In her introduction to Best
American Short Stories 2013, Elizabeth Strout writes about the trust a
reader must feel in order to be interested in a story. Trust is earned,
she implies, when a writer manages to sustain authority through voice, in the
face of surprise plot twists, in the face of language’s instabilities, in times
when characters are hard tried by
fates their fictional lives have handed them. For a writer like Charles
Baxter, who so often writes about varieties of staged strangeness, and desire,
and wonder, the reader's trust depends on how the “strange” is perceived by the
characters. Are Baxter’s characters ever perceiving strangeness honestly?
And if not, do they have good reason for their dishonesties?
In "Gryphon," first published in 1985, the young
narrator desperately wishes to believe in Miss Ferenczi, a character who tosses
off lines (and irresponsible logic) to children such as, "Do you think
[...] that anyone is going to be hurt by a substitute fact?" When I
first read this (as a much younger person than I am now), like the young narrator,
I was not sure of my answer to Miss Ferenczi’s question. Yes, her “substitute
fact”-finding leads the children to fear and to violence. But I wanted to
believe in her as a savior from a known tedium and conformity.
I don’t see Miss Ferenczi as a savior any
longer, maybe because I no longer trust “fact” itself, substitute or not. I trust Baxter because he shows me what I do
believe: that people’s perceptions are formed by deeply held fears and desires. Baxter shows me individuals who fail at questioning
that which informs them. Reading "Bravery,"
published 27 years later, have I changed in that I find this show quite obvious,
or has the author perhaps grown weary of misinterpretation?
In “Bravery,” Baxter exposes “truth” such as “Every mother feels this way, every mother has felt this, it’s time to
stand up” for what it is: informed by prejudice and the need for
self-definition. He reveals Susan’s
blind spot right in the beginning of the story: she needs boys to be a certain
way, to react a certain predictable way that defines them as male, so that she
can find self-worth. She believes she
has secret wisdom in knowing that boys are “not all alike”—but part of what is revealed
to the reader is that Susan doesn’t really believe this…she sustains this false
belief so that she can be special, find the special one, the one who is almost perfect
in his “variables”…but in the end, she actually believes that men should be all
alike. They should be men. They should be brave, and manly, right up
until someone gives them a black eye. And
let them have their black eye! Her
husband, Elijah, Susan confirms, “would want his badge. They all wanted that.”
In the end, she will pretend to believe his story about rescuing a
woman in danger, a story she suspects to be false, so that she can sustain a deeper falsehood that allows her self-definition. Wow! Baxter’s
magic trick is to show us what lies behind “magic”: our belief in it is in us,
in our desire to believe one thing and not another.
Does his storytelling free us to see past our own desires? Or is this just another kind of desire?
P.S. Susan believes in her heart that she has been able to
interpret the crazy woman’s message, even though the woman was speaking another
language. Know this: “Pozor” does not
mean “beware” in Czech. It means “pay attention.”