
something for him at a certain shop (he’s picky). These requests are made in a
considerate way, and she had told him that she’s always willing to help. But, since he expects her to do his bidding, the requests
begin to seem more like demands. They’re part of her role in his life.
Years go by, but the only way we
know that is because the winners of the Nobel Prize are announced (and they’re
not Ezra Blazer). What Halliday relies on to fill the 123 pages of “Folly” is
filler. Long italicized quotes from those books Ezra gives her to read (many
about the Holocaust); song lyrics (Ezra likes the old classics); play-by-play
accounts of baseball games (they’re both fans). Near the end of the section
Alice receives a summons for jury duty and pages are devoted to a list of names
being called out. We get the entire warnings on a drug printout.
The end comes swiftly, and has an
emotional intensity absent from the rest of “Folly.” Ezra’s health has been
declining; Alice is no longer a dispenser of pleasure; she’s a nurse. And Ezra
wants her to fill that roll — nurse and errand runner and companion — for the
rest of his life. As she sits beside his hospital bed she breaks down. “I can’t
. . . This! It’s just . . . so . . . hard. It’s so not . . . normal.
No, I don’t mean normal. I mean . . . good for me. Right now. If I’m with you
. . .” The words that come next, but aren’t spoken, are that if she’s with Ezra
she can’t live a normal life with a man her age. Ezra rationally counters all
she says, reassures her that things will be “fine” the way they are. They begin
to watch baseball on the hospital TV. “Don’t leave me,” he says. “Don’t go. No
one can love you as much as I do. Choose this.”
There “Folly” ends. There’s no
account of the breakup, but we know that Alice will not choose the life Ezra is
offering her. It was folly to get so entangled with him. She must move on.
Alice began “to consider rather
seriously whether a former choirgirl from Massachusetts might be capable of
conjuring the consciousness of a Muslim man . . .” Which is what Halliday does in
“Madness,” the second section of the novel. As to why she chose this as a
subject, it’s quite possible that, since she knew readers would see “Folly” as
based on personal experience, she was showing that she can carry out a feat of
the imagination. But, as a feat, it’s not an audacious one. Amar Jaafari isn’t
foreign in his sensibilities; his most notable quality is his reasonableness.
Nor is he allowed to fully emerge as a personality. We’re given some events of
his life, some of his thoughts and feelings — interesting fragments — but
there’s no unified narrative in which he’s allowed to develop; his story is
constantly broken up by shifts in time and place. Amar’s section is structured
around scenes of his interrogation in the holding room of Heathrow Airport,
where we learn little about him besides his patience and stoicism. In much of
“Madness” Halliday inundates us with Arab names, foreign locales, scenes of the
disarray and suffering going on in the Middle East. I began to wonder if she
had been a war correspondent or if she had just done an awful lot of research.
“We went left. This was not without cost: the drive to Sulaymaniyah from Zakho,
on the Iraq-Turkish border, took about nine hours that way. If we’d cut the
corner and gone down to Mosul and then across to Kirkuk, it would have taken
about five.” And I thought: more filler, this time aimed at establishing
authenticity of place.
The “Madness” section is political:
war is hell, the United States acted badly, the vast majority of people in the
Middle East want to live quiet, peaceful lives; like Amar, they’re not
radicals. Okay, but I already knew this. Politics is fatal to a novel unless
the reader is personally engaged with the characters. Amar’s controlled
reactions and the fragmentation in the telling of his story works against
engagement with him. He’s mainly a passive presence, dominated by the dense and
scattered problems in the Middle East. The same problem existed when Halliday
was writing about a young woman in New York and her affair — things she had
intimate knowledge of. Alice’s section is thin and repetitive. We get glimpses
of her emotions, especially at the end, but the role she plays is subordinate
to the personality of Ezra Blazer.
Agents and editors needed more than “Folly”
for Asymmetry to stand as a novel. I suspect they weren’t at all pleased
with the “Madness” section (and the attendant necessity to try to justify its
existence). A perfectly valid question arises: why didn’t Halliday write an
entire novel about Alice? One that would go into her life outside her time with
Blazer, then follow her after her break with him? One that would reveal her in
all her dimensions?
I believe that degree of revealing
was a task Halliday wasn’t up to. By shifting the story to Amar Jaafari she was
able to avoid the problems which the subject matter of “Folly” posed for her.
She tells enough about Alice’s affair to satisfy the curiosity of readers, but
no more. The faults I find with Asymmetry all have to do with its
evasiveness. What’s here is good, but there’s not enough.
Asymmetry ends with a short
section entitled “Ezra Blazer’s Island Disks.” It consists of an interview in
which Ezra is asked to select eight pieces of music he would take with him to a
desert island. But from that premise he’s given a wide range of personal topics
to discuss. Though years have passed since his time with Alice (we know that
because Ezra has finally won the Nobel Prize), he’s in fine form. Halliday has
him throw in a few words about Alice and a book she’s written. But,
significantly — for it’s a final manifestation of evasiveness — “Folly” is not
the book Ezra makes reference to: “A young friend of mine has written a rather
surprising little novel . . . that on the surface would seem to have nothing to
do with its author, but in fact is a veiled portrait of someone determined to
transcend her provenance, her privilege, her naivete.” He almost goes on to say
that this friend was one of the two women in his life that he had “hugely
loved,” but backs away (“Well, no. I won’t say that. I won’t say her name.”)
Blazer claims he is happily celibate, but he can’t resist making a pass at the
female interviewer. The voice is the same coaxing, humorous one he used with
Alice when he first met her at the park. Though the interviewer is married and
has children, Blazer persists. He has two tickets to a concert, and he’d like
her to come. “So. What do you say, miss? Are you game?”
1 comment:
So Philip Roth was true to his word: Nemesis was the last piece of fiction he wrote.
Yet a novel which is about him would appear before his death. In a way, this bothers me.
Post a Comment