From the CBC CANADA WRITES website
Susan Glickman: How I Wrote Safe as Houses
http://www.cbc.ca/books/canadawrites/2015/05/susan-glickman-how-i-wrote-safe-as-houses.html
http://www.cbc.ca/books/canadawrites/2015/05/susan-glickman-how-i-wrote-safe-as-houses.html
The unpredictable force of the stranger and the ethical challenge of hospitality are also central to Susan Glickman’s The Tale-Teller, which begins with the arrival of the mysterious Esther in the carefully regulated colony of New France in 1738. Esther has disguised herself as a boy, and while this deception is uncovered instantly, her further deception—that she is also Jewish—remains a secret throughout much of the novel, a secret she protects by spinning a complex Scheherazade-like past for herself involving shipwrecks and pirates and harem-escapes. The narrative is split between the realist historical narrative of Esther Brandeau, based on archival documents researched by the academically-trained Glickman, and Esther’s fantastical first-person stories, told in an engagingly intimate tone with a non-linearity and geographical range that contrasts markedly with the protagonist’s own cramped existence.
Esther’s stories are a carefully devised tactic, wielded in the face of her total lack of agency as a woman and a racialized minority. In both style and content they revel in mobility and subversion: she is raised by apes, refusing the strict division between the animal and the human; her adopted father, a sailor named Joaquin, falls in love with a slave woman when he is temporarily blinded, a metaphorical forgetting of race as a learned category. It is not surprising that Esther’s fantasy world is more appealing than the one she actually resides in, in which petty French officials use her as a pawn in their struggles for power and keep her captive throughout the long Quebec winter. Glickman’s imagination shines in these passages, unmoored from the documents that root the historical half of her novel. Appropriately enough, the restrictions of historical fact are felt at the level of narrative much as Esther feels the ties of her own oppressive social world; both language and subjects are freed by the unbounded imagination.
As the narrative proceeds, however, even Esther’s subversive imagination encounters its limits. The kindly Hocquart in whose home she is equal parts captive and guest, is originally enchanted by her stories and her fine recipe for chocolate, both exotic temptations in their own right. Eventually, however, her stories demand too much of him: “Far worse than the seduction of the stories themselves was how they challenged his convictions. If he accepted what Esther said as true, his beliefs about the world would be put in doubt. In her version of reality slaves deserved freedom, infidels were as good as Christians, and women became the equals of men.” Esther’s stories similarly fail to have the desired impact on the Ursuline nuns with whom she is lodged once her true identity, as the daughter of a Jewish merchant, is discovered. And when she attempts to use her tales to distract the inmates of the lunatic ward where she is made to work, she discovers that the destabilization of reality that comforts her only agitates those who already struggle to distinguish reality from fantasy.
The Tale-Teller is a novel both fascinated with the power of stories and aware of their limitations. As the period of Esther’s life illuminated by archival documents comes to an end, the historical woman and the fictional character slip beyond the reader’s view, the story’s control, and New France’s borders. The debris left by the stranger, in this case, is an awareness of Canada’s colonial history as a story not only of violent invasion but also of a failure to enact the ethics and politics of hospitality.
–Hannah McGregor
Reviewed by Scott Daley
Susan Glickman’s collection of poetry, The Smooth Yarrow, is marked above all by a sense of playfulness. Each piece in the collection gently leads the reader to quite a different place than where he or she began. Glickman plays around with vernacular expressions in “Witch’s Tit,” unearthing layers of history in the seemingly innocuous expression. Visceral imagery of spikes, fire, and disease that proliferates throughout the poem vividly takes the reader back centuries to the paranoid times of witch hunts. In “Rilke Doesn’t Wear Sunscreen,” Glickman plays with mythical imagery. At the beginning of the piece, angels flit about the titular hero, ensconced in a scene of heavenly summery serenity. But all hell breaks loose when he flicks at one of the angels, and a scene of terrifying meteorological chaos ensues. “Why the Wind Scares the Shit Out of Me” spirals off in similarly wild directions and tangents. The poem begins as a list of reasons why wind frightens the speaker, but beautifully bursts its bounds, becoming something much more personal, confessional, and eclectic. We learn, for example, that the speaker’s migraines are caused not only by the wind, for example, but by “feeling guilty”; that she lacks “vanity” and “steadfast concentration,” flees anger, and is “as afraid of [her] own rage as of the wind” (14).
The Smooth Yarrow gradually grows into a beguiling mixture of the primal and the modern, the epic and the everyday. “The Dog at the End of the Bed” stands out as an especially haunting mixture of mundane events and exciting rediscovery (the speaker comments on the boredom of “discussing taxes, teachers, where to buy electronics” but then all of a sudden “it’s new” again) (35). The poem explores the inevitability of death and slow decline with a tone of gentle amusement and serious darkness. “Jacob’s Ladder” is an elegy for Glickman’s father that blends sweetness and solemnity; the poem itself is a “thorny tree” bearing “aromatic fruit” like those lining the “narrow staircase” along which the speaker proceeds over the course of the poem (40). “Jacob’s Ladder” mischievously juxtaposes the swirling immortality of nature with human frailty, a dichotomy represented by the relative sturdiness of the ibexes along the mountain path compared with the speaker’s all-too-human legs, which “tremble with fatigue” (40). The ancient and recent past collides with the heavy weight of the present beautifully here, before looking stoically toward the future.
“Breath” again presents the reader with the gentle intermingling of past and present as a walk in the park causes the speaker’s mind to wander while “time reels back through itself” (43). The poem asserts the paradoxical brilliance of darkness (“it is precisely the lack of sunlight that suffuses the air with something / indefinable; that whets the gold of each leaf, / brightens the blue chicory”), a notion that carries us with hope throughout this seemingly dark piece, wherein imagery of funerals and deaths abounds (43).
“In the Garden,” meanwhile, begins as a catalogue of some of Glickman’s favourite flora and fauna (hummingbirds, bees, monkshood, irises, etc.) before becoming a winding sojourn throughout the titular garden and throughout life. Images of death (“I squished the caterpillars by hand,” announces the speaker), loss (“this winter’s losses” to the garden “were costlier than the gains / but isn’t that always the way?”), balance, and persistence in the face of inevitable failure (“Those we love we try to coax into staying / but it is not their way”) proliferate (49; 51; 58). With “In the Garden,” we get the sense that Glickman views poetry and gardening as similar trades. (Glickman’s personal website prominently features a telling Cicero quotation: “Anyone who has a library and a garden wants for nothing.”) Words and plants must both be cultivated carefully for them to reach their full potential, and writing and gardening both require enormous dedication, patience, and understanding to fully succeed. And while careful pruning is sometimes required in gardens and poetry, the rambling length of The Smooth Yarrow’s final two pieces suggests that sometimes it is best to let poems and plants grow wild and free.
All in all, The Smooth Yarrow is an eclectic, evolving mixture. Like yarrow, an herb often used to stanch the flow of blood from wounds, the collection touches on some painful material but winds up being strangely soothing. Glickman possesses a wry humour and a deep, thorny wisdom that shines through evenThe Smooth Yarrow’s darkest pieces and turns them into playful riffs on the chaos and hidden beauty of life.
#
The rustling of leaves is rated at ten decibels, a whisper at twenty, an ordinary conversation at sixty-five, a moving train at one hundred. Any sound over one hundred and twenty decibels is experienced as pain, not sound. Too much of anything, even something beautiful, is experienced as pain.
#
The decibel is one tenth of a bel, a measurement of amplitude named in honour of Alexander Graham Bell, who also invented the phonograph, and taught the deaf. Like Beethoven, only in reverse. Beethoven wrote music he couldn’t hear for the pleasure of others. Bell, who could hear, made a language for those who couldn’t. Translating sounds to signs, or electrical impulses, in the ear or along a wire, into voices, into music. Vibration—simple vibration—is what makes all bodies sound. And at the lowest register, sound waves are felt on the skin, the body itself resonating like a drum.
#
To sing you need to breathe deeply and hold your breath for longer than the ordinary four-second speech interval, then generate as much power as you can. The human voice is a more efficient transformer than a musical instrument, yet only one per cent of the energy a singer puts out is transmitted as sound waves. On the other hand, ordinary conversation is so weak that it would take two million people talking at the same time to run a fifty-watt light bulb.
#
The first public concert in England did not take place until 1672, organised by a violinist named John Banister who wanted to offer the public an experience previously reserved for the aristocracy: music outside the walls of a church, music for its own sake. Music as art, not as a practical aid to everyday life. Not to lull an infant to sleep, or inspire soldiers on the march, or set the tempo for oarsmen or labourers; music unconnected to public spectacles of dancing or feasting. A separate world.
#
Unaccustomed to their role, early audiences were appreciative but noisy, treating the concert hall no differently than they did the theatre. They talked and ate and shouted to their acquaintance; clapped or booed or hissed spontaneously and frequently; demanded favourite encores. Not until the late nineteenth century did concerts become decorous affairs. Wagner was the first conductor to turn off the lights, sheltering each listener in private reverie; Mahler the first to lock out late-comers and forbid applause between movements. Now we have come to rely on these conventions to help us listen. In a world saturated with sensory information, we require an absence of all other distractions to focus on sound.
#
There are those who contend that musical tones, like mathematical symbols, have no reference to anything outside themselves. They inhabit a platonic dimension of ideal forms: there is no way of representing them except through themselves, no shortcut to understanding their meaning. They simply are, B flat or the square root of fifteen, π or a minor seventh. They do not signify toothbrush or rhododendron; they cannot evoke the Napoleonic Wars or the Birth of Venus.
#
Others insist that musical tones participate in the patterning – the relationship of part to part and parts to whole – that is innate in human consciousness. For example, whether their local musical scale consists of three notes or five or eight or more, every person on this planet can hear and recognize the intervals of the fifth and the octave. Mean-tone tuning derives from this innate human ability. A frequency is selected and given a name: let’s call it “A”. It is doubled to form an octave, then halved to form a fifth, which we call “E”. The process is repeated with “E” and its fifth, “B,” and so on, all around the circle of fifths, the rainbow of sound that makes up the “Pythagorean” scale.
#
This mathematically generated scale dominated Western music for two thousand years, in part because philosophers cherished its implication that music simply made audible humanity’s innate perfection. But every system has its limitations; the limitations are what make it a system. And the limitation of mean-tone tuning is perplexing both philosophically and practically: it only works in one scale at a time. Beyond that scale lies dissonance or, if you will, chaos.
#
This is a minor difficulty for the solitary musician but a disaster for the ensemble, constrained to retune a whole flock of discordant strings every time they play a new piece. Luckily, around 1700, a method was invented according to which this built-in dissonance could be distributed evenly – almost inaudibly – throughout every scale. In The Well-Tempered Clavier, Bach demonstrated the versatility of the new tuning, known as “equal temperament”, by composing two pieces in each of the twelve major and twelve minor keys, all of which are to be played consecutively, without re-tuning the instrument. There was no looking back.
#
The “gravicembalo col piano e forte” – keyboard instrument with soft and loud – was presented by Bartolommeo Cristofori of Padua to Prince Ferdinando dei Medici in 1709. It replaced the quiet plucked-quill action of the harpsichord with a hammer action, allowing for much greater control. The first instruments had four-and- a-half octaves; over time, both their range and volume increased until, by 1800, the very loud, seven-and-a half octave forte-piano we still use today had supplanted its more modest ancestors.
#
When the pianist’s finger touches a key, the far end tilts up, raising a lever that, in turn, hits a felt-tipped hammer. This hammer lifts a damper, allowing the string beneath it to vibrate. As the key is released, the lever lowers the hammer so that the damper touches the string and impedes the vibration. Unless, of course, his foot hits the sustaining pedal, which lifts all the dampers off the strings, leaving them free to resonate to infinity (or at least far beyond human apprehension).
#
Both the piano and the violin make music by causing strings to vibrate. Perhaps an ancient archer heard the thrumming of the string after his arrow had taken flight. Perhaps he duplicated this phenomenon while idly plucking his bow. Was it because of such inadvertent discoveries that Apollo, god of music, is twinned with his sister Artemis, goddess of the hunt?
#
The piano uses more than 200 strings to play its 88 notes. The long, thick bass strings run singly; the shorter, thinner tenor strings doubly; the slender trebles in threes, like schoolgirls arm-in-arm on a busy street. Piano strings are wire lashed to an iron frame; their tension can be adjusted by a series of pins. It is a laborious job, requiring the services of a professional. By contrast, all violinists tune their instruments often, even compulsively, by themselves. Another contrast: the violin has only four strings and yet can attain a seven-octave range. The pull on each violin string is 70 pounds, 280 pounds in total. The combined pull of the strings on an upright piano is 16 tons; a concert grand will be closer to 23 tons.
#
Some musicians remain haunted by nostalgia for the Pythagorean scale with its concurrence of divine and earthly mathematics, and resent the modern insistence on compromise for the sake of the ensemble. They try to discriminate between a C sharp and a D flat; a B sharp and a C natural. Theoretically, this should be possible, especially on a fretless instrument like the violin from which one can coax many fractions of a tone. But in practice, our ears have grown too lazy for such fine discriminations.
#
The ear collects sound as a flower does dew; channels it along the auditory canal to brew a secret honey. The air flutters, the air is alive with wings; sound waves drum against the ear and set its architecture humming. Sensation is transformed into energy like dew into nectar. And then (but this is no explanation, this is just the map of a mystery) the mind gives meaning to what it hears.
1. What am I working on?
Final revisions to three entirely different manuscripts: 1) Safe as Houses, a “mystery” set in contemporary Toronto which is really an inquiry into the notion of personal safety, and will be published by Cormorant Books in the spring of 2015; 2) The Discovery of Flight, “YA” fiction in the voices of two sisters, one of whom is writing a journal, the other a fantasy novel; and 3) What We Carry, a collection of poems based largely on transcriptions of Mozart’s “24 Preludes” for solo piano.
And also a completely new project, which – because it is still at the angelic stage of inhabiting my imagination – is more extravagant and perfectly realized than anything I’ve yet accomplished!
2. How does my work differ from other work in its genre?
Genre is a convenience of academics, a useful way of organizing thoughts and bookshelves, and of describing the influence of tradition upon a writer’s work. I don’t pay attention to it when writing (see the quotation marks around the terms “mystery” and “YA” in my answer to the first question) because life is never just tragedy, comedy, farce, satire, or romance; it’s everything all at once. Thus: the smell of grapefruit and burnt toast + horrifying news about foreign atrocities on the radio + your kid making a profound observation before farting loudly + your husband kissing the back of your neck in that way that still makes you tingle = breakfast.
Still, I have to admit that my reluctance to squeeze into a single category has sometimes proved problematic. Editors and agents usually try to get me to simplify the polyphonic and intertextual elements of my work, and I have capitulated too often in the past in order to get published. I regret this now. My first novel, The Violin Lover, was written in sonata form but I suppressed that fact, and also the many interpolated comments in the voice of Music itself throughout the book (little intermezzi on topics like the difference between the operatic voice and the speaking voice, or different kinds of scales, or the invention of the public concert) because publishing folk felt no one would be interested. And I had a really hard time getting my last novel, The Tale- Teller, published, because it is generically heterogeneous and probably best described as feminist picaresque.
But much to my astonishment, the French translation of The Tale-Teller by Christiane Duchesnes, Les Aventures étranges et surprenantes d’Esther Brandeau, moussaillon, was greeted enthusiastically by critics in Quebec, who welcomed its fusion of history and fantasy in the context of 18thcentury enlightenment philosophy. Their response has made me hopeful that if I keep writing on the edge of genre, I may eventually be accepted in the ROC as well.
3. Why do I write what I do?
If I don’t write this stuff, who else will? Or, as American poet Mary Oliver put it, “Tell me, what is it you plan to do with your one wild and precious life?”
4. How does my writing process work
(Please note: the following is a description of the process for fiction. I’m not even sure I can describe the process for poetry. It’s too much like watching paint dry.
For at least a year, I read around the subject in an improvisatory way. I take random notes, which give me the illusion that I know what I’m doing. I go for a lot of long walks with my dog, Toby, who is a very distractible muse.
Once I find myself intuiting some kind of narrative, I write a cursory outline. Then I start writing what I think is the beginning, though it may not prove to be so once I reach the end. Early on, I go back to the beginning every day and edit my way forward to where I left off before continuing to write new stuff. When I get stuck, or bored, or lose faith in what I’m doing, I abandon chronology and just write something compelling; some scene I know will be in the book somewhere, and then write back and forth from that. When I can no longer sleep because all I want to do is keep writing, I use a trick my friend Helen Dunmore taught me: I force myself to stop while I still know what’s coming next, and leave myself a bunch of notes at the end of the page to pick up when I resume.
Taking into account the fact that I am employed as a freelance editor and a creative writing instructor at two different universities and therefore don’t often get unobstructed time to write, I would say that the first draft unfolds pretty quickly (if you don’t count interruptions for research, to which I’m prone). Then comes revision, for which I must rely on the advice of others more astute than I. If I were less of a hermit, I might know more people to ask for such advice. I see the list of acknowledgements at the back of some writers’ books and am astounded: I don’t have many friends because I’m always either working or walking the dog!
If only the dog could read. I’ve sent far too many manuscripts off to publishers before they were ready because I was desperate for meaningful dialogue.
I strongly recommend Susan Glickman’s historical novel The Tale-Teller. Esther, the main character, is one of my new heroes and inspirations, along with Katniss. (Is Jennifer Lawrence too old to play her?) Esther is a young Jewish woman (we’d call her a teen-ager today) who disguises herself as a male and gains passage on a ship sailing from France to New France, at a time when a female could not travel to New France without official permission, and Jews were not allowed.
It’s a beautiful story, beautifully written, with magical and revelatory micro-tales. So many memorable characters, which Susan manages to bring to richly-hued and multi-faceted life in such a relatively short space. Susan has been one of Canada’s finest poets for many years, and her poetic chops complement the narrative, never interfering. The story is replete with despicable villains, benevolent helpmates, and ambivalent types in whom empathy and a sense of justice wars with fear and self-interest — all of them thoroughly believable and convincing.
This is a novel I’d readily recommend to young people as well as those of us who know who Justin Trudeau’s father was.
Julie Bruck and Susan Glickman speak at Mt. A
The Centre for Canadian Studies held their third event in their fall lineup last Thursday, with award-winning Canadian poets Julie Bruck and Susan Glickman leading a discussion after reading selections from their respective poetry collections. Hosted by Professor Christl Verduyn in the Owens Art Gallery foyer, the event served dually as the writers’ second-last stop in their two-week tour of Maritime universities.
Both writers published major, critically-acclaimed works last year: Bruck’s third collection of poems, entitled Monkey Ranch, earned her the Governor General’s Award for Poetry, and Glickman’s historically-inspired novel, The Tale Teller, as well as her poetry collection The Smooth Yarrow, continue to receive positive reviews throughout Canada since their release in 2012.
Bruck was born and raised in Montreal, Quebec, and now lives in California where she continues to write and teach classes at the University of San Francisco and The Writing Salon, an independent school of creative writing for adults based in San Francisco and Berkeley. Her poetry has been featured in popular publications such as The Walrus and The New Yorker, among others. She is currently in the process of writing her fourth poetry collection.
Bruck cites the home as a frequent source of information and inspiration. “Our family relationships are our most intimate ones, and often our most fraught,” she explained. She believes this is often where people bear their true selves, giving a truer sense of being and living: “We reveal ourselves at our most human, whatever that may be.”
Although unbeknownst to her at the time, Susan Glickman went to the same high school as Bruck in Montreal, and went on to study dramatic arts and English literature in Boston, Massachusetts and at Oxford University in England. She has taught at the University of Toronto, and continues to live in the city where she works as a freelance editor for academic journals, in addition to pursuing her own creative projects.
Because of their extensive experience as educators, particularly in the fields of creative writing, both Glickman and Bruck offered advice regarding the composition process. They described their best inspirations as coming from extended contemplation and metaphoric extrapolation, rather than an instant eureka moment. “It’s usually a thought that won’t go away, like a grain of sand in your shoe,” speculated Glickman.
Due to Glickman’s success in both prose and poetry, she could attest to the varying challenges provided by each medium. “People who read novels like everything to be explained, and I’m still not used to that,” she elaborated, praising the concise and “compressed” nature of poetry. She also views poetry as a genre that is more perfectible and capable of expressing a complete idea or thought: “there’s a possibility of getting every word right, but that never happens with fiction,” she said.
Both poets also agreed that the process of writing must change the writer as much as it aims to change the reader. They explained that the role of a poet is to describe or conceptualize a common idea or feeling in ways that have not yet been used by either the writer or their audience. “If you’re not surprising yourself in the process,” Bruck commented, “then the work will be very flat.”
Despite their acclaim and success, both writers were refreshingly humble and eager to share their stories and advice with their audience during the discussion. Although not all students may go on to publish award-winning poems or prose, the pleasure of meeting excellent writers with the help of the Centre for Canadian Studies is a rewarding experience nonetheless.
– See more at: http://www.argosy.ca/article/canadian-poets-discuss-creative-writing#sthash.ukWyb0ON.dpuf
Witches Tit
Not particularly cold, it blushes slightly, a tiny bud
in the shadow of my left breast. You’d think it a freckle
or a mole and not be as far wrong as those who
four hundred years ago
would have burned me alive at the sight of it
after, of course, a significant interval of gratuitous torture
involving spikes being driven into various parts of me
tender anatomy and ending not in confession
but in exhausted and probably unconscious silence.
But who convinced the witch-hunters that evil marks the flesh?
And who was not deformed back then by something or other—
the body a map of disease and malnutrition,
stinking, lice-ridden, with bleeding gums and falling hair,
eyes clouded by cataracts, lids drooping with palsy, limbs trembling with ague,
pocked with sores, tumours, abscesses and ulcers.
Yet they ignored clear evidence of our shared mortality
in their search for one singular blemish, an extra nipple
with which to suckle a satanic familiar.
You’d think that centuries of plot and counterplot would have revealed
that most successful villains are unremarkable, their bodies
as fallible as ours, their faces as plausible, their stories
as full of lamentation and excuse. That the hand of God
if it bothered to write to us at all would surely be less
inscrutable. But no.
The encryption of the universe continues beyond our comprehension
as we study the marginalia on each others’ skin
blinkered and enraged, seeking somebody else, anybody else,
to blame.
…
Glickman has been writing the same solid line since she published her first book of poetry Complicity (Signal Editions, 1983). Like all of her poems, those in The Smooth Yarrow are so humane and heartfelt and yet there is a tension underlying this naturalness – and it is that tension that makes these poems/stories universal. Glickman knows what it is that we want to know.
Kiss
The baby, insatiable, eats you,
your cheek round as a breast
and almost as soft.
He pats it as a baker pats dough—
part scientist, part lover.
The dog licks his ass
and then your face;
nature’s egalitarian,
he means it kindly.
Mouth to mouth
we find each others’ softest places
and breathe.
…
Along with those many other traits I’ve long admired in the poetry of Susan Glickman, there has always been a fine sense of humour. Humour is far too rare in the world, certainly far too rare in poetry. With Glickman her wit is never far away from her wisdom.
I have always been partial to poems that are lists and in the following poem Glickman lists a litany of small defeats and fear. It could be my list – or yours.
Things From Which One Never Recovers
A 42-year-old eardrum burst in sympathy with an infant’s infection
the arbitrariness of luck, both good and bad,
sunrise over a field of poppies south of Sparta
the boy in university who said I’m sorry, but I only want to be lonely
the girl on the high school basketball team who said
You have the biggest ass I’ve ever seen
the taste of cod-liver oil in a spoonful of molasses
administered by a schoolfriend’s proper British mother
as a prophylactic against obsolete diseases
betrayal
giving birth
snorkeling for the first time in tropical waters—
how the fish part impassively to let one through
and carry on, oblivious to their own casual beauty
a contemptuous review that gets everything wrong in elegant language
like a sadist with impeccable manners
the entrenched injustice of the world that renders one’s own problems
too trivial to mention
that there are different kinds of shoes for every sport
but only one pair of arthritic feet
Chopin’s 24 Preludes, Opus 28
discovering the possibility of a really good wine
having a wild bird eat from your hand
being lied to by your child
seeing your child hurt and being unable to do anything about it
being hurt yourself and being unable to do anything about it
Sur la couverture, un bateau à voiles, flottant non pas sur la mer, mais au-dessus d’une mer d’ombres ou de nuages sombres. Le navire est retenu par des amarres tendues à l’extrême, prêtes à céder. Vers quelles contrées ce récit nous emmènera-t-il? Celles de l’imaginaire et de la liberté, Québec en Nouvelle-France n’est que le port d’attache où l’on revient inéluctablement et à contrecoeur.
Esther Brandeau, moussaillon, déguisée en garçon, est l’héroïne de ses propres histoires, aventures étranges et surprenantes, comme l’indique le titre. Le lecteur, comme les gens de Québec, se laisse prendre par les récits incroyables de la jeune femme. Elle raconte, par petits bouts, une vie trop extraordinaire pour être vraie, telle Shéhérazade en Amérique, dans l’espoir d’éviter non pas la mort, mais la déportation, le retour sur le vieux continent.
Tour à tour, elle est élevée parmi les singes, naufragée sur une île déserte, prisonnière de pirates. Mais quelle est la véritable histoire d’Esther Brandeau? Cette jeune femme au tempérament frondeur a bel et bien existé, un événement historique avec peu d’incidence, rien de plus qu’un fait divers qui a occupé les langues de l’époque, mais qui aujourd’hui constitue un délicieux petit roman, une ribambelle de contes fabuleux auxquels on veut croire plus qu’à la vérité.
Au final, lorsque tout est dévoilé, la décevante réalité nous pousse à imaginer que l’aventure continue.
– Ariane Hivert
– See more at: http://www.lesmeconnus.net/les-aventures-etranges-et-surprenantes-desther-brandeau-moussaillon-tout-est-dans-le-titre/#sthash.GzaFYS4N.dpuf
Sur la couverture, un bateau à voiles, flottant non pas sur la mer, mais au-dessus d’une mer d’ombres ou de nuages sombres. Le navire est retenu par des amarres tendues à l’extrême, prêtes à céder. Vers quelles contrées ce récit nous emmènera-t-il? Celles de l’imaginaire et de la liberté, Québec en Nouvelle-France n’est que le port d’attache où l’on revient inéluctablement et à contrecoeur.
Esther Brandeau, moussaillon, déguisée en garçon, est l’héroïne de ses propres histoires, aventures étranges et surprenantes, comme l’indique le titre. Le lecteur, comme les gens de Québec, se laisse prendre par les récits incroyables de la jeune femme. Elle raconte, par petits bouts, une vie trop extraordinaire pour être vraie, telle Shéhérazade en Amérique, dans l’espoir d’éviter non pas la mort, mais la déportation, le retour sur le vieux continent.
Tour à tour, elle est élevée parmi les singes, naufragée sur une île déserte, prisonnière de pirates. Mais quelle est la véritable histoire d’Esther Brandeau? Cette jeune femme au tempérament frondeur a bel et bien existé, un événement historique avec peu d’incidence, rien de plus qu’un fait divers qui a occupé les langues de l’époque, mais qui aujourd’hui constitue un délicieux petit roman, une ribambelle de contes fabuleux auxquels on veut croire plus qu’à la vérité.
Au final, lorsque tout est dévoilé, la décevante réalité nous pousse à imaginer que l’aventure continue.
– Ariane Hivert
– See more at: http://www.lesmeconnus.net/les-aventures-etranges-et-surprenantes-desther-brandeau-moussaillon-tout-est-dans-le-titre/#sthash.1YUo0ZGd.dpuf
– Qu’est-ce qui vous fait croire que je suis heureux ?
– Vous aimez votre charge et vous vivez comme vous l’entendez. Le gouverneur, lui, se préoccupe trop de ce que les autres pensent de lui. Les gens comme lui ne sont jamais satisfaits.
Suzan Glickman, Les aventures étranges et surprenantes d’Esther Brandeau, moussaillon, Boréal, p. 116
Recent Comments