What happens when we write

 Souvankham Thammavongsa’s poem “Theory of Writing” compares the way we write to the way we learn to get to the number 4.

We learn 2 + 2 = 4 as kids. Later, we learn we can get to 4 by other ways, including algebra and geometry. In mathematics, our concept of what we’re doing gets larger as we progress. Perhaps, the poet suggests, something similar happens in writing.

 

Or maybe

It’s the ways in which you know how

To get to four that is the point of writing,

What you had to learn and build, the time it took

To hold open the possibility for yourself.

 

I like that line about holding open possibilities for yourself. I think writing is a way to learn — to become a larger person or a larger self in a way.

One of my prejudices is that most of what should count as writing occurs outside the business of composing sentences. Naturally, I like this poem.

• Source: Souvankham Thammavongsa’s “Theory of Writing” is at Poetry Daily:

https://poems.com/poem/theory-of-writing/

Thammavongsa was known as a poet before she published a collection of short stories. Stunned by the stories, I’ve been looking at her poems.

Stories about bewildering places

 I found Souvankham Thammavongsa’s How to Pronounce Knife, a collection of 14 short stories, and told myself I would enjoy one a night for two weeks.

But the stories were too good. I binged.

The stories are the kind I like. I can read one in 10 to 20 minutes. Each is so tight, so well made, it takes me to another world. To say they’re more rewarding than a 20-minute doomscroll doesn’t cover it.

Critics say Thammavongsa’s fiction is largely about Laotian refugees. She was born in a refugee camp in Thailand. Her parents crossed the Mekong River on a bamboo raft and made it to Canada.

The culture of the immigrant community is interesting, but the stories worked on me although I know little about Laos and its people. In the past few years, I’ve developed a sharper sense of what it’s like to live in a culture I don’t understand. I can understand how people who are having to adapt to a place they don’t understand can be uncertain, tentative, fearful.

I can see how, under pressure like that, adults sometimes act like children, and children have to act like adults.

Like the critics, I could see refugees in Thammavongsa’s stories. But I also could see myself.

• Source: Souvankham Thammavongsa, How to Pronounce Knife: New York: Back Bay Books, 2021. “Slingshot,” one of the stories in the collection, was picked up by Literary Hub after winning an O. Henry Award. It’s here:

https://lithub.com/slingshot/

Before the first sentence

 I mentioned Professor Kathleen Bruhn, an expert on democratization and chair of the Political Science Department at the University of California, Santa Barbara. I was curious about her writing habits and found an interview with her published by the University of Notre Dame Press.

Professor Bruhn said she likes to write in the mornings and tries to block off two hours, four days a week.

Asked for advice to someone thinking about starting a book, she replied:

 

Writing itself is only the tip of the iceberg. A lot of work goes into designing the project, doing the research, reading and organizing notes, and planning the chapter outlines. Once the writing itself starts, be prepared to be surprised, and be patient.

 

One of my prejudices is that most of what should count as writing occurs before someone starts composing sentences.

Professor Bruhn is speaking the truth as I know it.

• Source: “An Interview with Kathleen Bruhn, Author of ‘Politics and the Pink Tide’” is at the University of Notre Dame Press site, April 3, 2024. It’s here:

https://undpress.nd.edu/blog/2024/04/03/an-interview-with-kathleen-bruhn-author-of-politics-and-the-pink-tide/

A problem with populism

 My interest in Mexican newspapers led me to the work of a California scholar: Professor Kathleen Bruhn, an expert on democratization. She has written about how democracies in Latin America have been strengthened and undermined.

I got interested in her work because I love Mexico, a wonderful place with a problem with populism. Populism divides a society into two groups: the pure people v. the corrupt elite.

Mexico’s former president, Andrés Manuel Lopez Obrador, known as AMLO, was the kind of guy who would ignore court orders on the grounds that they violated the will of the people.

He was also an election denier — but only when he lost. He lost four times.

You are perhaps beginning to see parallels with the alleged leadership in the United States, which claims to be exceptional and disparages the kinds of things that go on in “banana republics.”

Professor Bruhn’s study of Mexico and other Latin American countries shows a pattern: Populist autocrats erode democracies. In her account, the movement from democracy to autocracy follows a formula.

• Once in power, the autocrat seeks to capture the state by controlling its institutions. He attacks the courts, law enforcement agencies, the military, oversight agencies (especially those that oversee elections) and public media.

• The autocrat attacks all opponents, driving them from power. He then seeks to gain more control of the state, gaining control over courts that hadn’t previously caved in.

• The autocrat seeks to polarize the divide between the true believers and opponents. By keeping up the constant theme that opponents — meaning people who disagree — are enemies of the state, the autocrat can justify infringing on their civil rights. He uses state institutions to persecute them. He eventually stops counting their votes.

I discovered the work of Professor Bruhn by reading the obituaries of Cuauhtémoc Cárdenas, who showed that this process works both ways. Democracies can be strengthened as well as weakened. Cárdenas was known for undermining the idea of one-party rule in Mexico.

When the way is not clear

 Ludwig Wittgenstein, who watched Europe descend into insanity before World War II, wrote this: 

When you can’t unravel a tangle, the most sensible thing is for you to recognize this; and the most honorable thing, to admit it. …

What you ought to do to remedy the evil is not clear. What you must not do is clear in particular cases.

 

My ellipsis marks the spot of a note in parentheses that makes it clear he was talking about antisemitism. But I think his observation is generally true of all tangles in the social fabric, including antisemitism, racism, xenophobia and the kind of greed that allows us to exploit neighbors and destroy the natural world while pretending our enterprise is a virtue.

The remedy for all these tangles is not clear, at least not to me. But I think Wittgenstein was right: On a case-by-case basis in our dealings with people, it’s usually clear what not to do.

When doctors are trained, they learn the first rule is to do no harm.

It’s not a bad rule for citizens.

• Source: Ludwig Wittgenstein, Culture and Value; The University of Chicago Press, 1984, p. 74.

A prophet is not without honor ...

 Since I live in Georgia, people ask about U.S. Sen. Jon Ossoff and whether he’ll run for president in 2028.

Since I’m a newspaper reader, I can tell you that half the voters in Georgia oppose the idea. The Atlanta Journal-Constitution asked likely voters which politicians they would like to see run for president and which are opposed to the idea. Here are the percentages, with support given first:

Ossoff: 44-50.

U.S. Sen. Raphael Warnock: 36-54.

Gov. Brian Kemp: 47-47.

Former U.S. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene: 11-77.

Kemp, a Republican, is widely viewed as a popular governor. I think that’s accurate. A lot of Democrats have supported his brand of conservativism, which has been criticized by the current occupant of the White House. Ossoff has some of that crossover appeal. Polls suggest 13 percent of people who say they are conservative support him.

But we’re getting into the fine print. What strikes me about the numbers: Georgians don’t see any of their elected leaders going on to allegedly greater things.

• Source: The Atlanta Journal-Constitution has some interesting newsletters, including Politically Georgia. If I were a newspaper editor, I’d subscribe for a month or two just to study the newsletters. Details are at ajc.com.

Campaigning in Georgia

 The political stars have been coming to Georgia. I’m less interested in the speeches, the rallies and the star power than I should be.

In my working days, I liked stories that were grounded in factual details. I think the Atlanta Journal-Constitution has done some interesting work comparing early voting this year with early voting in the last midterms. The newspaper reported these numbers:

• Percent increase in Black voters: 33.

• Percent increase in voters under 30: 54.

• Percent increase in Black voters under 30: 80.

Voter turnout in the South is so dismal it’s fair to say that elections depend on who shows up.

The current occupant of the White House is unpopular in Georgia. He is especially unpopular with Black voters and young voters.

It’s probably me, but I think those numbers are more interesting than the coverage of the speeches and rallies.