Zeitoun (spoilers)

[JeffKamin]

Feel free to kick off the discussion here. I'm not done yet, but will check back when I am.

[Carter]

Who is this Katrina woman the book keeps mentioning?

[Docrimbo]

Ha.

Ok, on that note, here's the question I keep coming back to. It pertains more to the book as a constructed literary work, rather than the true-story, unbelievable injustice side of it.

Throughout the book, I kept noticing the way proper names were used and . . . misused, I guess. I'm talking about the odd way that Hurricanes all have names, how Zeitoun's first name is difficult for Americans to pronounce, the names of streets, neighborhoods, etc., and the power that's unleashed when Eggers reveals the names of his arresting officers at the end.

I guess what I'm asking is this:

Am I crazy? Is there really a name-thing going on throughout this book, intended by the author, or does it just seem that way because . . . well, because everyone has a name?

My only other theory is that it's a counterpoint to the rash of anonymity that spreads when a disaster like Katrina happens.

[elihoughton]

Dave Eggers will be speaking at the Library's Pen Pals thing in May. Here's the link for anyone interested:

http://www.supporthclib.org/penpals-tickets.html

[MHerman39]

Jeff Kamin, a Milwaukee native and transplant to Minneapolis via New York and Los Angeles, is standing in the Bryant-Lake Bowl, a turn-of-the-20th-century bowling alley converted to include a bar, restaurant and theater. As moderator of the popular and locally-acclaimed Books & Bars reading series, Kamin is working with the technical staff of the theater to wire in primitive live video conferencing Skype with Lev Grossman, the author of that month's selection "The Magicians".

"Lev, can you hear us?" says Kamin as the 150 person capacity crowd of the theater greets each other and orders drinks around him.

His wife Rachel sits in the first row in front of the stadium-seating-style theater seats. Kamin fell in love with her one night at a party when she shared the last Cheez-it with him. It's a deep and abiding love and together they have two sons, Pablo and Doodles. ...

(Hey, y'all. I have a prior commitment on the same night as the August B&B and can't attend. But I wanted to engage a few of you in lieu of being there that night. Ok, on with the program already in progress.)

Ok, so all of what I just wrote is true. By reporting what I know about Jeff and Rachel and the July meeting of Books & Bars, I've given an accurate representation of what was happening. I may have embellished a little bit here, tightened up a bit there and put words in Jefe's mouth but at its heart everything I wrote is true to the actual event.

Is it the Truth though? Is what I wrote an absolute representation of the situation? Well, no. I focused on Jeff while cutting out everyone else in the room. I gave one perspective on the event and had that stand in for the whole of the event. As a reader who wasn't there, you would likely assume (correctly I hope) that a perspective highlighting the moderator would be able to be generalized to the lion's share of the people in attendance because taking the time to actually chronicle the entire crowd would be time-consuming and unlikely to shed a great deal more perspective upon the July meeting. So you accept it's a representation of the Truth.

The same is true of "Zeitoun". It's based upon actual events from Zeitoun and Kathy's real lives. But it doesn't purport to be the Truth. It is after all Eggers' name on the front of the book, not Kathy and Zeitoun's names. Eggers is giving a representation of the Truth of their experiences surrounding Hurricane Katrina and using it to stand in as representative of a generalized experience of a person who lived in New Orleans in the aftermath of the storm. We could again try to chronicle the experience and perspective of everyone but at a wont of time and necessity, we don't.

So you might be saying, "So what? Eggers is writing creative non-fiction. Welcome to the world of early 21st century publishing." And I agree with that, especially because the popularity of Eggers and his own deliberate efforts have pushed contemporary publishing in that direction. Did anyone see that 16-year-old Justin Bieber is writing his memoirs? Speak of a wont of time and necessity...

[MHerman39]

This is why I think it's important. One of the three things which stuck out about "Zeitoun" (along with how it romanticizes the post-storm anarchy and how poorly Kathy comes off) is the frequent references to how difficult it is to be a Muslim in post-9/11 America. It stuck out to me because 1.) it's kind of tangential if Zeitoun is taking the place of the Everyman and 2.) it's like duuuuuhhhhhhh. It's not even something which we can limit to happening prior to January 20th, 2009 either as the stupid "WTC mosque" controversy has proven. Though it's been almost ten years since 9/11, our continued military presence in Muslim countries makes for a constant backdrop to living in the United States right now. Anyone alive and aware in America knows it's difficult to be a Muslim in our culture.

The only people whom that wouldn't be readily obvious for is people who don't live in our culture. Since America is a cultural hegemony (just try to find a foreign film in the top 100 grossing films of 2009) and because we're willing to live with our warts, that's not an idea which is remote to anyone living in a free society on the planet. Which means the people whom need to be told of that reality are for the most part people who are either too young to remember or haven't been born yet. Eggers has to be aware his celebrity and influence means his books will be read not just by contemporary audiences. They will also be read by people who wouldn't know offhand how difficult it is to be Muslim right now.

It matters because for many people who will be looking back on this era, this will be their perspective and representation of this era in the same way Kerouac's "On the Road" is for those of us who were not old enough or even alive in the 1950s. (Notice that I said Kerouac and "On The Road", not Halberstam and "The Fifties" or C. Wright Mills and "The Power Elite".) But it would be ludicrous to suggest "On the Road" is the Truth about the 1950s, no matter how beloved our friend Kerouac is. "On the Road" is creative non-fiction which is meant to represent a generalization of post-WWII America in the way "Zeitoun" represents our current moment. Hell, the focus in each is even on the main character's transportation.

So my impression while reading "Zeitoun" was an awareness that what I was reading was true but not the Truth. I don't think you can hand someone a copy of the book and say "This is what it was like to live in New Orleans in the days after Hurricane Katrina," any more than you can hand them "On the Road" and show them the 1950s. To get closer to the Truth, you have to keep on looking and I hope, being an open-minded individual who believes in the freedom of religion, that the future readers of "Zeitoun" keep looking. Our era is much too complex to summarize in 325 pages and in the experience of only one man.

[Andrew]

In response to Mike:

Firstly, I really wish we could banish the notion that the aim of creative writing/art is to present "a truth" or, even worse, "the Truth." It's an outmoded notion, and I'm not sure if it worked even in the pre-20th century world in which that idea took hold. Seriously, can you think of a single work of literature/art/journalism/etc. about which you can honestly say, "This is the Truth"? Because I can't.

When we ask a book to give us the "Truth," we're both asking too much of it and not enough of it. Too much because I don't think any book (much less any other art form or mode of communication) can give us the truth in its totality...and not enough because what a book can give us is something entirely different and in some ways better than the "Truth."

So here's what I ask of a book:
1) Does it tell me a good story? (i.e. is it compelling, is it worth telling, does it broaden my experience of the world?)
2) Does it create a space for me to experience interesting reactions, emotions, musings, conversations, etc.
And for creative nonfiction, I ask further:
3) Does it accurately represent reality within the confines it has set up for itself? (e.g. first-person narrative, scientific inquiry, historical account, etc.)

In the case of Zeitoun, the answer to #1 and 2 is yes, and I'm willing to give the Zeitouns and Eggers the benefit of the doubt on #3--it seems well-researched, but ultimately these things come down to trust.

Secondly, is it really true that anti-Muslim prejudice in America is truly obvious to eveyone living in our culture? I can think of plenty of people who deny that such prejudice exists, think it's overblown, or acknowledge that it exists but think that it's acceptable for reasons of national security. For these people, books like Zeitoun are important for proving that injustice does take place, and for combating apathy by forcing people to experience injustice vicariously.

[MHerman39]

Re: whether everyone knows about the difficulty being Muslim in America.

Yes, it should be obvious to everyone and I would find it difficult to prove otherwise. People who believe there is not a heightened level of Muslim-American discrimination since 9/11 have their own motivations for saying it and I believe these people will end up on the wrong side of history as it bends toward justice.

Even more so, I think it's one of the things which will come to define our era. If "Zeitoun" is going to define the years of the Bush Presidency in a way a book like "Revolutionary Road" defines the 1950s, I'm worried. I don't want to be defined by that characteristic of our era just as I wouldn't want to be generalized as a businessman in a flannel suit were I alive in the 1950s. The outsiders aren't the only one who can lay claim to going against this onerous trait of our contemporary culture. Part of the reason we've come to this point is because an idiot once said, "You're either with us or against us." I'm with the U.S. but against the discrimination against anybody.

[MHerman39]

Re: whether Art should strive for the Truth.

"Zeitoun", for intents and purposes, is non-fiction. It's a representation of actual events which become tangled in thought by Locke and made into symbols by the structuralists. On that much we agree.

I'll go on agreeing when you ask "Does it tell a good story?" Yes, though overlong at spots. "Does it create an idea space?" Yes, we are in that space right now. You are right also to add another level to creative non-fiction. If we are to allow Eggers the liberty of creative non-fiction as opposed to journalistic reporting or having seen the events himself (again, it is his name as the author, not Kathy and Zeitoun's), we should hold it to a higher standard than creative fiction. "Does it accurately represent reality within the confines it has set up for itself?" This is where we begin to differ.

I worry about letting the author set the confines for themselves out of fear of moving the goalposts. Journalists have a standardized set of ethics and proof something they wrote was false or even kind of false sheds doubt upon their credibility. There is not a corresponding system for authors in the creative non-fiction realm. I'd use an abridged and modified version of your standard "Does it accurately represent what is true?" while adding "Does the presence of the author increase the level of Truth?"

[MHerman39]

Why do we tolerate the presence of the author in creative non-fiction? Surely a journalist could just as easily brought us the true facts of "Zeitoun" and a journalist steps back out of the work once they're done reporting. Creative non-fiction implies authorial intent and authorial intent implies this is a work of Art, not a work of journalism.

It's a fair advantage for Eggers to take. Art comes with it a little ability to make the story better, to tighten and embellish as I said in my original post. (See: the Mistakes We Knew We Were Making section in Egger's own Heartbreaking Work...) And by better I mean bringing it in line with a connection to something greater than its gross constituent units. To connect to something bigger than just the work itself as entertainment, something we think of as Beauty. As Keats wrote about 100 years before Hemingway moved to Paris;

"When old age shall this generation waste,
Thou shalt remain, in midst of other woe
Than ours, a friend to man, to whom thou say'st,
'Beauty is Truth, Truth Beauty,—that is all
Ye know on earth, and all ye need to know."

Ode on a Grecian Urn - John Keats

So I reiterate it was my impression while reading "Zeitoun" was an awareness that what I was reading was true but not the Truth. Eggers uses his authorial intent to include the Global War on Terror in a book about Hurricane Katrina. Why? Zeitoun spent the shortest amount of time at Hunt out of the four people he was arrested with and, other than some insensitivity, his experience seems pretty general to being in prison during an unprecedented crisis.

I'll stop short of accusing Eggers of bending the facts or having an agenda. It's a part of the story of Zeitoun and "Zeitoun" that living as a Muslim in the United States comes with its own special perils. At the same time, beware of the treachery of images as Magritte would warn us. This is a book with an actively-involved author. "Ceci n'est pas New Orleans."

[Andrew]

I'm understanding your argument better, but I don't think I fully grasp the endgame of your argument.

Are you simply saying that we shouldn't read this book expecting it to represent the totality of Hurricane Katrina or American society in 2005? If so, mission accomplished. I don't read this way and I don't know many who do.

Or are you saying that, because future generations may read this book and make unfair assumptions about the people living during this era, this story should not have been told or should have been told differently? If so, that simply doesn't make sense to me. Of course accounts of injustice reflect poorly on the society they're portraying, and perhaps unfairly because they portray those societies at their worst and contain no counterexamples. But these stories still need to be told. The injustice of future generations unfairly mischaracterizing the past doesn't even remotely compare with the actual wrong that this book is trying to expose. If this book reflects poorly on us all in the future (and again, I simply don't think people read this way), then so be it.

As to Eggers' integrity in the book--well, he goes out of his way on p. xv to say that this is just one family's story, not a definitive account of Hurricane Katrina. He also says that the story is based on interviews with the Zeitouns, with facts corroborated independently whenever possible. Then, on pp. 331 and following he lists all his sources, and includes notes on his methodology. I'm not sure how much more he could have done.

And as to Eggers' presence in the book, I have heard or read others complain that he's not present enough or at all in the book, but you're the first person I've encountered who finds him to be intrusive. I didn't feel that he was straining for the connections with the war on terror--in my opinion, he simply presented the information. The connection is there, I think, not because he made it but because it exists.

[MHerman39]

My endgame is this. This is a non-fiction book. But the presence of the author in the book AT ALL starts the drift from truth and toward truthiness. I do think critically about stuff like that and I wanted to make sure it's a part of the discussion.

Because "Zeitoun" is filtered thru Eggers' authorial bias. He didn't give a dry journalistic representation nor did he actually witness the things he writes about. It's his selection of his research, subject and emphasis we are reading. And if I had an opportunity, I'd ask him why? To me, it strays from the story as it begins (Zeitoun as an Everyman) into something tangential and questionable.

Why connect to GWoT? Again I'll stop short of accusing Eggers of bending the facts or having an agenda. There's just something that doesn't ring true and distracting from the real tragedy of Katrina. If you're looking for injustice following Hurricane Katrina there is plenty to spare.

I feel there is Truth out there about Hurricane Katrina. (I had someone suggest "One Dead In The Attic" by Chris Rose.) I'm worried it will be swept under by the weight of Eggers' popularity. More so, I wish Eggers would use his reach and popularity to talk about GWoT directly.

[Girl Detective]

FEMA head during Katrina speaks out as the 5th anniversary approaches:

http://www.cnn.com/2010/US/08/27/katrina.brown/?hpt=C2