Friday, March 28, 2014

Fiction Friday: Not for Profit, Part Two


By the time I had crossed the square, I was grateful for the dim coolness of the museum. As I entered, a balding middle-aged man was just coming out, and he held the door open for me with a charming little bow. He looked faintly familiar, and while I paused to leave a donation I puzzled over who I could possibly know in Mexico. But I didn’t puzzle long, as I quickly realized I wasn’t alone: Jonathan was standing at the far end of the room, his back to me, leaning over to examine something in a glass case.
It was Jonathan as in my ex-fiancĂ© Jonathan. The “ex” part had been his idea, not mine. We met in college and soon began spending our evenings together in the campus coffee shop, where he would beat me at darts while he talked history and I talked accounting. And somehow it worked. We got quietly engaged the spring of his senior year, before he headed off to Georgetown (the showoff) to get his master’s. I knew long-distance engagements were usually trouble, but once again, somehow it worked. We called each other most evenings, of course, and Jonathan wrote. I know, who writes letters anymore? But he did. It must have been the historian in him. On nights when he didn’t call, I could re-read the letters, and the loneliness wasn’t fun, but it was a good year. The way you handle being apart can tell you whether you’re meant to be together. Or at least, I thought so.
He came to my graduation that May. I told myself that a little reserve was only natural after we’d been separated so long. That summer, the letters became less frequent and the calls just a little shorter, but I was cramming for the CPA exam and it was easy not to think about anything else.
He waited until after I’d passed the exam. I was grateful to him for that, even then. And he flew out to talk to me in person. I don’t believe you can soften a blow, but at least you can face it. He was sorry and, I think, ashamed, but he had met someone else. There wasn’t much to say on either side. The bare statement did the trick. We wished each other well — he probably meant it — and said goodbye.
I hadn’t seen him in four years, but now I knew it was him even before he turned around. So I had a second or two’s advantage over him, and yes, I enjoyed it. I was determined that he was going to deal with seeing me.
He didn’t look pleased. It took him a few moments to make a decision, and while he hesitated, I studied him. He looked good. I could admit that, and the admission had nothing to do with the fact that he wasn’t wearing a wedding ring. Yes, I checked. But if his second engagement or his marriage (I preferred engagement) hadn’t lasted either, it was not exactly an incentive to think about a rebound. He had left me. If he had left someone else after that, well, maybe he was better off alone.
Besides, there were other things to think about. Things like the small gold signet ring on his right hand. The diamond-set Rolex on his wrist. The obviously bespoke light grey suit. This was a man who had so far published exactly one book: a biography of Sir Francis Walsingham. It was a really good biography, but Sir Francis Walsingham does not pay for that kind of tailoring. More importantly, none of it was Jonathan. Some things don’t change in four years. Or ever.
Whatever he was thinking about, he made up his mind. “Hi.”
“Hi.” This was his problem, not mine.
“‘Of all the gin joints,’ huh?” He took a step toward me. “Except that you’re a beer drinker, aren’t you?”
It hurt that he remembered that.
“Can I buy you one?”
Dignified silence is harder than it looks. “I don’t think that’s a good idea. I mean… There’s no point, is there? It’s a small town, but I’ll only be here three days. We can ignore each other that long.”
“Yeah, but I need to say a couple of things first.” He saw that I was about to speak and put up a hand. “Natalie, please. This is not to rehash the past or offer explanations. This is right here, right now. There’s something you need to know.”

*******

I let him buy me a beer. I was curious, but it was more than that. I had only heard him use that tone once before: the night he proposed. He had looked and sounded then as if a minor matter like the end of the world wouldn’t distract him, and he looked and sounded that way now.
He took me to a cantina just off the square. When the waitress had brought beer, guacamole, and chips, and then made herself scarce, I expected him to launch right in, but he started by asking why I was there. I told him about my job and about the hospital, and because it seemed natural I even told him about the week’s delay and my sister’s baby. I suddenly remembered that he’d been my date to her wedding, and that I’d tripped over my bridesmaid’s dress on the dance floor.
He murmured congratulations that we both knew I wouldn’t pass on, but his mind was elsewhere. “Do you trust me?”
“I used to.”
He deserved that, and he knew it. “And now?”
I thought, Heck no, are you crazy? But I heard myself say, “I’ll try.”
“Okay. Just listen, and I’ll answer questions at the end if I can. We met at the museum — I mean met met, as in complete and total strangers. I told you my name was David Blair and that I was in banking, but I didn’t seem to want to give details. You got the impression I was here on vacation. You let me buy you a drink, we flirted a little, I wasn’t your type.” He paused. “You want it?”
I shook my head. “Too easy.”
“No hard feelings, we went our separate ways, and that was that.” He saw the waitress glance in our direction, so he smiled, but his eyes weren’t smiling.
My first thought, when I was capable of having thoughts, was Why are you trusting me now? But the answer was obvious. He was trusting me now because he had to. And for no other reason. And there were more important questions to ask. “Are you in trouble?”
“Not if your memory’s still good.”
“Is this why you left me?” I knew it was, but I needed him to say it.
“Yes.”
“Will you call me when it’s over?” It was my turn to stop him from speaking. “I know you can’t explain. That’s become very obvious. But just this once, I need to know you’re all right.” When he nodded, I reached into my purse and handed him a business card.
He looked at it, but then he handed it back. “I wasn’t your type. You wouldn’t have given me a card.” He drained his beer and clinked the bottle against mine. “Don’t worry — my memory’s still good, too.”

*******

It occurred to me that night (when you’re not sleeping stuff occurs to you) that I had never for a second doubted what side he was on. I was angry at him, more angry now than I had been four years ago, but I simply wasn’t able to doubt him. Like the Rolex, it wasn’t Jonathan. So I forgot about doubt and concentrated on anger. He should have told me. There I was on safe ground. He should at least have asked what I wanted. But after dwelling on that in righteous certainty, at about 1 a.m. I asked myself what my answer would have been.
There I wasn’t nearly as certain.

Friday, March 21, 2014

Fiction Friday: Not for Profit, Part One

[Rationale (-ization?) can be found here.]


Not for Profit

They asked me to change the names.
Actually, they asked me not to write it at all, but I pointed out that it might as well be fiction — no one would believe it. And it needs to be told. So we compromised.
This is fiction.
I’ve changed the names.


*******


When I met Hector Perez, he was the bright spot in the middle of a very long day. I was on my first foreign site visit as the very junior program officer at a very big charitable foundation. I had a laptop case stuffed with the proposal and supporting financials of a Mexican hospital. Okay, Mexico wasn’t exactly the ends of the earth, but it still counted as foreign. I was running late — more than a week late, as I’d had to postpone the trip to help my sister while she had her third baby. Somehow Aunt Natalie, with no children and no prospect of any, was always the first choice to watch the kids. Now that the trip was finally on, I was also running late because of traffic, and on the way to the airport I managed to spill a cappuccino on the sleeve of my brand new, professional-but-still-practical-in-the-heat white linen jacket. During the flight, I convinced myself that I was completely unprepared and that it would be painfully obvious to the hospital staff, and that it must have been painfully obvious to my boss, so they must be setting me up to fail, and what was I doing in this job, anyway?
Then I took a deep breath and told myself everything was fine. That works more often than you might think.
Hector met me at the airport. He was wearing khakis and a loose shirt, and a wooden rosary around his neck peeked out at the collar. He approached with a smile and a firm handshake, and asked “Miss Evans?” with a purely American accent.
“California,” he added, either through telepathy or habit, as he took my bag. “Born and raised in Long Beach, pre-med at UCLA. I got permission to do a year of my internship here.”
“Permission from where?”
“Johns Hopkins,” he admitted, with a smile that held equal parts pride and embarrassment. I learned very quickly that that was Hector’s normal smile: it said two things at once, and they were usually contradictory.
“I don’t remember reading about you in the proposal.”
He shrugged. “I’ll be gone soon enough. They’ll still be here.”
He led me out of the airport to an ancient Volkswagen Beetle. As he opened the passenger door for me, he said that the hospital was about an hour’s drive, “not counting flat tires, washed out roads, or other acts of God.” Since the car was practically riding on rims as it was, I wanted to ask what he called a flat tire, but decided against it.
As he drove and kept a lookout for acts of God, I asked him how a Johns Hopkins intern had been drawn here. He told me about the hospital, about Dr. Reyes (whose name had been in the proposal) and about some of the patients he had seen. He was a persuasive advocate, and I wondered aloud whether he had chauffeured any other program officers.
He shook his head. “I’ve been here ten months, and you’re the first one I’ve seen. Honestly, I don’t think most of us expected you to really show up, either. We’re small, kind of under the radar out here. Maybe I shouldn’t ask, but does your being here mean we’ve got a shot at a grant?”
“I really can’t…”
“I get it. Anyway, you should see the place before you make up your mind.” And, with perfect timing, he chose that moment to tell me that the cooler in the back seat was stocked with bottled water. Before I could reach back, he had snaked his arm around the back of his seat, snared a bottle, opened it one-handed, and presented it to me. As I held it to my wrists and temples and then took a sip (gulping didn’t seem professional), Hector grinned: “How are we doing on first impressions?”


*******


Hector saw me checked into the hotel and insisted on carrying my bag up to my room. I was surprised by the size of the hotel: from what I had seen of the town driving in, it didn’t seem large enough to support that much tourism. Hector explained that the town had seen action during the Mexican War of Independence in the early 1800s, so it attracted historians, photographers, sightseers, and various combinations of the three. There was even a small museum on the other side of the square.
In the interests of full disclosure, I should mention here that I gave myself a pat on the back when I turned down an entry-level position at PricewaterhouseCoopers to take an internship at the foundation. I had the inner glow of altruism which comes from joining the not-for-profit sector, and which had lasted until I read my first grant application from Rwanda. I knew then that I understood neither courage nor self-sacrifice, and I had reminded myself of that every day since. So when Hector mentioned the museum, it seemed like a good opportunity to learn about people who had understood both.
Be careful what you wish for.

Thursday, March 20, 2014

Fiction Friday: A Thursday Introduction

Well, we’ve learned a few things in these last couple of years of mostly-not blogging. The most obvious one is that I don’t have a lot to say. Not a lot that I consider worth the trouble of saying, that is.
 
Except that’s not entirely true. I do have things to say, but I have trouble translating them into “blog”. I think in story.

So I’m going to try an experiment. Over the next few Fridays, I’m going to serialize a story I wrote awhile back. (Yes, the scheduling is totally based on alliteration.)

This is, honestly, something that I never expected anyone to read. The brief introductory section, and the central moment of inaction, popped into my head one day, and I fashioned the story around them so that they would leave me alone. But I’ve had no idea what to do with it: it just clearly wanted to exist. I’m not in the least sure it’s any good, but it says some things I wanted to say.

See you tomorrow!

Thursday, February 6, 2014

The After-the-Reichenbach Fall: His Last Vow and the Problem of Sin

[Spoiler alert: We’re going to talk about the ending of His Last Vow. (Well, not the ending ending. All I will say about that is that I don’t think it’s a trick: go re-watch John’s abduction in The Empty Hearse.) Properly speaking, we’re going to talk about the climax of His Last Vow. You know, the part where Sherlock makes sure he has plenty of witnesses before shooting an unarmed man in the head. (I’ve never been very good at spoiler alerts.)]


[Note to family and friends: Should I ever need morphine, and should you not have it, I fully intend to bellow, “Then what is the point of you?!?” in the best public-school accent I can muster. You have been warned. Now on with the post.]





“The point I'm trying to make is that I am the most unpleasant, rude, ignorant and all-round obnoxious arsehole that anyone could possibly have the misfortune to meet. I am dismissive of the virtuous, unaware of the beautiful, and uncomprehending in the face of the happy. So if I didn't understand I was being asked to be best man, it is because I never expected to be anybody's best friend. And certainly not the best friend of the bravest and kindest and wisest human being I have ever had the good fortune of knowing. John, I am a ridiculous man, redeemed only by the warmth and constancy of your friendship.”
- Sherlock Holmes, The Sign of Three


Are there people who identify with John Watson? For me, it’s always been Sherlock. Not that I think I’m a genius, but that I would happily divide the world into “people” (defined as those I care about) and -- to borrow from the smarter Holmes brother -- “goldfish”.

So I guess what I’m saying is, I’m Sherlock with less excuse.

Great.

It’s been widely said that we’ve seen a more human Sherlock in Series Three, and I think that’s true, but not because he learns to love. The fact is, Sherlock has always been willing to love: remember what happened to the CIA agent who roughed up Mrs. Hudson? He is just extremely careful about whom he chooses to love. And how. And isn’t that the temptation for all of us? “To love” is an active verb. It’s something that we decide to do, and something that can be done on our terms.

To BE loved? Now that’s scary.

Being loved requires humility. It requires a willingness to surrender control and accept a gift freely given -- and often undeserved. The Sherlock of A Study in Pink does not deserve John Watson’s friendship, but it is given, and Sherlock doesn’t understand why. Even by the end of Series Two, he still thinks love should be earned, should somehow be based on merit. In The Reichenbach Fall, he asks faithful lab assistant Molly Hooper, “Molly, if I weren’t everything you think I am -- everything I think I am -- would you still want to help me?” She replies simply, “What do you need?” Molly doesn’t love Sherlock Holmes, Consulting Detective. She loves Sherlock.

And two and a half years later, it is Molly who snaps when she sees the results of his Dr.-Watson-ordered drug test in the opening of His Last Vow:



The language here, a language of gift and obligation, is breathtaking. A gift places us under an obligation to the giver: an obligation of gratitude, but also an obligation not to abuse the gift. By abusing himself, Sherlock has abused his friends’ love -- not least, as John points out, by refusing to acknowledge that love and ask for their help.

But the episode’s most stunning scene is yet to come. Christmas with the Holmes family. Mycroft and Sherlock pretending to put up with their parents’ confounded...normality (and Mycroft not really even bothering to pretend: “Am I glad, too? I haven’t checked.”). The brothers sneak outside for a forbidden smoke break, and Mycroft warns Sherlock not to pursue Charles Augustus Magnussen, calling him a necessary evil, “not a dragon for you to slay.” Mycroft says he has been authorized to offer Sherlock a job, but that he hopes Sherlock will decline it. Sherlock promptly declines, then asks what the job is. MI-6 wants him to go back undercover in Europe (capitalizing on his work destroying Moriarty’s network during the [interminable!] two-year gap between Series Two and Three), but Mycroft has estimated that he will last only six months before being discovered and killed.

Then this happens:



And here’s a question: As the scene concludes, Sherlock asks, “What the hell am I supposed to say to that?” and Mycroft suggests, “Merry Christmas.” Recall that Magnussen’s ultimate plan is to ensnare Mycroft, and recall Sherlock’s last two words before shooting him. Sherlock is primarily thinking of John and Mary in that scene, but is he also answering his brother? It is certainly not the answer his brother wanted: “Oh, Sherlock, what have you done?” *

We have grown accustomed to seeing Sherlock use people. His relationship with Janine is perhaps the most egregious example, ending in her unexpected and brilliant parting shot: “We could have been friends.” For just a moment, Sherlock looks at someone he had placed firmly in the “goldfish” category...and discovers that she is a person. (I. Love. Steven. Moffat.)

Anyway. What we don’t notice so easily is that Sherlock also uses himself. The heroin, after all, was for a case. And in A Study in Pink, he risks suicide for a point of pride. Irene Adler sums him up when she takes away his clergyman’s collar in A Scandal in Belgravia:

Irene: Disguise is always a self-portrait.
Sherlock: You think I’m a vicar with a broken face?
Irene: I think you’re damaged, delusional, and believe in a higher power -- in your case, it’s yourself.


Sherlock believes that he is completely his own master: to preserve, or to destroy. When he kills Magnussen, he is once again using himself. It’s not that he thinks it’s right. He thinks it’s a necessary evil, and he takes that evil upon himself. But in doing so, he also takes that evil into himself, betraying the people who love him by making himself something that he was not before. “My brother is a murderer,” says Mycroft, and for once there is no quip to disguise the simple truth.

But Sherlock has betrayed more than his friends, and at least one person in the series does hint at a higher power. Go back and look at the Molly scene again. His friends are not the only, or the first, thing she thinks of: “How dare you throw away the beautiful gifts you were born with?” There is more being given here than John’s, or Molly’s, or Mycroft’s love.

A gift places us under an obligation to the Giver.



*Dear Mr. Gatiss: After the empty house/Mary as client sequence, I didn’t think my heart could be broken again. You re-made it and re-broke it, right here.

Thursday, December 19, 2013

Oh. Right. I Have a Blog.

It kind of slipped my mind. See, I’ve spent the last few months traveling with Francis Crawford of Lymond.

There’s so much I want to say:

I want to discourse at length on three words - “I don’t mind.” - as spoken in The Disorderly Knights, on why the scene of which they are the lynchpin became my instant favorite as I read it, and on why that judgment only deepened after I finished the entire series.

I want to discuss, from both a reader’s and a writer’s perspective, the importance of supporting characters. Not just “characters who play an important but secondary role in the plot,” but truly supporting characters: the characters who make it their mission in life to support the main characters. In other words, a prose ode to the men of Saint Mary’s, with pride of place given to Adam Blacklock and Archie Abernethy. (Daniel Hislop fans may also present their case.)

I want to start what I think (only half facetiously) could be a very illuminating debate: “Granting that they both richly deserve it, whom do you want to punch more: Jerrott or Marthe?”

I want to announce that I love the ending of Pawn in Frankincense, and then let you all call me a horrible person.

I want to explore the whole concept of the supernatural as Ms. Dunnett presents it, from religion to the occult, and how it relates to her views on marriage.

I want to talk about Sybilla. Oh, how I want to talk about Sybilla.

That’s just for starters. But I can’t do any of it. You see, I had the great good fortune to come to these books blind (and that word, right there, is intentionally loaded). Someone I trust gave me The Game of Kings and essentially said, “Read this. You won’t be sorry.” So I read it. I admit I found it rough going at first (and there’s another thing I want to discuss: Should the central narrative thrust of Kings have been made apparent earlier, to give us some sort of foothold in navigating this new world? Or is the delayed revelation ultimately necessary to the structure of the whole six-volume work?). But trust kept me going, and then in the courtyard at Threave I surrendered utterly and signed up for the whole voyage.

I tried to stay away from comments and reviews while I read, for it became apparent very early that this is a story built to astonish, in every sense. I intend to go back now, and relish it differently, but the first encounter should, by rights, be on Ms. Dunnett’s terms.

And that’s why I don’t want to post anything. Because I can preface with all of the spoiler warnings I want, but it would still be out there, and I don’t want even to risk ruining for some unknown reader-of-the-future the end of part four of Checkmate. But how do you talk about Lymond without talking about that?

Sometimes you can’t say “Read this because…” You can only say “Read this, and the ‘because’ will become apparent.” The Lymond Chronicles are an experience for solitude, and a favorite chair. They require, as their hero does, an extraordinary trust.

So really, all this post can be is a long “Thank you” to the person who, five months ago, put the first volume into my hands. Who reminded me that the best way to discover a story is to receive it, in trust, from a kindred spirit.

And I’d better stop now, or I won’t be able to resist bringing up Austin Grey...

Sunday, September 1, 2013

The Theology of Doctor Who: The Fires of Pompeii


Since this episode has recently increased in trivia-game value (“Name the Doctor Who episode that guest-starred both a future companion and a future Doctor.”), it seemed like the right time to give it another look. So much good stuff here that it’s hard to know where to begin. It is funny, as all of the best Doctor Whos are (the water pistol!), and heartbreaking, as all of the best Doctor Whos are.

Theologically speaking, it is an elegant illustration of that most difficult of concepts, the coexistence of predestination and free will. Headed for ancient Rome, the Doctor and Donna instead wind up in Pompeii on the day before “volcano day.” Donna wants to warn everyone, but the Doctor just wants to get out: there are certain points in time, he explains, that are fixed, unchangeable. Unfortunately, the destruction of Pompeii is one of those times. Donna, not much impressed by Fate, tries anyway to start an evacuation, but she encounters two roadblocks: the language does not yet have a word for “volcano” (it is this eruption that will give it one), and the city’s soothsayers predict a long and prosperous life for the city and its inhabitants. Donna would scoff at that last one, but for the fact that Pompeii’s soothsayers really do seem to have second sight. One of them even identifies the Doctor as “man from Gallifrey.”

The Doctor’s plan (for the Doctor, “run” is a plan) also hits a roadblock when an enterprising street merchant sells the TARDIS as “modern art” to a local businessman, Caecilius. In attempting to recover it, the Doctor learns (short version) that ancient aliens, the Pyrovile, have tunneled under Mt. Vesuvius and intend to use its power to take over the earth and transform humans into Pyrovile. The Doctor can stop them, thus saving the world, by shutting off their machine...but all of the power of Vesuvius that had been diverted will then need another outlet. In other words, Pompeii is a fixed point in time AND it is the Doctor’s choice that causes it.

As a bonus, this is also a nice example of the principle of double-effect. The Doctor does not blow up Pompeii to save the world. He turns off the Pyrovile engine to save the world, and the destruction of Pompeii is an attendant but decidedly un-willed consequence.

And yet, for all of that, the moment that haunts me is yet to come. The Doctor, furious and despairing (“Don’t you think I’ve done enough?” he snarls at Donna), and haunted by the burning of Gallifrey, heads straight for the TARDIS. But Donna, with tears in her eyes and ash in her hair, begs him to “save someone.” She has accepted what had to be done and what must be, but she rejects the Doctor’s fatalist surrender. And so Caecilius and his family are saved (and David Tennant grips Peter Capaldi’s hand and pulls him into the TARDIS).

It’s so easy (for me, at least) to be the Doctor here. To become so overwhelmed by the big picture that we think, because we can’t control that, we can’t control anything. Sometimes we all need a shorthand typist from Chiswick to remind us that we can still save someone.