Close Menu
    Facebook X (Twitter) Instagram
    CNQ
    • Issues
      • Number 114
      • Number 113
      • Number 112
      • Number 111
      • Number 110
      • Number 109
      • Number 108
      • Number 107
      • Number 106
      • Number 105
      • Number 104
      • Number 103
      • Number 102
      • Archive
    • Magazine
      • About
      • Contests
      • Advertise
      • Submissions
      • Where to Buy
      • Subscribe
      • Promotional Subscriptions
      • Contact
    • Features
      • Web Exclusive
      • Essays
        • CanLitCrit Essay Contest
      • Interviews
      • Reviews
      • CNQ Abroad
      • Poetry
      • Short Fiction
      • The North Wing
      • The Dusty Bookcase
      • Profiles in Bookselling
      • Used and Rare
    CNQ

    Literature, Etherized Upon a Table
    by Steacy Easton

    0
    By CNQ Team on October 24, 2022 Essays, Web Exclusive

    A response to John Metcalf’s “The Worst Truth”

    The Worst Truth
    by John Metcalf
    Biblioasis, 61 pages

    Maybe I am the wrong person to write this, bored and incensed in equal measure by John Metcalf’s The Worst Truth, queer and disabled, nonbinary, enmeshed in the identity politics he is so worried about—someone too young to give a fuck about Morley Callaghan, someone who thinks the best two books that Mordecai Richler ever wrote were Jacob Two-Two and his tiny book on snooker. 

    I am someone who thinks that Atwood is better when she’s bitchy, that her best novel is the The Robber Bride because it’s about gossip, and gossip is secretly literature. Or I get frustrated that people like Peter Watts or William Gibson are never up for the Giller—what could be more Canadian than anxiety about the end of the world, marked by ennui, material fetishism, a genuine blankness? Maybe the only more Canadian thing would be the mark of violence, and how it intersects with sex. This might be the great Canadian theme, one that Metcalf refuses to recognize. 

    There are a dozen competing Canadas. There is also an argument that Canada does not exist, that the nation state only exists in a set of relationships, that these relationships are fraught. Metcalf would likely argue that I am engaging in questions of identity politics. Of course, canonizing white men, being unnecessarily harsh to white women, and mostly ignoring people of colour (he doesn’t mention Dionne Brand, Althea Price, Sam Selvon, Pamela Mordecai, Richard Wagamese, Drew Hayden Taylor, Thomas King, or Maria Campbell), is also a kind of identity politics—a gatekeeping which allows for only one kind of inquiry, and shuts off anything nasty or funny or complex. 

    Metcalf’s obsession with clean text extends the New Criticism ideal of writing that can be pure, the idea that good writing can be surgically extracted out of social contexts. This is a misunderstanding of how surgery works. He sees the operating chamber before and after the procedure, but does not see how the viscera has been contained. The critic André Forget makes this point in his essay on Metcalf’s most notable act of canon-making, The Century List: “by treating the short story as a purely aesthetic object, Metcalf severs the beauty of prose from the profundity of what it communicates.” He also notes that Metcalf’s list is incoherent, and filled with people that Metcalf had a professional relationship with—including someone everyone can agree with, Munro. 

    Thinking of the masters of the field, maybe Canadian literature is more like Munro’s “Dimensions.” In that story a woman’s husband kills her three children. Much as she tries, she cannot escape the violence. She leaves town, changes her appearance, gets a new job as a chambermaid at a Comfort Inn. The cleaning of other people’s spaces does not make her inner spaces any cleaner. 

    Or maybe it is like the Atwood story “Hairball,” where a chic woman with a chic life in chic Toronto—a woman Atwood makes sure to tell us has had two abortions—has a fibroid extracted from her uterus. The fibroid has teeth and hair, a memory of the potential of a body which never grows fully. She has it put in a jar of formaldehyde and left it on her mantle for everyone to see. 

    Or maybe it is like Engel’s Bear. 

    Metcalf is scared of Bear. He reads the story as parsimoniously as possible. It’s a tight reading, and one without potential. He doesn’t seem to understand that the novel is both an allegory and a paratext. He notes that the book was written as “a contribution to what was called the Trolley Project, a proposed anthology of pornography to be published as a fundraiser for the Writers Union of Canada. The anthology did not, thank God, materialize, but the proto-Bear metastasized.” He then goes onto to mention that Bear is a bad novel because the bear would never fuck Lou, because Lou would have smelled wrong. 

    Bear
    by Marian Engel
    McClelland & Stewart
    141 pages

    In these two sentences is the core problem of Metcalf’s argument. First, the bear is very much a real bear. Engel is masterful in describing the bear’s physical body, his size, and the pleasure that this size can bring—“‘Bear, bear,’ she whispered, playing with his ears. The tongue that was muscular but also capable of lengthening itself like an eel found all her secret places. And like no human being she had ever known it persevered in her pleasure. When she came, she whimpered, and the bear licked away her tears.” 

    The bear is also a symbol for knowledge. The book takes place in an octagonal house on an island in Northern Ontario. Lou spends her time making sense of the island’s knowledge—of Indigenous people (this is where it gets problematic), white settlers, herself, and also nature, in the form of the bear. 

    She is on that island as a research assistant, to learn about the archive the scientist who designed the house left behind, but the archive is destabilized via the “musk and shit” of an actual bear; the body of the bear reintegrates the body of Lou. The book is about systems of knowledge, about how to know oneself but also one’s community; it is a story about the wilderness, where the taming of the wilderness is viewed as both a complete task and a failed experiment. Metcalf does not consider that the central crisis of Canadian Literature is its continued colonialist baggage. Bear does that. 

    Engel never denied that Bear was a pornographic novel. Metcalf, at his pearl-clutching best, suggests that sex cannot imbue knowledge—or maybe just sex written about women, by women. He does not seem to have a problem with the boyish, masturbatory sex found in Duddy Kravitz, but the idea that our Canadian Literature could be founded on a pornographic text is a horror. Pornography is a grasping, ambivalent, difficult genre, a genre of ideas and a genre against other kinds of reading. Canada, caught between empires, never sure what it is, ambivalent and floating, might be pornographic. (Ballard, when talking about Cronenberg’s adaptation of Crash, said that Toronto was the story’s perfect setting because of the Gardiner Expressway’s eroticized blankness.) 

    Every so often, someone discovers Bear again (even though it won the Governor’s General Award in 1977!) and writes a difficult and trenchant essay about it. Recently, in the London Review of Books, Patricia Lockwood described the cover of the Seal edition “where the body of a softcore librarian is completely laid open to us, surrounded by flowing silk. Her tits are perfect, like two drawers of a card catalogue. The bear of the title looms over her shoulders—a Muppet designed to be sexual, smiling inside the dark cavern of his face and presumably doing her from behind.” 

    The novel continues to be passed hand to hand, as sort of pulp and sort of literature. (See, for example, the lurid removal of limbs in Mrs Mike by Benedict and Nancy Freedman; or think about Leonard Cohen’s paeans to Roman Catholic cunnilingus in Beautiful Losers, or the sudden way violence disrupts in domestic spaces as written by Munro; or Lynn Crosbie’s Paul’s Case or the plays of Sky Gilbert or Brad Fraser or Michel Tremblay, or, in film, anything by Bruce La Bruce or Jean-Marc Vallée.)

    Bear is too pornographic for Metcalf, but he also doesn’t like Ann-Marie MacDonald’s high gothic Fall on Your Knees. He thinks it’s too lurid, that it doesn’t reflect reality. In doing so, Metcalf fails to recognize the gothic as a tradition. It might be useful to read MacDonald in the context of Matthew Lewis’ The Monk or Coleridge’s Christabel. Of course it’s not high realism; gothic novels are strange and lurid by design. MacDonald’s plotting does some major fucking damage to the dry, realist obsession of previous Canadian literature by working paratextually: it is a thing and a commentary of the thing. Barbara Gowdy’s “We So Seldom Look on Love” is heartbreaking for a similar reason: it understands taboos and how to break them. 

    The moment where the fibroid is removed from the body politic and placed on display; the moment where the cleaning of the hotel rooms ceases, where the distance from the material can no longer be thought to be real. Canon-makers spend a lot of time and effort considering the edges of their genre—something that breaks past, contaminates. The creation of a canon is a creation of a pure object, and the pure object must not be soiled. 

    Metcalf hints that he doesn’t believe biography should be part of criticism. It’s part of the concern he has with new writers, and something that he notes when he talks about who wins the Giller or the other big prizes. He can sound like Harold Bloom, who thought that women (even women like Munro or Laurence) or people of colour or queer folks did not have worthwhile things to say. 

    Metcalf does not recognize a variety of realisms, and a refusal of realism. There is this sense, that he would prefer (to use American examples), for literature to retain a kind of stern, observational quality—like Cheever or Updike. Other realisms, other ways of seeing, are parceled out into anxiety about identity. It’s not that anxiety of identity doesn’t exist—but there are counter readings and counter traditions that do exist. Openness to the grotesque is one kind of reading; the absorption of other stories and other people telling them is another. Fear of the other marrs Metcalf’s timid readings of sometimes timid texts.

    Let’s be brave. Let’s found a (post)national literature on the novel about a woman fucking a bear. Let’s leave the fibroid in a jar on the kitchen table. Let’s recognize that we cannot move from the house where great violence has been done.

    —A CNQ Web Exclusive, October 2022

    Steacy Easton first read Bear on a Greyhound bus, going to Olds for a family Christmas. Nothing explains their aesthetics more.


    We post only a small fraction of our content online. To get access to the best in criticism, reviews, and fiction, subscribe!

     

    Related Posts

    Where East Meets West
    by J R Patterson

    Over There
    by Susan Glickman

    Describing the Days Ahead
    by Andrew Forbes

    Comments are closed.


    CNQ Issue 114:
    Fall/Winter 2023


    Subscribe & Save! Within Canada, with free shipping:

    Subscribe & Save! Outside Canada, with free shipping:

    Recent Articles
    June 30, 2023

    On Upstart & Crow
    by Zoe Grams

    March 28, 2023

    Jana Prikryl’s Midwood
    by Andreae Callanan

    March 20, 2023

    Spring Is Here
    by David Mason

    Recent Posts
    • On Upstart & Crow
      by Zoe Grams
    • Jana Prikryl’s Midwood
      by Andreae Callanan
    • Spring Is Here
      by David Mason
    • Where East Meets West
      by J R Patterson
    • Tolu Oloruntoba’s Each One a Furnace
      by Kevin Spenst
    Recent Comments
    • theresa on Don Coles’ A Serious Call
      by David Godkin
    • Mother, Wife, Author and Professor – O'Niel Barrington Blair on Meaghan Strimas
    • Vol. 1 Brooklyn | Afternoon Bites: Yaa Gyasi Interviewed, Justin Torres Nonfiction, Janice Lee on Fritters, Karen Russell, and More on Amy Jones interviewed
      by Brad de Roo
    • Pinball: A Walking Tour by Emily Donaldson – CNQ | Fun With Bonus on Pinball: A Walking Tour
      by Emily Donaldson
    • admin on Interview with Helen Kahn
      by Jason Dickson
    Archives
    • June 2023
    • March 2023
    • February 2023
    • January 2023
    • December 2022
    • November 2022
    • October 2022
    • September 2022
    • August 2022
    • July 2022
    • June 2022
    • April 2022
    • January 2022
    • November 2021
    • June 2021
    • May 2021
    • April 2021
    • February 2021
    • January 2021
    • November 2020
    • August 2020
    • April 2020
    • March 2020
    • February 2020
    • June 2019
    • May 2019
    • April 2019
    • March 2019
    • January 2019
    • November 2018
    • October 2018
    • September 2018
    • August 2018
    • July 2018
    • June 2018
    • May 2018
    • April 2018
    • March 2018
    • February 2018
    • January 2018
    • December 2017
    • November 2017
    • October 2017
    • September 2017
    • August 2017
    • July 2017
    • June 2017
    • May 2017
    • April 2017
    • March 2017
    • February 2017
    • January 2017
    • December 2016
    • November 2016
    • October 2016
    • September 2016
    • August 2016
    • July 2016
    • June 2016
    • May 2016
    • April 2016
    • March 2016
    • February 2016
    • December 2015
    • November 2015
    • July 2015
    • June 2015
    • May 2015
    • April 2015
    • March 2015
    • February 2015
    • January 2015
    • December 2014
    • November 2014
    • October 2014
    • September 2014
    • July 2014
    • May 2014
    • February 2014
    Categories
    • Archives
    • Blog
    • CanLitCrit Essay Contest
    • CNQ Abroad
    • CNQ Timeline
    • Essays
    • Exhumations
    • Features
    • First Reading
    • Interviews
    • Poetry
    • Profiles in Bookselling
    • Rereading
    • Reviews
    • Short Fiction
    • The Antiquarium
    • The Dusty Bookcase
    • The North Wing
    • Uncategorized
    • Used and Rare
    • Web Exclusive
    Meta
    • Log in
    • Entries feed
    • Comments feed
    • WordPress.org
    CNQ: Canadian Notes and Queries
    1686 Ottawa St.
    Windsor, ON
    N8Y 1R1
    Phone: 519-915-3930
    Email: info [at] notesandqueries [dot] ca
    Instagram: @cnandq

    Type above and press Enter to search. Press Esc to cancel.