Singular, idiosyncratic and a little mysterious, Black Clock is one of America's leading literary journals.

Posts Tagged ‘Anne-Marie Kinney’—

Loud and Quiet: An Interview with Anne-Marie Kinney

In “Zizou Président,” author Anne-Marie Kinney flexes literary skills as deft as Zizou’s footwork to capture the palpable energy of the World Cup without the maddening buzz of the vuvuzela.  Kinney’s story, published in Black Clock 12 and free to read online, brings us back to the summer of 1998 when Zinedine Zidane led France to its ultimate World Cup victory and became a soccer legend.  Though set in a specific moment and place in time, Kinney’s depiction of the raw frenzy of collective emotion that hinges on the superhuman achievements of select individuals is universal; marked by a kind of historical clairvoyance, it offers a glimpse of things to come for the next country and the next “president” to claim the championship title in July.  Black Clock recently spoke with Kinney about her writing, Zizou, the World Cup, celebrity, mass culture, and naming her dog Dee Dee Ramone.

BLACK CLOCK: What inspired you to write “Zizou Président”?

ANNE-MARIE KINNEY: I’ve always found Zinedine Zidane to be compelling.  Aside from the fact that his fame and influence can’t be overstated, I really see him as a poet.  He transcends the game.  I wouldn’t call myself a huge fan of any sport only because I’m too scatterbrained to know when games are on and get myself in front of a TV at an appointed time, but I do enjoy soccer because it’s so emotional and violent, and there was something extra with Zidane.  You could see the fury inside him, in his face, and the way he channeled it into the most precise, beautiful moves.  When I learned that Black Clock was seeking submissions for a sports issue, he immediately leapt to mind.

This story is sublime and so well-crafted.  In a few pages, it takes a very specific person, moment in time, and place to create a tableau of humanity.  How did you decide on your narrative approach to this piece? In other words, how the hell’d you do it?

I can’t say I ever decide on a narrative approach.  It just happens however it happens and then I see what I’ve got.  I started with my memories of being in Paris during the ’98 World Cup–which was the World Cup that really made Zidane a superstar–and just being wrapped up in the energy of it all.  For the opening ceremonies, they had these four sort of giant robots that were crouched in different parts of the city, and it seemed like they were there, motionless, for the longest time, so it was so startling and also such a release to see them finally come to life on the big day.  I watched it on TV and then went out, where it seemed like everyone in the whole city was in the street celebrating, and it got pretty out of hand.  It was hot, hard to move, there was glass flying, cops running–it’s kind of a blur.  I guess the story built itself from that peripheral blur, and the dangerous, anything-can-happen thickness in the air, and I went from there into Zidane’s head, into the quiet center.  I was inspired by things he’s said in interviews, what I knew of his life, the racism he’s faced, both overt and implicit, and also the documentary Zidane: a 21st Century Portrait, which is just a match shown with him in close-up the entire time with this very intense and hypnotic music by Mogwai in the background. I wanted the story to center on loudness and quiet, and the way each feeds the other.  That’s probably the most conscious narrative choice I made.

Did you write “Zizou Président” before or after the famous headbutting Materazzi incident?

I just wrote this a few months ago.  At first, I thought if I was going to write about Zidane I was sort of obligated to address the 2006 incident, but I ended up being more interested in his rise, rather than what some would deem his fall, though I wouldn’t.  I think he was forgiven pretty quickly.  He was and is far too beloved for it to taint his legacy too much.

Perhaps because it’s still relatively fresh in my mind even a few years later, the supposed “fall” (which I agree with you in that I don’t think it’s really his fall) was the elephant in the room when I read the story.  Not an annoying, crowding, why-aren’t-you-addressing-this elephant; more one that expands the story into a realm beyond the moment, making it both historical and prescient.

I wanted the Materazzi incident to be kind of hanging somewhere outside or beyond this story.  When it happened, people started talking about Zidane’s history of violence, and speculating about all the possible reasons he might have done it, or what Materazzi might have said to provoke him, so those elements–his response to taunting, his quick temper–are all here in the story, waiting, suggesting where they’re going to lead.  In the end, his head hurts from the two goals he scored with it, but I like to imagine that he’s also feeling the pain of what’s to come.

Have you written other work that considers the perspective of other famous individuals?

My characters tend to pay a lot of attention to pop music.  I did write an as yet unpublished story about a character who worships Dee Dee Ramone.  Which is only a little autobiographical.

Do you worship Dee Dee Ramone?

I don’t worship anybody, but I did name my dog after him.

What do you think makes an icon, draws us to some and not to others, generates a cult of personality?

That’s a really good question.  I’m not sure I know how to answer.  I think some of it is about a person having the right appeal at the right time, either socially or politically.  That’s definitely a part of it with Zidane, as an Algerian-French player who became the best just as tensions were building for Arabs in France.  I don’t know if I could break it down like that for every icon.  I guess they wouldn’t be icons without some indefinable spark.

What are you working on these days?

I’m working on a new short story, and I have another novel sort of brewing, slowly.  My first novel is currently making the rounds of publishers, so I’m just going to work every day and trying not to think about that.

And watching the World Cup?

I’m following it in the news, but the only match I’ve caught was a re-broadcast of England vs. USA.  It’s tough because the matches are in the morning.

Do you have a favorite team or player?  Any predictions?

I don’t have any predictions, but I can’t help but root for the home team.  I’d love to see the U.S. make a respectable showing.

Anne-Marie Kinney is a writer and copy editor from Northern California.  She completed her MFA in creative writing from CalArts in 2008, and her work has appeared or is forthcoming in Indiana Review, Keyhole, Satellite Fiction, as well as Black Clock.  She lives in Los Angeles with her husband.

by Kyoung Kim
Assistant Managing Editor of Black Clock

EMBARRASSING RICK MOODY

Rick Moody is the author of eight books including The Ice Storm, The Black Veil and most recently, Right Livelihoods, and his fiction and essays have appeared in The New Yorker, Esquire, Harper’s, and elsewhere.  His band, the Wingdale Community Singers, released their first album on Plain Recordings in 2005.  Moody’s “Primary Notes 2008: The Republican Diaries,” appearing in issue 9, marks his fourth contribution to Black Clock.

In this interview, conducted via email over the course of our nation’s birthday week, Moody gives some further thoughts on the Republican party, the “Third Way,” embarrassment, and prog rock.

BLACK CLOCK: In “Primary Notes 2008: The Republican Diaries,” you discuss all the characters who became major players in the Republican primaries, from the unelectable but “witty” Huckabee to the “what the fuck” Fred Thompson.  Now that McCain is the Republican candidate, the new crop of characters are the possible running mates.  Do you have any thoughts on these hopefuls, such as the erstwhile exorcist Bobby Jindal?  How does Tim Pawlenty’s mullet play into your theory of “Republican hair”?

RICK MOODY: Pawlenty reminds me of that SNL skit from long ago that was meant to be at the expense of Canadians: The Great White North.  Pawlenty is like Bob or Doug McKenzie.  He actually played hockey as a kid.  I bet his favorite band was Rush, before he realized that he should simply avoid talking about his favorite band.  I don’t actually believe Pawlenty is in play as a running mate, because I don’t see what he gets McCain.  He’s a Republican governor in a pretty moderate state, not one that is normally a swing state.  I suppose having converted from Catholicism to evangelical Protestantism is pretty attractive, but what about OH or PA or FL?   Pawlenty’s mullet, which is really an ersatz mullet, unfortunately, is probably a reflection of his provinciality. He wouldn’t trigger McCain’s temper, because he doesn’t trigger anything. He makes insufficient waves. But I still don’t think he’s really under consideration, and I think the same is true of Jindal. Jindal comes out of Louisiana, and that is the center of a nullity where rules of politics do not prevail. Interestingly, he attended my alma mater, Brown University, and seems to have emerged without any of the intellectual hallmarks thereof. Meanwhile, he’s 36!   We don’t know enough about him!   McCain won’t pick him, because, again, there’s just not enough benefit. Amazingly, Mitt Romney is back in the running mate discussion. I suspect someone of that kind of stature is inevitable. McCain is behind in the polls, and he has to veer to the center, but he’s already functioning without the Republican base. He needs a real conservative icon. Mitt gives him some of that. Plus the hair.

Speaking of Mitt Romney, you mention that part of Romney’s lack of appeal for you is a “resistance to aspects of the L.D.S. church. “ Do you think that enough people have that same wariness about the L.D.S. church as to make Romney a liability to McCain? And, just on a ticket chemistry level, how would you imagine McCain and Romney getting along?

I’m not sure it matters how they get along. Look at Nixon and Eisenhower or Kennedy and Johnson. People do what they have to do to get elected, and if that means sharing the ticket with a stuffed shirt, so be it. I assume McCain would expect total loyalty from Romney, of a sort that Bush, because of his weakness, was never able to expect from Cheney, who imagined and has even argued that he was not part of the executive branch. Romney’s adherence to the Mormon faith probably would be a campaign issue, but I’m willing to bet it’s less of an issue in a vice presidential candidate than in the top slot. If you look at his concession speech as I quote from it in the diary, it’s clear that he is positioning himself as true blue, and it’s on that basis that he would serve as v.p. With an eye on getting his chance if McCain for some reason cannot serve out two terms.

Huckabee seems to want to be v.p. too. But please.

Although McCain has drifted toward the center on some issues, you say that a McCain White House would still be disastrous given the fact that he will have to sway Republican Party loyalists to his side, a party that you argue is defined by its “deficit in the department of sympathy. “ Do you think McCain is a true Republican by your definition, or simply needs to appeal to the “sympathy deficit crowd ” in order to have a hope of winning?

Well, he might have a pustulating bit of cardiological tissue in there somewhere, but it has long since been layered over with scar tissue, enough so that he now, especially now, resembles a Republican in full.

In the opening of “The Republican Diaries, ” you say that you have insight into the Republican mindset because you are related to so many of them. Do you think this insight has come in handy in other areas of your life and/or work?

On the contrary. Often I know what needs to be done, or can imagine it, when thinking like a heartless person, if by “what needs to be done” we are speaking of the imperialist impulse, but then I am unable to do it, the unilateralist thing, and this just creates great cognitive dissonance. When younger, I thought I was supposed to yield to the impulse to behave like a cad in order to get what I wanted, and when I was unable to do so, I felt like I was letting someone down. But then I lurched into middle age and I stopped caring. I became good at repression, or suppression, or maybe I just got soft. It is good for a novelist to understand all the opposing viewpoints and then to attempt to render this complexity.   Republicans are unable to do so, to understand the other side of the aisle, because the “liberal” impulse is mystifying, embarrassing to them. It’s like dogshit on the soles of their cordovans. They just want to rub it off and are unable to suffer it long enough even to feel what is to be felt.

So, do you think that liberals are more able to understand conservatives than vice versa, or only those liberals who have close contact with conservatives? Where does that leave us in terms of transcending our divisiveness and getting to what you call the “Third Way, ” which “circumnavigates the partisanship of the last eight years “?

I suspect that there are liberals who are just as divisive and malevolent as some of the conservatives. I sort of dislike the word “liberals,” because I don’t really know what it means, and the same, actually, holds true for “conservatives.”   For example: the word “conservationist” is often used to denote a certain kind of environmental regulation that is, actually, “conservative.”   Whereas the far right “conservative” point of view collides with “libertarian” principles, which are clearly “liberal” principles gone dangerously awry. There are always these spots where the yin and yang seem to be admixed. The third way recognizes this. But the rigors of the general election, while they demand the third way, also require a dangerous adherence to party loyalty — which amounts to the converse of the third way, a repudiation. My hope and wish is that a candidate like Obama (though there is some potential with McCain, if one is feeling charitable about him) will do the old infiltrate-and-double-cross dance and, upon assuming the presidency, will govern from the more fertile middle. If he does so, I hope he nonetheless avoids the pitfalls of Clintonian triangulation: which, after all, gave us welfare reform and the Defense of Marriage Act.

“The Republican Diaries ” is your first contribution to Black Clock since “Prog Rock Confessional ” from issue 4 (“Guilty Pleasures And Lost Causes”). Is the Brooklyn Record Club still meeting, and have you had any more chances to dig into embarrassing territory with your selections?

Brooklyn Record Club is alive and well. I don’t think I have played anything nearly as embarrassing as the Jethro Tull song I wrote about in “Prog Rock Confessional,” but I have since investigated some other prog rock bands from the period that I could have included in that piece — in the spirit of writing about deeply embarrassing things. Gentle Giant and Gryphon. They were both really interesting bands, bands in which the movement in and out of medieval music is essential to the sound. Gryphon played a lot of contrabassoon and instruments like that. Gentle Giant favored recorders. I actually have a little piece about Gentle Giant coming out in another magazine next month. The Record Club, meanwhile, convened in May and I brought a song by Robin Williamson, another current favorite, whose work in the somewhat neglected Incredible String Band I also find very, very interesting. And just in case people think I am a total geek, I am also into Rhys Chatham’s Guitar Trio Is My Life and Michael Harrison’s album of piano solos in just intonation: Revelation.

Do you get a certain enjoyment out of writing about deeply embarrassing things?

In most cases, I find embarrassing things deeply embarrassing, and I’m not sure there is any kind of enjoyment in that. I do, however, like the truth. I feel like when you observe something correctly, some phenomenon, or some thing in the world, that you are doing a good deed. That the world is mainly layered over with bullshit and imprecision seems to be undeniable. When language peels back that layers of imprecision to see things as they are, there’s a kind of a revelatory feeling for me, as a reader thereof. Personally, I am not as good at this as I wish I were. Nabokov, for example, could describe things, and get at their essences, like no one else. Nicholson Baker is also very good at it. I wish I were better. But that attempt at precision seems to me part of my job, and the deeply embarrassing stuff is a subset of observations of the precise sort. I hope.

What has been your experience as a frequent contributor to Black Clock? Does the limited editorial interference make a difference in your process?

Limited editorial interference is always very, very satisfying. I also like that there is usually a specific assignment: write on music, write on politics, etc. I do well with assignments. In Erickson’s regime we find a perfect alignment of approaches designed to make it impossible for me to refuse. Most of the time. I guess I failed on the sexuality issue. But one day…

by Anne-Marie Kinney
a writer and graduate of the MFA Writing Program at CalArts,
who lives and works in the San Fernando Valley and has just completed her first novel