Gonzalo Barr

If you have a garden and a library you have everything you need.
– Marcus Tullius Cicero

Image: Mary Cassatt, “Woman Reading in a Garden” (1880); Source: Marcus Tullius Cicero quote, thinkexist.com

I think it was Coco Chanel who single-handedly showed the world that simplicity is elegance.  Simplicity is even more crucial to getting a message across, to communicating efficiently, a fact that is lost on people who “relocate” when they could “move” and “inquire” when they could just “ask.”

Simplicity is no different in the naming of things.  Local weathermen who suffer from an acute case of jargon-envy say, “convection,” when what they really mean is “rain.”  I suppose listening to high-falooting words like that takes some of the sting out of paying the cable bill.

Officials in Webster, Massachusetts forgot this lesson about the importance of simplicity and paid for it recently with embarrassment.  Years ago, they decided to make signs with the original name of a nearby lake.  The name they decided to use was the indigenous one and went like this (take a deep breath) — “Lake Chargoggagoggmanchauggagoggchaubunagungamaugg.”  And the cause of embarrassment was the recent discovery that the signs the city had made for Lake Chargoggagoggmanchauggagoggchaubunagungamaugg were misspelled in, not one, but two places.  The incorrect signs were written with an O at letter 20 in place of a U and an H at letter 38 instead of an N.

No one knows the cost of correcting these misspelled signs, but it may not matter because everyone refers to the lake, simply, as Lake Webster.

Source:  Paul Thompson, “Wrong spelling on signs for Lake Chargoggagoggmanchauggagoggchaubunagungamaugg,” Mail Online (Apr. 22, 2009)(accessed Apr. 27, 2009)

In an earlier post, I published a quote from Montaigne that I thought was “answered” by Yeats 300 years later, as if the two had been engaged in a conversation.  Let’s try this again, only with a shorter time span and two participants from neighboring countries who spoke the same language.

Here is the late Julio Cortázar’s protagonist in his short story, “Apocalípsis en Solentiname” (Apocalypse in Solentiname) published in 1978.  The protagonist is a writer on tour, Cortázar himself, who is weary of the press asking him the same questions, one of which has to do with a writer’s commitment to politics, activism, to bringing about change in his society.  [The translations from Spanish to English are mine] –

“¿Te parece que el escritor tiene que estar comprometido?”

***

“Do you think that a writer must be committed?”

Here is the “answer” by Chilean writer, Alberto Fuguet, from the Preface to the collection of stories, McOndo (1996) –

“Si hace unos años la disyuntiva del escritor joven estaba entre tomar el lápiz o la carabina, ahora parece que lo más angustiante para escribir es elegir entre Windows 95 o Macintosh.”

***

“If years ago the young writer had to choose between grabbing a pencil or a carbine, now it seems like his toughest decision before writing is choosing between Windows 95 and Macintosh.”

I take it as a sign of maturity that this generation of writers in Latin America, a group that includes Jorge Volpi of Mexico, Edmundo Paz Soldán of Bolivia, Santiago Gamboa of Colombia, and others can be full-time writers and not part-time activists.  The latter, I suspect, are neither very effective as activists nor much good as writers either.

I have also written about this younger generation of Latin American writers here.

Sources: Julio Cortázar, “Apocalípsis en Solentiname” in Alguien que anda por ahí (1978), at 79, Alberto Fuguet and Sergio Gómez, eds., McOndo (1996), at 13

Today, April 23, is World Book and Copyright Day.  It is a date established by UNESCO to promote reading, publishing, and the protection of intellectual property rights throughout the world.

It is also the date when Miguel de Cervantes, Shakespeare, and Garcilaso de la Vega died in 1616.  And it is the feast of St. George, patron saint of England and Catalonia.  In Barcelona, it is customary to give a book and a rose in celebration of today.

A more extensive earlier post on World Book and Copyright Day and on the feast of St. George is here.

Here is a segment from the German television program, “Euromaxx,” on World Book Copyright Day and the celebrations in Barcelona (in English) –

Photo:  Miguel Ugaldi; Thanks to Diari d’un llibre vell blog for the link to the video.

The University of Rouen has created online the most comprehensive site on the draft manuscripts of Madame Bovary.  The site is a gold mine for anyone interested in the composition of the novel.  It is as close as we can get to standing behind Flaubert and spying over his shoulder as he wrote passages and drafts of the novel over the eight years that it took him to write it.

For example, if you click on “Consulter” on the left side bar, and further click on “Roman,” you get a list of the chapters, subdivided into passages.  Click on one, say the beginning passage, and a new window opens with the novel in its final form.  Moving the cursor over the text will highlight passages.  If you click on the highlighted passage, you will be taken to a side-by-side view of the holographic manuscript with corrections by the author and a transcription of the same on the right.  It is not surprising to learn that the beginning in final published form of the novel was a lot different from the beginning in the first draft.  (Maxwell Perkins cut thousands of words from the original beginning of Hemingway’s The Sun Also Rises before publishing it, which is why it starts with the passage about Robert Cohn, who is a minor character.)

The site also has charts that map each section of the novel, including discarded passages.  All this may sound like esoteric information (TMI) to the non-specialist, but isn’t dissecting a book through the consecutive drafts a good way to learn something about how the author did it?

Image:  first page of the holographic manuscript of Madame Bovary, bovary.fr; Source:  bovary.fr (accessed April 21, 2009)

I have been reviewing my posts and identifying stories that may have developed since I last posted about them. The case of Rachel Ehrenfeld is one. I won’t post all the details again, you can read them in the two previous posts, here and here, but I will summarize them [from my previous posts] –

In 2005, Rachel Ehrenfeld published Funding Evil: How Terrorism Is Financed and How To Stop It, in which she wrote that Saudi businessman, Khalid Salim bin Mahfouz, had financed al-Qaida through the family’s National Commercial Bank of Saudi Arabia and Islamic charities. Mahfouz sued Ehrenfeld for libel in the UK. When Ehrenfeld did not appear, the British court entered a default judgment against her, awarded Mahfouz substantial money damages, and enjoined the publisher from making the book available in the UK. (For example, Amazon (UK) does not list the book.)

Ehrenfeld then filed an action in US federal district court, arguing that Mahfouz would not have been able to prevail had he sued in the US and, therefore, the British judgment is unenforceable here because it violates the First Amendment. She also argued that Mahfouz should have sued her in US courts, as she is American and lives here. And that Mahfouz engaged in forum shopping by bringing the suit in the UK, where the libel laws are more liberal.

The federal district court, sitting in diversity jurisdiction, asked New York’s highest court, the Court of Appeals, to interpret the state’s long-arm statute and whether it applied to Mahfouz to give the federal court personal jurisdiction over him.

On December 20, 2007, the Court of Appeals decided that Mahfouz had not transacted any business in New York “in person or through an agent” and therefore the state long-arm statute did not apply to him. If Mahfouz were to petition a US court to enforce the British judgment here, a sustained attorney-client relationship in the state might be sufficient to make him subject to NY laws and court jurisdiction.

That was not a defeat for Ehrenfeld. In their decision, the Court of Appeals stated, “At the outset, it is important to emphasize that we are called upon to decide a narrow issue. The Second Circuit has not asked us to opine upon the propriety of English libel law or its differences from its United States and, particularly, New York State counterparts. And we decline to do so.”

In response to the court decision, the New York State Assembly (legislature) passed “The Libel Terrorism Protection Act,” which was signed into law by the Governor in April 2008. The law states that a New York court need not recognize a foreign judgment if –

the cause of action resulted in a defamation judgment obtained in a jurisdiction outside the United States, unless the court before which the matter is brought sitting in this state first determines that the defamation law applied in the foreign court’s adjudication provided at least as much protection for freedom of speech and press in that case as would be provided by both the United States and New York constitutions.
– New York Consolidated Laws, Civil Practice Law and Rules, Article 53 Recognition of Foreign Country Money Judgments § 5304. Grounds for non-recognition.

What the New York law does is allow state courts to not enforce judgments entered in foreign jurisdictions when those jurisdictions do not have at a minimum the same free speech guarantees as those in the US Constitution first amendment.

As I noted before, the UK is a defamation plaintiff’s paradise. A plaintiff there, to maintain a suit for libel, slander or defamation, need overcome very low legal thresholds.

In this case, the cause of action arose out of the fact that Ehrenfeld’s book was available in the UK. Neither party resided there. The plaintiff’s lawyers shopped for the forum that would be most convenient for the case.

As a matter of practice, known as “comity,” courts in the US and elsewhere generally recognize the judgments of foreign courts. Given that the Internet makes it possible to circulate any statement around the world, though, there exists a heightened potential for abusing the practice. Without laws like the one passed in New York, anyone who feels slighted can silence the author by filing a suit in a friendly court and seeking enforcement of the court’s judgment in the jurisdiction where the author resides.

Fortunately, the US Congress is considering a bill similar to the New York law. H.R. 6146, in part, states –

(a) Findings.–Congress finds the following:
(1) The first amendment of the Constitution of the United States prohibits the abridgment of freedom of speech.
(2) Freedom of speech is fundamental to the values of American democracy.
(3) In light of the constitutional protection our Nation affords to freedom of speech, the Supreme Court has modified the elements of the common law tort of defamation to provide more protection for defendants than would be available at common law, including providing special protections for political speech.
(4) The courts of other countries, including those that otherwise share our Nation’s common law and due process traditions, are not constrained by the first amendment and thus may provide less protection to defamation defendants than our Constitution requires.
(5) While our Nation’s courts will generally enforce foreign judgments as a matter of comity, comity does not require that courts enforce foreign judgments that are repugnant to our Nation’s fundamental constitutional values, in particular its strong protection of the right to freedom of speech.
(6) Our Nation’s courts should only enforce foreign judgments as a matter of comity when such foreign judgments are consistent with the right to freedom of speech.
(b) Purpose.–The purpose of this Act is to protect the right to freedom of speech under the first amendment to the Constitution of the United States from the potentially weakening effects of foreign
judgments concerning defamation.

Note that the bill in Congress goes further than the New York law. While the New York law allows the state court some discretion — “a New York court need not recognize a foreign judgment if” — the language in the proposed bill before Congress is mandatory. The key portion of H.R. 6146 states –

(a) First Amendment Considerations.–Notwithstanding any other provision of Federal or State law, a domestic court shall not recognize or enforce a foreign judgment for defamation that is based upon a
publication concerning a public figure or a matter of public concern unless the domestic court determines that the foreign judgment is consistent with the first amendment to the Constitution of the United States.

The scope of the bill before Congress is quite broad.  It would trump any other federal or state law.  It would also apply to publications concerning a “public figure or a matter of public concern.”  The disjunctive “or” is key here. Even if the plaintiff shows to the court’s satisfaction that he is not a “public figure” and thus the law should not apply to his suit, the court may still find that matter at issue is one of “public concern.” No one could fault a court for finding that a publication, like Ehrenfeld’s, about financing terrorism through money laundering, is a matter of public concern. In that case, the proposed bill, once signed into law, would bar the plaintiff from seeking to enforce his foreign judgment in any US court.

The bill under consideration in Congress would apply to all courts in the US, federal and state.

Congress would do well to act with alacrity on this important and necessary legislation. And the President should sign it into law without delay once it is presented to him.

Sources: New York Consolidated Laws, Civil Practice Law and Rules, Article 53 Recognition of Foreign Country Money Judgments § 5304. Grounds for non-recognition, US Government Printing Office (GPO Internet Access)(accessed Sept. 18, 2008), Library of Congress FindLaw website (accessed Apr. 17, 2009), OpenCongress website (accessed Apr. 17, 2009)

In a recession, doing it yourself (DIY) is one way to beat the high cost of construction.  So in the spirit of overcoming these economically difficult times, here’s a primer on the ultimate DIY project — starting your own country.

(1)  Get some land and occupy it.  You really need some land or at least a solid structure affixed to the earth.  Countries can’t be virtual or metaphysical or ethereal.  It helps tremendously if the land is unoccupied and unclaimed.  Also make certain it is undefended.  If you occupy land belonging to someone else chances are they will find out about it and boot you off.  Even if the land belongs to no one that does not mean you’re in the clear.

Sometime in the twentieth century, two Europeans thought they could start their own country on an island in the Pacific that had been formed by ocean currents.  The newly-formed island did not belong to anyone legally nor did anyone occupy it.  It was ripe for the taking.  So the two men sailed to the island and claimed it.  They declared the island a country.

The rest of the story arrives to us as hearsay:  One day, the two Europeans, no doubt enjoying the fruits of independence and sovereignty, spotted a flotilla of kayaks with nearby islanders paddling in their direction.  The islanders took the island by force and declared it part of their domain, never mind who got there first.  The two Europeans were never seen or heard from again, but we are told that they tasted like chicken.

(2)  Once you find unclaimed land that you can legally occupy, populate it.  Don’t just plant a flag, no matter how cool the flag may be.  (See more on flags below.)  German tourists wake before the sun rises, drape towels over the best chaises longues at resorts all over the world, then go back to sleep, secure in the knowledge that most people are too polite to remove the towels.  Land is different, as we have seen with the case of our two intrepid Europeans in the Pacific.  If you’re going to claim land, you had better go armed and ready to rumble.

(3) Form a government.  This is the fun part of building your own country.  You get to give yourself and your best friends great titles like Prince of Percocet or Grand Duke of Demerol.  (If I were you, I would name my country after something that denotes relaxation to help draw tourists.)  This is also where you get to design your flag and print your money and stamps.  You don’t need anything special to make a flag.  Panama’s flag was designed by a woman in New York who had nothing to do with the isthmus, using materials she bought at Macy’s for a few dollars.  Most flags are rectangular, but yours doesn’t have to be.  Nepal’s flag is made of two pennants.  Nepal’s flag has to be the coolest flag on the planet, which is an achievement considering that the country is so far above sea level it is almost not on the planet at all.  A unique shape will help your flag stand out from the rest.

Forming a government also requires you to draft and sign high-sounding documents — a constitution, laws, and decrees.   Do not give into the temptation to copy some other country’s docs.  What works in one place will not necessarily work someplace else.  Founding documents must be tailored made.  Of course, no one said you can’t borrow an idea or two.  Another word of advice:  Keep it simple.  The more articles you put in your constitution, the more likely you will have to redraft the whole document in a few years.  Give your document room to grow through jurisprudence,  but we are getting ahead of ourselves here.

This is also your chance to invent unique customs and practices to make your country stand out and the world a richer, more diverse place, as occurred here –

(4) Be nice.  According to the 1933 Montevideo Convention, your government must be able to interact with other governments.  No one knows what this means, but it sounds good.

(5)  Be recognized.  You’re not a real country under international law if no one recognizes you as one.  If no one hears that tree fall, it didn’t really fall.  The Principality of Sealand is an example.

(6) Join up.  There are many organizations your new country can join to puff up its bona fides.  There’s the United Nations, of course.  The UN is rife with departments and agencies that have kept the talentless, lazy, and corrupt fully employed for decades.  But there are also organizations that are dedicated to specific and laudable goals.  Once you join, be visible and active.  Nikita Khrushchev became a household name when he famously banged the heel of his shoe against a table to disrupt a diplomatic meeting.  Fortunately, today you don’t have to go to such extremes.  Showing a little nipple will suffice.

(7) Be serious.  You can’t call yourself a country.   Joel and Donna Brinkle “seceded” from the United States and claimed to be sovereign nations.  Arguing that they were now independent countries, they stopped paying income tax.  They also printed their own money, by hand, from “The Land of Brinkle,” and used it to put a deposit on a $700,000 house.  Although the Land of Brinkle had no military, the couple filed liens against anyone they did not like.  Having a lien filed against your property by some joker thinking he is an independent country is not nice.  I don’t care where you come from.

Another flawed attempt at establishing personal sovereignty was made recently by Scott Allan Witmer, who was arrested for driving under the influence.  In his defense, he claimed that he was sovereign and therefore the government could not arrest him.

“They think I’m nuts. They locked me up for it,” said Witmer, wearing a green prison jumpsuit. “I know what’s going on here.”

Witmer said he was challenging the traffic stop that led to his arrest and said he believes in certain laws, not all of them.

“Don’t all our souls live within ourselves?  Isn’t this where you really live?” Witmer asked, pointing to his body.

The judge hearing Witmer’s case reset his bail and ordered that he not be released from prison until drug, alcohol and psychological evaluations were completed.

So there you have it — DIY country.  Never let it be said that this nerdy blog about books, reading, and writing doesn’t occasionally offer useful and practical advice, as well.

For the rest of us who are not thinking about starting our own countries, remember that today, April 15, is tax day in the US.  We have until midnight to mail our income tax forms.

Photo: sand bar, Gonzalo Barr; Sources: Joshua Keating, “How to Start Your Own Country in Four Easy Steps,” Foreign Policy (posted February 2008), loweringthebar blog, film clip from “Bananas,” (1971), written by Mickey Rose and Woody Allen, directed by Allen, YouTube, Sarah Cassi, “Northampton man defends himself on drunken-driving charge,” Northhampton County News (Mar. 12, 2009)

Do stories matter? Alexander McCall Smith thinks so –

Stories have an effect in this world. They are part of our moral conversation as a society. They weigh in; they change the world because they become part of our cultural history. There never was an Anna Karenina or a Madame Bovary, even if there might have been models, but what happened to these characters has become part of the historical experience of women.

Why segregate the significance of literature along gender lines, though?  Literature and what happens to the characters who make it great become part of the historical experience of everyone.

Image:  Ivan Kramskoi, “Portrait of an Unknown Woman” (1883); Source: Alexander McCall Smith, “Lost in Fiction,” The Wall Street Journal (Apr. 4-5, 2009), at W1

With so many books crossing genres, Bolaño’s 2666 being a recent example, shelving them correctly can sometimes be a problem for booksellers.  The works of Geoff Dyer have been described as “genre-defying,” which I suppose means they are extra-difficult to shelve.  Dyer has written novels, critical studies and, well, call them what you like.  Two examples of these unclassifiable works are But Beautiful (1996), a fictional account of jazz and Out of Sheer Rage:  In the Shadow of D.H. Lawrence (1997), which is not what you think it is.  Here is Dyer on how one bookseller solved the problem of where to shelve his books –

Q: Booksellers don’t know where to shelve your book.  Do you have any advice
for them? Will they have to start a new category?

Dyer: The most satisfying experience of this I’ve had was in London when I saw my jazz book in the best-sellers section.  I knew the manager of the store a little and asked him if it was true.  ‘No, of course not,’ he said.  ‘But we didn’t know where else to put it.’

Sources: Pantheon staff, “A Conversation With Geoff Dyer,” (about another of Dyer’s unclassifiable works, Yoga For People Who Can’t Be Bothered To Do It (2003)), absolutewrite.com (accessed Apr. 3, 2009), article on Geoff Dyer in Wikipedia.  See also Mark Crees, “The raw and the acquired,” reviewing Geoff Dyer, Jeff in Venice, Death in Varanasi (US edition in 2009), Times Literary Supplement (Mar. 27, 2009), at 19