Books
INTERVIEW WITH STEVE HERMAN ABOUT HIS BOOK,
A DAY IN THE LIFE OF TIMOTHY STONE
What the hell is this?
I have always loved Faulkner. In fact, I really didn't like to read growing up. It was like pulling teeth. All Cliff Notes. Then when I was a junior in high school, I had a book report due, and I was procrastinating as usual. Two nights before it was due, my dad gave me Intruder in the Dust. And I actually read it. Basically in one sitting. And then I read the Sound and the Fury that next summer, and I just remember thinking, "This is genius." So I have always been daunted about, "well, what else is there?" And I wouldn't compare anything I have ever done to the Sound and the Fury or anything else, but I was thinking about thought. And the various layers or "streams" if you will of consciousness. Which one is "the" stream. You are watching tv, and your mom is talking on the phone, and you are having a pretend conversation with someone. (As Jamie Ellsworth once said, "I rarely talk to myself. But I always have conversations with people that aren't there.") And maybe you are also skimming through a newspaper or a magazine. You are aware of all of these things, at once, in some sense, on some level; but what are you really "thinking"? I was trying to isolate the main, principal, primary, stream of consciousness. Sometimes you are thinking what you are reading. Sometimes you are thinking what you are hearing. Sometime you are thinking what you think you are hearing. And sometimes you are just thinking what you are thinking. And that is what I wanted to capture, over one day, in this alter ego character, Timothy Stone.
And how is that different from Faulkner or Joyce and other stream of consciousness writers?
Because there is, in effect, no narrator. Usually, what you have are stories, or narratives, which are told in a "stream of consciousness" style. A Day in the Life of Timothy Stone is more like splitting someone's head open and looking inside. Like the fly on the wall in Gordian Knot. There is no "narrator" telling a "story". It is simply, literally, a stream of consciousness.
What is the deal with the punctuation?
Originally there was no punctuation. But that is completely unreadable. Pauses are important. And breaks. Pauses are part of the thought process. Part of the stream. And I had this Professor, Professor Spengmann, who taught me how to read poetry, and, really, made poetry meaningful. He said that everyone reads poetry, either pausing fully at the line breaks, or reading right through them, as if they weren't there. They are something. Less than a comma, but more than nothing. And his trick was to just hold the last word a bit. Just drag it out a little. Works beautifully. But, in any event, I needed some way to show a short pause, which I first used a comma, but then decided on a dash ("-"), and then a longer pause, with a paragraph break. Streams of consciousness which are being heard at the same time they are being thought are in quotes (""). Streams of consciousness which are being read and "thought" at the same time are printed and punctuated as they would appear. That's kind of the "code".
How many variations did you go through?
A lot.
Why not just do it as a memoir; why create Tim Stone?
Well, gives you a little freedom. Talk about people without them necessarily knowing who you're talking about. But, particularly at this time, I was thinking a lot about the analogy of God to parents, and the metaphor of an orphan to life in a world without God. Parents nurture; they love; you love them; they give you something to aspire to; standards; meaning. And there is that desire for validation that stems all the way from when you are a kid. You do something good. "Look at me. Look at what I did." That's the same type of validation people seem to seek from God. And yet, there are these rules; it's confining; you live in their shadow; baggage; expectations; role. So it's painful, yet liberating. You're lost, and yet there is freedom to make your own way. There's no purpose, but you can find your own beauty and meaning in things. And then there is a social analogy there too. Not relying on someone else to take care of us; we have the responsibility to take care of our brothers and sisters; need to take care of each other; take care of ourselves. So I really wanted his parents to be dead.
Why the In Memoriam?
Well, it's not really intended to be part of the novel. It says it's an "epilogue" but it's not really an epilogue. It's just something I wanted to do. Seemed thematically appropriate. Can't be published as a stand-alone. But wouldn't make sense with Gordian Knot or The Sign of Four.
Do you have a favorite line?
From the book or from the In Memoriam?
Both.
Well, it's not really my line. It's from Bob Dylan, It's Alright, Ma (I'm Only Bleeding). But when I get angry with someone about something, I think of this, and helps me take the high road. Kind of words to live by: "I wish no harm, nor put fault, on anyone who lives in a vault. But it's alright, ma, if I can't please him." I think that's in the book somewhere. And from the In Memoriam, for some reason, I really like: "The night preserves a whisper." I like that.
