I want to compliment Lisa Borst on her excellent "Ways of Seeing," in the current issue of Bookforum. It’s a review of Nicholson Baker’s new book Finding a Likeness: How I Got Somewhat Better at Art. Borst writes,
Finding a Likeness chronicles two years in which Baker took a break from fiction and literary journalism to teach himself “how to draw and paint on the far side of sixty,” recasting his interest in figurative language as a new focus on figurative art. The mechanics of getting “somewhat better at art”—the mimetic skill that drawing demands, the “erasefully slow” temporality imposed by shading a landscape or still life, the robust universe of instruments and tools (longtime Bakerian subjects) available to the amateur artist—echo many of his lifelong literary concerns. But the essential irony of the book—one Baker is way too humble to name—is that we spend much of it watching one of the best describers alive struggle with the basics of representation.
“Figurative language,” “mimetic skill,” “one of the best describers alive,” “basics of representation” – these are words that immediately catch my attention. The art of description is one of my main interests. Baker’s book appears to be one that I’d enjoy enormously. Borst says of it,
Long before he turned to visual art, Baker was writing images. (There’s a generally synesthetic quality to much of his prose—blurbs on the back cover of my copy of Vox compare the novel to both Chagall’s drawings and Ravel’s Bolero—but the dominant mode, the sensory system to which he defaults, is the visual.) Baker’s exhilarating similes belong to a larger project of capturing how everyday things look in ultra-high-resolution detail; his sensibility, he admits in the early memoir U and I, is “image-hoarding.” Also in that book, in which Baker reflects on his literary indebtedness to John Updike, he refers to Updike’s image-forward style as “Prousto-Nabokovian,” one of many admiring epithets in the memoir that could equally apply to Baker himself. (I just don’t believe Baker, who in his previous book had described a woman’s pregnant belly as “Bernoullian,” and her pubic hair as “brief,” when he claims to envy Updike’s “adjectival resourcefulness.”) Nabokov’s crisp molecular comedy, his tendency toward anthimeria and dryly upcycled technical language, his cliché-demolishing descriptive precision; Proust’s luxuriant digressiveness, his great subject of time, and above all his sublime animation of psychological riffs by visual cues: already, by 1991, it was clear that these were Baker’s gifts too.
Wow! That “cliché-demolishing descriptive precision” is superb! The whole passage is superb. Borst is on my wavelength. Nabokov and Updike are consummate describers. And she’s right; Baker is in their league (see, for example, his brilliant New Yorker pieces "A New Page" and "Painkiller Deathstreak"). His Finding a Likeness is a book I want to read. Thank you to Borst for bringing it to my attention.
Hello, John. Sending this comment just to say that the Bookforum link is broken. I searched for the essay online and indeed, it is an excellent text. I was tempted to buy Baker's book. (Taking advantage of this message to say that I finished reading, on your recommendation, the book Fire Season, by Philip Connors. The book is spectacular! Thank you for another great recommendation.)
ReplyDeleteHi Guilherme, how's it going? That faulty Bookforum link was my doing. I think I've fixed it. Thanks for pointing it out. Your mention of the Connors book surprised me. I haven't thought of it in years. I must dig it out and reread it. It deserves greater attention. Have a good day!
Delete