A Cardinal’s Brutal Homily

My mother lives on the second floor of a high-rise apartment building on West End Avenue. Back in the 1990s, she and her boyfriend bought themselves a bird feeder built in the style of a Swiss chalet, and hung it outside their kitchen window. One of the first regular diners was a resplendent male cardinal, whom they named “John O’Connor” after New York‘s archbishop. Whenever the bird put in an appearance, my mother would cry out, “Faith, ‘t’is none other than His Eminence!” — changing accents from her normal gentrified New Jersey to something far closer to the Old Head at Kinsale.

My mother, I’m proud to say, is the furthest thing from the Bill Maher type of ex-Catholic who dines out attacking the Church. Having gained her freedom and worked through her animosity long ago, she now regards Catholicism the way she came to regard my father — not her type by any means, but good enough in its way, and worth invoking when the situation calls for extra leverage.

I got a reminder of this today, when we had our Thanksgiving call. Somewhat like the Catalan language has done since Franco’s death, the domestic qualities my mother once suppressed have lately undergone a renaissance. Whereas, during my childhood, Thanksgiving meant Chinese take-out and a Holocaust movie, my mother now helps her boyfriend prepare cocktails and hors d’oeuvres, turkey and stuffing, for his entire family. She has, in effect, rewritten her life’s script, from Annie Hall to Hannah and her Sisters.

The trick, then, is in reaching her before they begin the serious work of stuffing the turkey. I managed it by calling at 9:00 AM, Eastern, before she’d so much as decanted the olives. After she’d run through the list of friends and relatives who’d fallen sick — a new, strange custom for both of us — I mentioned I planned to spend Black Friday lunching with my friend Rick.

Here, I was consciously choosing the lesser of two evils. Rick is the dinking buddy sans pareil; in the dozen years of our friendship, we’ve taken our Fear and Loathing act on the road, through Arizona, Nevada, California and the Mexican states of Sonora and Sinaloa. My mother’s as aware of this as she is that I’m a scant ten weeks on the good side of a drinking problem. At the same time, she also knows that Rick is my sole remaining close friend in the Valley. He lives a proper settled life, with a wife, a house and a beautiful basset hound who is just starting, at the age of eight, to go gray about the muzzle. He is a crackerjack cook, and all things considered, my mother would prefer to hear that I’d be with him than with nobody.

“I have every intention of staying sober,” I assured her.

“I’m so glad to hear that,” she said. Then added: “Oh, dear. I think I hear a portent.”

She explained that the birdfeeder had attracted a brand-new cardinal. “He’s not a stable character like O’Connor, though. There’s something the matter with him. He bangs his head on the glass, all the time. We call him ‘Headbanger’.”

I knew that birds weren’t terribly bright — hence, “bird brain” — and would sometimes fly full-throttle into windows, mistaking them for open sky. On a bad day, ASU campus, where buildings are commonly covered top to bottom in plate glass, could look like Tarawa Beach for grackles. But this wasn’t quite Headbanger‘s problem.

“Our friend Bapsi, the Parsee girl from Mumbai, said he sees his own reflection in the glass and thinks it’s another bird. He doesn’t dive straight at it; he just knocks at it with his head. She bought us a beautiful hand puppet shaped like a owl — apparently, she thought we were going to sit at the table all day wearing the puppet, just to scare him away from the glass. Instead, we hanged it from the branch right above the feeder.”

“You lynched the owl?”

“Yes. Yes, we did. He’s our strange fruit now. But Headbanger pays him no mind. He goes right on attacking his reflection, like he’s attacking himself. There’s no need — he seems like a very talented cardinal, with a warm heart and a lovely tuft like a Kennedy’s.”

“So that’s the portent?“ My mother, the English professor, deals in symbols — positing them, reading them. Some are subtler than others.

“Yes, that was the portent. As soon as you mentioned Rick, I heard him start banging his head. Perhaps he needs new contact lenses, too?” I told her I thought Headbanger was fine on that count. “In that case,” she said, “I think he was an agent of the Holy Ghost.”

Where the Church is concerned, my mother is a walking time capsule. She left in autumn of 1962, just after Martin de Porres had been raised to the altars as the first black saint, and just when the bishops were gathering in Rome for the first session of Vatican II. “Holy Ghost” sounded to me as quaint as the comparison of a cardinal’s tuft to a Kennedy’s. Normally, I subscribe instinctively to a 19th-century view of time — linear and ruthless, marching from darkness to light, trampling those too feeble to keep step. But for a brief moment, just before hanging up I felt like a Catholic should: buffered from the caprice of ages by the embrace of Mater et Magistra.

What Price Perfection?

John Belushi and Humphrey Bogart were born too late. On the other hand, if you’re reading this, and haven’t yet died of lung cancer, or from shooting up a speedball, you might be right on time. According to the New York Times, researchers at San Diego’s Scripps Institute are planning work on a vaccine that will prevent recipients from feeling the effects of these substances.

Like any vaccine, it contains small elements of the dangerous agent, and is meant to trick the body into producing antibodies that will thwart them before they take effect. Results have been mixed so far. Smokers injected with the vaccine frustrated researchers by quitting smoking at the same rate as smokers injected with a placebo. On the more encouraging side, vaccinated cocaine addicts who snorted up under laboratory conditions reported wanting to beat down research assistants for giving them stuff that had been stepped on.

In itself, this is good news. If people, finding themselves in the grip of a life-threatening or life-destroying addiction, would resort to a vaccine in the hope of regaining some sense of control, I’m certainly not about to stand in their way. But the Scripps researchers’ ambitions are vast. They’ve also experiment with vaccines against alcohol, marijuana and obesity — the last of these designed “to block the effects of a peptide hormone produced by the stomach called ghrelin that signals hunger in the brain.”

When I consider that science, if it has its way, will soon be able to pre-empt any self-destructive or socially unacceptable behavior, I think of Chris Christie. The notion that his Santa Claus figure might represent some disqualifying character defect got shot down quickly enough, but the point is, it got raised in the first place. Embedded deeply in the American character is a strain of ascetism that condemns any outsized appetite — except, naturally, for the lust after power and renown that tends to sustain people through the psychic buffetings that attend any political career. That’s perfectly kosher.

If voters like their candidates lean, focused and driven, that’s their right. But if that demand is pushing medical researchers to turn every citizen into the sort of person who could survive a vetting from either party’s national committee, humans as we know them might cease to exist. If that sounds panicky or dystopian, consider the rate with which the notion of sex addiction has been gaining in popularity. Though the American Psychiatric Association has yet to recognize the condition, sex rehab clinics exist, and have attracted the likes of David Duchovny and Tiger Woods, among others.

To be fair, many of the patients under care seem to be very far out of control. According to Marty Kafka, who treats self-described sex addicts at McLean Hospital (in view of his name alone, he should title his memoir “In the Penile Colony”), addicts experience sex as a joyless compulsion. Kafka uses a set of fairly stringent criteria to distinguish true addicts from people with strong libidos. Best of all, his treatment regimen does not include chemical castration.

And yet I find it worrisome. As Hannah Roisin observes in Slate, “Addictions share cultural boundaries with character failure.” Medicalizing the fringe end of some frowned-upon behavior can only serve to stigmatize its more mundane manifestations. The randy frat boy and the corn-fed Iowan come under suspicion as fellow-travelers with the poor souls in treatment.

When it comes to defining normative, or at least optimal, behavior, American society is looking less forgiving all the time. In a Times opinion piece, James Atlas identifies an emerging subspecies, “Super People.” From a brochure that profiles winners of a prestigious fellowship, he lists the defining characteristics:

…there doesn’t seem to be anyone on this list who hasn’t mastered at least one musical instrument; helped build a school or hospital in some foreign land; excelled at a sport; attained fluency in two or more languages; had both a major and a minor, sometimes two, usually in unrelated fields (philosophy and molecular science, mathematics and medieval literature); and yet found time — how do they have any? — to enjoy such arduous hobbies as mountain biking and white-water kayaking.

The rise of these demigods may be the logical response to the concentration of American wealth. One percent of the population earns one-quarter of its annual income; Ivy League schools, whose graduates rank among the likeliest candidates for that share of the pie, comprise less than one percent of America’s college-aged population. As the bar goes up, people take special measures to clear it. Stiffening competition has created a de facto educational fast track. “If your child is in an elite school,” writes Atlas, “there are no more dumb kids in his or her math class– only smart and smarter.”

So we’re looking at an aristocracy of talent — nothing wrong there. But when it comes to the survival of the fittest, I am a trickle-down theorist. If squeaking into a top school or landing a top job is getting more difficult, then mediocre schools and jobs should soon raise their standards, too — after all, they’ll be catching the elite spillover. Such circumstances, I fear, will make any eccentric tendency look like a potential block to success. If people can’t actually medicate or vaccinate themselves to keep from smoking, or eating, or slacking off, or having too much sex, or — in my darkest fantasies — making faux pas in interviews, they’ll certainly wish they could. The self-improvement market being what it is, there will always be some mountebank, if not some respectable researcher, catering to that wish.

Self-improvement is fine. It’s admirable. But I’d hate to live in a society that expects perfection, and demands that anything outside that narrow box be hastily sanded away. In Nathaniel Hawthorne’s short story, “The Birthmark,” a lofty intellectual named Aylmer becomes obsessed by a hand-shaped birthmark on his wife’s cheek. In his mind, it evolves into an all-or-nothing proposition: either it goes, or she does. He concocts an elixir that, finally, does them both in: just as the birthmark disappears, his wife dies.

Hawthorne moralizes: “Yet, had Aylmer reached a profounder, wisdom, he need not have flung away the happiness which would have woven his mortal life of the selfsame texture with the celestial.” In other words, where his wife’s appearance was concerned, Aylmer shot for divinity and came up dust, the schmuck.

Now, I don’t see much chance of us actually killing ourselves or each other in the name of perfection. But I’m afraid we could start judging ourselves — and each other — with such a cold and ruthless eye as to make life seem a living death. To put it aother way, how can we really be merry if we start second-guessing ourselves every time we eat or drink?

The Odd Thing About Sobriety…

Well, it’s Day Sixteen, and I’m pleased to report that I’ve felt no very strong urge to drink. It’s not that I’ve enclosed myself in any bubble; since the Sunday before last, I’ve passed by innumerable bars and liquor stores. True, I haven’t actually parked myself at a table with a bunch of friends who were hitting it, but since I did most of my real boozing when I was by myself, I’m not sure that’ll be the sternest test.

Could this mean I never descended into the kind of powerlessness Bill W. wrote about? Maybe, but this seems like the wrong time to start splitting hairs. I had a nasty habit; now I’ve kicked it. Why trivialize that? When I told a friend I planned to quit drinking, she protested I wasn’t suffering delirium tremens or vomiting blood — therefore, my resolution must be premature. As they say down South, bless her heart. (I understand this to mean: “What a ninny.”) Why should people wait till they’re in the last extremity before changing their lives for the better? Whatever happened to “An ounce of prevention…etc”?

No, as things are shaping up, the real challenge is in living with myself unanesthetized. Most people have no occasion to realize this, but binging four nights a week ensures that a quantity of alcohol remains constantly in the bloodstream. It has the effect of hanging a thin curtain between the conscious self — the part that handles the details of daily living — and the parts that form long-term plans, hunt for the big picture, make value judgments. I have the sort of mind that infers oceans from drops of water; as I’m just now starting to remember, this isn’t always as much fun as it sounds.

An example? Last Thursday or Friday, I happened upon a short opinion piece that purported to instruct Catholics on how to write. It threw me into a tizzy, not only because I found the author’s premise — that none of us know how already — damned insulting, but also because she seemed to be calling for more of the reductive, high-intensity screeds that make me, when I’m the reader, feel like someone is slamming my head in a car door.

With its pointed tone, the piece took me back to my sales days, when every so often management would oblige us to attend a seminar in some hotel’s conference room. The presentations were aimed at beguiling and shaming us in equal measure. With slogans like “TAKE OWNERSHIP!”, the presenters did their best to convince us that failure to close betokened a failure of will and nothing else. In my own interpretation, I failed to close when a prospective buyer turned out not to need what I was trying to sell, or could get it cheaper somewhere else. Soberly acknowledging these facts and moving on did not, to my mind, make me a lily-livered slacker, and I resented management for trying to make me believe I was one.

At times like these, booze comes in handy. Management must have known this, because, like captains from the Age of Fighting Sail who dealt out grog in tandem with the cat, it tended to schedule these galling events on Fridays. Depending on the company, this meant either that our weekly team-builder had ended several hours earlier, or that it would begin a few hours hence. When still half-smashed or happy in anticipation of becoming fully so, I could just manage to keep a poker face. With my psychic nerve endings stripped bare, I reacted to the offending column by storming around the room, cursing under my breath and shaking my fist, like a (barely) overgrown Rumpelstiltskin — or perhaps like a coked-out Lenny Dykstra, which amounts to the same thing.

But for all its apparent drawbacks, I can foresee one advantage in this new accessibility to grief, rage and high dudgeon. That is in discovering material for good fiction. Yesterday, in the New York Times Sunday Review, novelist Jeffrey Eugenides defined consciousness as “being in a room with stuff that just won’t go away.” This is also a letter-perfect definition of sobriety. When that “stuff” is particularly bizarre or out of proportion, it mustn’t be projected onto the outer, existing world, as in an opinion column; doing so would brand the writer as a crank. If, on the other hand, he cannibalizes it to build an imaginary world, he might, with a lot of elbow grease and a lot of luck, turn out to be Kafka.