Don't You Dare To Think Out Loud!

Javier Truben

A transnational author and voice crafter. Wrote a few novels and a medieval trilogy. And works hard to upload them on ACX before the inevitable vocal fold atrophy. javiertruben.substack.com

  1. Nov 3

    The Life of the Mind

    While the kids shrieked in the streets like they owned the place because sweet-toothed Halloween had arrived, so as not to hear them, I did a movie double feature about writers of fiction without a name, without success, without readers to worship them. They are known, of course, in the singular as a ghostwriter. Like the Other Woman, the mistress, they are never invited to a wedding and even less to the launch of the book they have written. It’s a movie genre about losers, nothing like the well-worn narrative arc of established writers. Much like hitman movies finding redemption. Although instead of a string of shootouts straight out of a kids’ video game, this genre faithfully portrays the shattered dreams of so many—far too many—writers. Namely, those whose unsold copies are sent to the guillotine so that the publisher who bet on their talent doesn’t at least lose the paper pulp. That’s 99% of them, and I’m falling short. Nothing gets recycled quite as well as the nauseating publishing industry. Those who escape the guillotine, seeking refuge in digital publishing, are complete idiots. Amazon pays authors who publish on Kindle based solely on what the reader reads. And everything digital—Substack included—is measured graphically and by the second. Just like the actual listening of a podcast. The unbearable, hypocritical posturing of readers of paper books, who used to brag so much about reading when in reality the book had fallen from their hands, whether out of laziness or lack of concentration, or from using it as the cheapest of sleeping pills, doesn’t have the slightest place in digital publishing. And this leads me to untangle the revealing parallels between The Ghost Writer and Verity, both films based on novels of fiction, of great public success and in turn well-deserved critical scorn, signed by Robert Harris and Colleen Hoover, respectively. Not for nothing did Alfred Hitchcock tell François Truffaut that only bad novels could make good movies, given that their material was quite malleable to twist them at will as is usually done in a screenplay. And that for this reason, much as he liked Fyodor Dostoevsky’s Crime and Punishment, it’d never crossed his mind to adapt it. Because it had so many words, all of them had a function, and of course they all fit together to perfection. Like a blessed puzzle. * The Ghost Writer, written just like that as a concession to the original title of the novel that director Roman Polanski adapts, puts the likeable actor Ewan McGregor in the skin of a writer without fortune yet a skilled ghostwriter, with books to his credit that several protagonists in the film confess to having found stranded on the nightstand, to his utmost derision. The subject of the memoirs he has to edit, given that he is replacing another ghostwriter who perished under mysterious circumstances, turns out to be a British prime minister who is the spitting image of Tony Blair, alongside his influential and anything-but-decorative wife Cherie, holed up in an unrecognizable and gloomy Martha’s Vineyard amid all the suspicions surrounding their involvement in the War on Terror, Halliburton, and the torture committed in Iraq, which paradoxically turned the United Kingdom increasingly into a vassal state of its former overseas colony. And increasingly distanced from Europe. Of course, Polanski can’t set foot in America because he has been wanted for statutory rape since 1978, which is why the scenes of idyllic Martha’s Vineyard were actually filmed in Peenemünde, on the Baltic Sea—curiously, where Hitler manufactured his miracle weapons, the first missiles. Thus, the Shangri-la that seems to be a cliché of every film in this genre is this time ominous and dark: a brutalist fortress made of glass and concrete with an abundance of security personnel and comical maintenance staff trying in vain to clear the fallen leaves amid an infernal storm. And also like every film in this genre, the ghostwriter is manipulated every which way—that is, by the sheer weight of money and sex, and even for the sacrosanct good of international justice—to whitewash this disgraced, Napoleonic British prime minister, whom only a sniper redeems. The cherry on top arrives at the end—not with the beginning of the memoirs, but with their beginnings. In the manner of an acrostic, we learn that the character standing in for Cherie Blair has been a CIA agent all along, much to the delight of paranoid conspiracy theories. Behold the redemption of the charming ghostwriter as a champion of the International Criminal Court in The Hague. Thank goodness for Polanski’s magic as a filmmaker! Because he treats us to a memorable shot of McGregor being run down off-frame at the hands of the omnipresent CIA, while the loose pages of the manuscript are carried back by the breeze of the grey London afternoon. ** And then there’s Verity, where the ghostwriter character is embodied by the queen of nepo-baby actresses, Dakota Johnson. Here we dive headfirst into the sheer nonsense typical of demographic-targeted cinema. The opening hit-and-run, I suppose a clumsy homage to the previous film, looks more like a pig slaughter than a sharp cyclist ignoring traffic lights, so that the angelic Dakota gets two liters of thick blood all over her face, hair, and coat. Not even Jackie Kennedy experienced that when a sniper blew her husband’s head off with a single shot. As my sister-in-law Leslie aptly puts it, it’s just a movie. The scene has its moments, since a stranger immediately comes out to ask if she’s okay, takes her to a restroom to clean off the blood, and offers her a white shirt that, would you look at that, fits her like a glove. And it’s all like that, along a line that insults one’s intelligence, amounting to a constant assault on plausibility. Because that same stranger turns out to be the husband of the bestselling thriller author, who offers her a job at a publishing meeting to be the ghostwriter for his catatonic wife. As if thriller readers were stupid enough not to notice—especially if the successful author were recognizable for her wit on trendy podcasts, not this one of course, but Call Her Daddy and Hot Ones, that ridiculous show where guests are humiliated by eating spicy chicken wings until they completely lose their composure. To reiterate, one can understand the nonsense inherent in demographic-targeted cinema. However, the sacrosanct suspension of disbelief must always remain sacrosanct, unless we leap into a video-game aesthetic where gunshot wounds are less severe than mosquito bites, women have the same brute strength as men, and no one has human reactions like panic, shock, or trauma. It’s the gospel of fifteen-year-olds brought to the most foolish Hollywood of all time. One piece of trash after another, backed by actors selling out the little prestige they have left. This time, the genre’s Shangri-la is in Vermont, and poor Dakota mistakes a frozen lake for a field—she’s so out of it, poor thing—allowing herself to be completely and utterly conned, both by the scheming husband and by the supposedly catatonic author, who truly deserve each other. The entire plot starts revolving around the same device Polanski uses: the long-obsolete USB flash drive capable of holding numerous manuscripts. Without any care, without any encryption, left behind in a cigarette pack, is a manuscript titled So Be It, written in a strict autobiographical and confessional key without any sugarcoating. The dim-witted, angelic Dakota never once suspects that it is an antagonistic journal—a writing exercise meant to question internal narratives, to break through analysis paralysis. In short, to make you adopt the role of your own devil’s advocate. Antagonistic journaling serves fiction writers by allowing them to write about villains instead of limiting their narrative to heroes. That is the ultimate use the catatonic writer once made of it to write her successful thrillers. Of course, this isn’t revealed u… Get full access to Don't You Dare To Think Out Loud! at javiertruben.substack.com/subscribe

  2. Oct 23

    Pathos verging on bathos

    October sunrises arrive late because, until the coming weekend, they simply don’t bother to set the clocks back. Every year they promise that this seasonal switch will be the last, and every year—back in October and forward in March—they keep shifting the hands. We remain subjects governed by proven incompetents and hustlers, while the best and the brightest are far too busy giving free rein to their greed. For that very reason, I do what I can so that filthy mediocrity does not splash me, thinking of October as a lazy month, humid and ever hotter. In this little beach town where I stitch words together, it is no scene of Magical Realism to see, on the main street, the smoke from the roasted chestnut and sweet potato stand intertwine with the lines at the Italian ice cream parlor. If it were up to me, I would make October last forever because I am furiously productive and the visionary within me is operating at peak form. So I try to stitch together my freewheeling thoughts and some hardcore truths, thinking that once the cold arrives I will have time enough to edit—though at times I think that editing is sheer cowardice, a concession to the censors of official groupthink. When one has enjoyed the fortune of living a long life and, in turn, seen successive generations of censors pass by, one recognizes all the tricks of semantic dilution inherent in political correctness. Homage to Catalonia, Animal Farm, Nineteen Eighty-Four, and Shooting an Elephant and Other Essays demonstrate the obtuse need of power to reduce thought to a clipped-wing flutter. Who wants us to be so idiotic? Who instills in us the fear of the inner voice? Perhaps ourselves? Are we so frightened to think out loud? These questions were lingering in my mind while I was watching the before and after of a phenomenal American actress, Frances Louise McDormand, in two films spanning thirty years: Mississippi Burning and Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri. Even though I had seen both movies back in the day, displays and sound have improved so much that I had the impression it was my first time watching them, a feast far more interesting than alternating Italian ice creams with roasted chestnuts and sweet potatoes—as frumpy housewives do to appease children they do not even bother to discipline, busy as they are with doom-scrolling or recording messages with an iPhone held out like a slice of toast with jam. McDormand is an actress of chiseled features with a cleft chin, a horsy beauty that bucks and kicks out of pure despair. There is a scene in Ebbingwhere she dishes out kicks to the groin equally to boys and girls because, out of sheer cowardice, they threw their milkshake at her car’s windshield. But there are so many other scenes in that movie that listing them would exceed the scope of these lines. Suffice it to say that in Mississippi Burning she plays the exact opposite role: a woman married to a racist cop whom she covers for despite herself. I would bet that Martin McDonagh wrote Ebbing as a bespoke gift for McDormand—a gift I envy since, in novels, it is the imagination of the generous reader that does the casting. And there is little generosity while skimming diagonally across the page out of unmentionable laziness; all the more reason to bet on oral storytelling. It goes without saying Mississippi Burning was painted with a broad brush: highly sensationalistic, at times even comical when it tries to be tragic. Or as critics often say when referring to the lack of skill in inept drama: pathos verging on bathos. By the way, in Ebbing it was not McDormand but Sam Rockwell who made me truly laugh, playing Dixon—a racist, useless, torturing cop who nonetheless possesses redeeming qualities that only the accumulation of his blunders and a letter from the beyond manage to unlock. I am convinced that human kindness is equally distributed, provided one awakens from mental laziness. And art that does not awaken kindness is not art, but something far more sinister destined for a state of constant stupefaction. I could search for a name for it, but dawn has just broken and I want to go for a run so as not to lack breath when it comes time to record this podcast upon returning from the lighthouse. I am also convinced, without a shadow of a doubt, of everyone’s innate capacity to fill the gaps in thought with the wonder of intelligence. Even when we hear the voice of the Orwellian Big Brother hollering, “Don’t You Dare to Think Out Loud!” Then the weekend arrives and the late October sun that had warmed the coastal light gives way to a dark, relentless downpour. Sitting in front of my Flemish triptych, listening to the water drum like a tambourine against a nearby corrugated asbestos roof, the realization hits home: the musings written in the glow of dawn were far too pristine, too gentle—a castle of sand built on the illusion of human kindness. I had longed to believe in the best version of myself while running to the lighthouse, but reality does not dwell in the high towers of thought. It waits in the heart of the European continent. The screens flicker to life and the panic of the press floods the room like a burst dike. From Paris, the news comes not of philosophical debates or noble student marches, but of a dark tide rising from the miserable fringe of the banlieues. No, you are not Gaza’s children. You are spoiled children. Where are the professional mourners of Instagram and the television sets now? Just a fortnight ago, they were weeping before “this little light facing a country adrift.” And then a town hall burns down, streets are trashed, and they vanish into thin air. The intellectuals—that pure, and true, and hardline left of journalists, comedians, and commentators—rush to endorse what they romanticize as a formidable citizen mobilization. They excuse everything, pretending that the chaos is the legitimate voice of rebellious youth. In the name of distant geopolitical grievances, hooded and masked figures hiding their colored skin, because they are unmistakably Moors and Blacks, ransack storefronts to fish iPhones out of shattered glass. Paris becomes a maze of smoke and running shadows. Down in Limoges, the clock tower of the nineteenth-century town hall groans under the heat of a targeted fire and collapses into a mountain of glowing brick and shattered slate. The sinister algorithms of Musk’s X feed on the fall like a pack of African wild dogs, eager for a cheap rerun of Notre-Dame’s collapsing spire. In the alleys behind the grand boulevards, the looters strip away the pretense of civilization. The hooded and masked Moors and Blacks of the banlieues are here, shattering the laminated glass of boutiques not with a clean break, but with the heavy, dull crunch of cracking ice. Luxury handbags crafted for the über-rich, lined with velvet and meant for quiet drawing rooms, are dragged through the greasy water of gutters. Silks intended for galas where men drink champagne in tuxedos are torn on iron grates. By midnight, the violence shifts from the street to the screen. The disenfranchised sit in damp, concrete rooms, lit only by the cold blue glare of their smartphones. They photograph a three-thousand-euro leather backpack fished straight from a shattered display window, offering it on Vinted for three hundred euros in cash. They type out quick, casual messages to prospective buyers: “No receipt, cash only, pick up before dawn.” The luxury item is instantly hollowed out of its prestige, reduced to digital currency, flipped in real time like stolen scrap metal. The pack of African wild dogs begins its feast; the talking heads who had been waiting on the fringes step into the bright lights of the television studios. They smile with the cold satisfaction of those whose terrible predictions have come true. Look where your noble ideals have brought you. You will be swept… Get full access to Don't You Dare To Think Out Loud! at javiertruben.substack.com/subscribe

  3. Oct 14

    The Billionaire, the Goddess, and the Daredevil

    That Young Sailor—who by no coincidence then answered to the name of Javier—was signed on aboard Leviathan, a sailboat just over a hundred feet in length: a job he considered from the very start an outright steal for what he intended to do with his brand-new life, a favor offered him by his twinkling fate, and one where, by his own choosing, he was already secluded at the time, studying Comparative Literature on his own. It was a lot of sailboat for a single man—a wooden-built classic gleaming with varnishes, bronzes, and abundant rigging. However, that Young Sailor, who most of the time passed for a freak given his striking extravagance, was actually a seasoned airborne veteran who still retained the martial demeanor worn for years, since he had been honorably discharged just a few months earlier. Philippe Leroy, the shipowner, had met Javier at a soirée held on a rooftop along Barcelona’s Rambla with killer views, arranged by a French expat, Adrien Joffre, whom every last soul knew, judging by the turnout and the constant stream of people on the building’s ancient staircase. Besides serving Catalan wine in abundance—especially the hairy grenache—Adrien had set up a Brazilian-style barbecue, also known as picanha, which would at least prevent all that wine from landing on an empty stomach. As was the rule on such occasions, at least among friends, when Fatboy Slim’s music began booming through the speakers and the dancing got underway, the one who wound up turning the meat over the mesquite embers was the only one capable of staying sober and skillful amid the mounting chaos: the ever-watchful Javier. As night fell over the nearby silhouette of Montjuich promontory, a moon on which could be spotted with the naked eye the ash of its shadowed face ended up tragically impaled on the slender Calatrava Tower, in the manner of an olive resting at the bottom of a glass of dry Martini, a magical moment when Philippe arrived, in the midst of his inseparable cloud of smoke—a chain-smoker like few others—accompanied by a woman of bewildering beauty whom some mistook for Helen of Troy herself, though the name of that Parisian model was in all truth none other than Malou Guex. Drawn by savory aromas, Malou proved somewhat demanding toward Javier, asking him for ever thinner slices of the picanha, because, despite it being an early June night, he was dressed head to toe in stark black, and without the slightest malice she came to mistake him, in the first instance, for part of a catering service—something altogether normal for a model accustomed to crowded events—though he, for his part, did nothing other than give her whatever she asked for without a word of complaint, provided he could savor in quiet delight her Parisian splendor. As soon as the host, Adrien Joffre, stepped over to check that part of the terrace to make sure all was well, he in passing dispelled that understandable misunderstanding and formally introduced them; instead of slinking off embarrassed for having taken such liberties and vanishing for the rest of the night, she stood staring at him fixedly for a full minute without saying a word, and straightaway went in search of Philippe Leroy, who, utterly detached from the bustle of the party, was smoking leaning on his elbows against the terrace parapet overlooking the Rambla, lost in thought as he watched the very young African hookers offering b******s to overly drunken tourists for peanuts. “Haven’t you noticed that guy?” she said, agitated. “It’s Patrick come back to life!” “Who, Adrien?” Philippe said. “You’re wrong. I met him at a party two years ago. I think it was at Samantha Rowles’ place in Ibiza, though I can’t quite remember now.” “No, Philippe,” Malou insisted. “The guy tending the barbecue. My hair is still standing on end! Go on, get over there and don’t make a scene.” Upon confronting Javier, Philippe noticed the astonishing physical resemblance to his brother, who had recently died of an overdose. He barely managed to ask in a low whisper, as if expecting this double to clear his doubts: “Patrick? Are you supposed to be here?” Of course, with Fatboy Slim still booming through the speakers, Javier could only read his lips, point to his ears to signal he couldn’t hear a thing, and go right back to his business: tending to the hungry crowd hovering around the fire waiting their turn. When Philippe managed to gather himself after the thrill, by dint of sharp elbowing and securing a spot beside the embers, he finally managed to strike up a conversation with Patrick’s surprising doppelgänger, and they even shared a few laughs all together when Malou joined in, at the expense of the supposed catering service, an opportunity Philippe seized on the spot to suggest meeting up early the next day to go sailing on his sailboat and so get to know each other better, since they couldn’t really talk much in all that din anyway, an invitation Javier gladly accepted—though at the time he was completely ignorant of who the hell Patrick was—always ready to join in any kind of adventure, such was his temperament, since he had no attachments of any kind, nor did anything stir fear in him, and whatever mischief he committed, even when it tempted fate, inexplicably, he landed on his feet. ★★ The morning that followed the successful and well-attended soirée, having scarcely slept a wink, because all of a sudden he woke up in a stranger’s bed and in the sweet company of some girl, yet outfitted with his inseparable backpack stuffed with books, notebooks, and a mere two changes of clothes, Javier strode up the Rambla in long strides, until reaching the commuter station beneath Catalonia Square and stepped aboard the first train bound for the marina Philippe Leroy had indicated—none other than in Arenys de Mar, out in the back of beyond, halfway to the Costa Brava. Having completed the commute in no time flat—for he cleverly took advantage of the hypnotic rattling to catch a little bonus sleep—he walked toward the eastern breakwater of that luminous marina sheltered beneath a decomposed granite hill, where that mighty Leviathan was finishing its annual maintenance work alongside the shipyard quay, which proved easy for him to distinguish in the distance, standing out among the crowded fleet of sailboats, for it was rigged with a huge wooden mast with four spreaders, at whose masthead a cormorant sat perched in that priceless moment, unfurling the full wingspan of its black wings to dry them in the sun and breeze. Perhaps he was superstitious, on account of that cormorant and because right then and there he promised himself he would do whatever it took—something would surely occur to him on the fly—just to sign on to that massive sailboat; lucky as he was, it proved easy enough, for as luck would have it, that very morning Philippe’s old sailor had quit on him, citing no other reason than that he was no longer at an age to be away from home for so many days at a time. “I told him when I hired him that I sail in the spring,” Philippe told him while showing him the layout of the varnished wooden cabins. “It seems the salary I paid him punctually and the light workload weren’t enough for him.” Javier slipped off the heavy backpack from his shoulders with a swift gesture when they emerged onto the deck, after completing their tour below deck of Leviathan, and nimbly improvised an unbeatable sales pitch, gesticulating with both hands, his palms purposefully turned toward his companion, knowingly punctuating his words with an honest and open body language: “With a sailboat of this size, you need an onboard sailor, of course—but nobody with a family and kids, since they’ll naturally want to spend the night at home every chance they get; otherwise they’d be single, like me.” At this point, he dropped his voice as low as possible so the ensuing promise stayed strictly between the two of them: “I assure you that with me you’ll never have that kind of trouble, because being alone to … Get full access to Don't You Dare To Think Out Loud! at javiertruben.substack.com/subscribe

  4. Oct 6

    Some Books I Have Dreamed Of

    Once upon a time there was Michael Morris, a professor trying to instill at eight in the morning a sliver of love for novels in a bunch of teens, who were either yawning with sleepiness or simply not paying attention. Because the rush of hormones disturbed them terribly in the shadow of young girls in flower. I was one of his students, stuck there and convinced that no one was going to teach me anything relevant about literature, given that I had been an avid reader since childhood. As for the beauty sitting by my side, Mary Palmer, I let her write in the margins of the textbook the word “sleepy” as many times as she pleased and in whatever handwriting she pleased. If she had asked me, without hesitating an instant, I would have also let her write on my hand, on my forearm. And if I had been alone with that freckled girl with the curly mane, even on my chest I would have let her write the word “sleepy,” where my heart beat out of pure desire, thinking about each of her wet kisses. As for Michael, that literature professor, I wouldn’t say his job enthused him either, but it was his only source of income. He showed up to morning classes smoking his pipe and in a mild state of intoxication with some sufficiently discreet substance—gummies, perhaps? A cold beer for his whole breakfast? There was no way of knowing. Or we were projecting our crazy fantasies, which might also be the case. Instead of boring us even more, if that were possible, by patiently instructing us in endless tropes or figures of speech—as so many other professors had done before—he took advantage of every opportunity to read out loud whichever author he felt like. Like Edgar Allan Poe’s Arthur Gordon Pym, a gripping story of shipwrecked sailors who draw straws to kill the youngest among them—and eat him. One morning he brought with him a boombox and played us a jazz piece by Dizzy Gillespie so we would wake up once and for all. Next he told us the reason why he had brought the boombox, which was none other than to prepare us to read Hopscotch by Julio Cortázar, an Argentine expatriate author in 1950s Paris, whose pages are soaked with multiple references to the venerated jazz musicians of that era. And not only jazz, but also time jumps, counterpoints, doublings, disordered chapters, or alternate reading orders. Hence Dizzy Gillespie. And Benny Carter, Earl Hines, Lonnie Johnson, Coleman Hawkins. Good God! The f*****g book that Cortázar had written in the manner of a game for mischievous children was an encyclopedia. Wherever Professor Michael Morris is—which might be heaven—I want to thank him for that spring morning of 1983. Because he instilled in me not a sliver of love for groundbreaking novels, like Hopscotch, but a boundless passion. It is no exaggeration to say I must have read Hopscotch fourteen times over—which is to say, endlessly—not only because Cortázar built a labyrinth, but because it poses a trial for someone with mild dyslexia—that chaste kiss the archangel Metatron gives on the forehead to certain writers who proceed by slow degrees. And deep down, the maze is not a trial, all things considered, but a lovely cure. Today, sitting at my console with a Substack feed ready to drop, I have everything I need to build an audiobook of Hopscotch myself—weaving those jazz tracks straight into the narration. It remains one of those books I have dreamed of, yet could never have—a seamless score Cortázar could only imagine. That said, today I am radiant, as usually happens to me whenever it rains. Why might that be? Let me explain. Old Bill—William Faulkner, to drop the familiarities—wrote The Sound and the Fury in 1929, to my mind, the best novel ever written using the narrative technique of stream of consciousness. For the sake of conciseness, I am not going to get into the highbrow considerations behind this statement. Faulkner demanded that it be published with several colors of ink so as not to lose the reader given its complexity. But in 1929 no one took him seriously, not even his publishers, because he was not a celebrity. Then, in 1933, Bennett Cerf at Random House proposed a multicolor limited edition printed by the Grabhorn Press in San Francisco. Faulkner was thrilled and marked up a copy with colored pencils. However, the Great Depression hit, and the technical nightmare of running multiple letterpress passes to align single words and lines on a page made production financially impossible. Faulkner agreed to use italics as a compromise for the 1933 Modern Library edition. It was the shrewd Victor Weybright who turned Faulkner into a bestseller by reissuing his complex and out-of-print novels with suggestive covers under the Signet Books paperback imprint of the New American Library, which sold en masse for 30 cents at newsstands and drugstores. The pulp-fiction-style covers, with sensationalist illustrations of a noir and markedly erotic tone—undressed women and sordid environments illustrated by James Avati—achieved an almost ironic contrast between the rarefied literature of Faulkner’s Southern Gothic and a commercial aesthetic worthy of the most torrid noir novel. Thanks to this packaging strategy, millions of American readers bought and read Faulkner for the first time. What can you do! Old Bill did not forget his first creations. For anyone who would lend an ear, he used to recall how his long-gone publishers rudely dismissed him over the edition of The Sound and the Fury: “I wish publishing was advanced enough to use colored ink… I’ll just have to save the idea until publishing grows up. If I could only get it printed the way it ought to be with different color types for the different times in Benjy’s section recording the flow of events for him, it would probably make it simpler. I don’t reckon, though, it will ever be printed that way, and that will have to be the best, with italics indicating the change of events.” Well, I just found out that in 2012 an exquisite London publisher, the Folio Society, finally fulfilled Old Bill’s wishes, selling out the expensive run of copies at £175 or $345 in days. While Faulkner initially discussed four colors for his monologues, textual analysis by scholars Noel Polk and Stephen Railton proved that Benjy’s chapter (April 7, 1928) actually jumps back and forth across 14 distinct time planes between 1898 and 1928. Because Benjy experiences time non-linearly through sensory triggers (the smell of trees, cold iron, or golfers’ cries of “caddie”), the text shifts temporal gears mid-sentence. I wore my eyes out tracking those time planes myself, wanting to believe that an author pulls his genius out of thin air. It stunned me when I finally understood that the trade is strictly practical. Books are made out of books. I just pry the boards loose from whatever I read last, pull out the bent nails, and use the old wood to build my own house. No doubt there will be those who think that novels have to be simple tales, that their novelty, as the word itself indicates, has to be in the surprise of what is told, not in the form itself. But these two novels prove the exact opposite. Sometimes the novelty is the form. I came of age believing that great literature was some kind of moral disinfectant, a high-minded shelter from my own sordid instincts. What a joke. A truly great book doesn’t sanctify you; it weaponizes you. It hands you a loaded weapon wrapped in fine typography—and I spent the rest of my days wondering why everything around me smelled like dust and empty bottles of red wine. Without jazz and without brewing mate at all hours, you cannot fully understand Horacio Oliveira and La Maga in Hopscotch—I confess I could never handle mate myself. In turn, you also cannot read the slap in the face that is the stream of consciousness of The Sound and the Fury without the colored inks; although back in the day, I had to make do by underlining with markers,… Get full access to Don't You Dare To Think Out Loud! at javiertruben.substack.com/subscribe

  5. Sep 25

    1856: The Year of Mighty Books

    The pleasure of reading lies in time travel—when I lend my imagination to the page and arrive in worlds that have vanished entirely. I am not talking about historical fiction, far from it, but about works that were, back in the day, groundbreaking and revolutionary. For surely not all my attention should be squandered on the incessant trickle of novelties, trivialities, and insubstantial drivel paraded across bookstore displays, fueling the fear of missing out. Missing out on what? Is literature ephemeral? I don’t think so. Last week, I combed Gustave Flaubert’s walrus mustache—strictly from a personal, intimate, and evocative perspective, of course. I also made a few observations regarding his harsh, chauvinistic disposition as an unrepentant whoremonger, which was common currency in his time. Who among us hasn’t heard the term “The French Pox” used to describe those suffering from syphilis? An attentive reader shared a clever pun with me, describing Flaubert simply as “a flawed person.” His greatest contribution to literature was his full embrace of Realism—which, as he wrote to his favorite correspondent, demanded a narrator who “must be in his work like God in creation, invisible and all-powerful; felt everywhere, but nowhere seen.” After the stylistic excesses of Romanticism, it was a welcome return to common sense. Hence, his crowning achievement was dissecting the adultery and eventual ruin of a woman married to a country doctor in a small town in Normandy in Madame Bovary. It is not my intention today to linger on that fatalistic mammoth of a novel; nearly everyone has had occasion to read it. An avid reader of novels—especially one willing to run the risk of writing them—derives the greatest joy from weaving them together across time, nationality, and style, uncovering unexpected connections and shared currents. An author without references beyond their immediate horizon has little to offer save for their own audacious ignorance. Back in 1856, in Second Empire France, Gustave Flaubert scandalized his readers to such a degree that he was put on trial for offenses against public morality—a trial that provided Madame Bovary with invaluable free publicity. That very same year, the Swedish writer Fredrika Bremer ignited a widespread public debate, resonating even across America, known as Kvinnofrågan—the Woman Question. What a time, when a novel was a portal of human consciousness! With Hertha, Fredrika Bremer does not merely portray a domestic drama; she raises a blistering indictment against the legal guardianship system that condemned unmarried women to perpetual legal minority. Under the absolute authority of a father or an appointed male guardian, a woman possessed no legal standing whatsoever. In the novel, Director Falk is no mere household tyrant; he is the very incarnation of the paternalistic state. By hijacking his daughter’s maternal inheritance to crush her spirit, he turns the home into a financial prison and obedience into a life sentence. There is a bitter paradox at the foundation of this drama: centuries before the adoption of Roman law and state codification locked women inside the cage of legal guardianship, High Middle Ages Scandinavia granted them an autonomy unheard of in the rest of the continent. The mistress of the estate during the Viking Age, carrying the keys to the homestead at her belt, managed property, exercised the right to divorce, and held sole ownership of her wealth. The confinement of 1856 was not the inertia of an ancient tradition, but the refined craft of modern paternalism, which had reduced women to perpetual minors. Seen in this light, Fredrika Bremer’s outcry in Hertha demanded no unthinkable utopia, but the restoration of an ancient sovereignty buried by law. One must not misjudge the weight of faith in the North. If Catholic dogmatism built an insurmountable wall against female autonomy in Southern Europe, in Protestant Sweden Lutheranism operated as a double-edged sword. The State Church preached blind obedience to the father as a divine command, yet Luther’s own theology demanded that every woman read the Scriptures for herself. Universal literacy was the fracture in the foundation. Fredrika Bremer did not need to renounce her faith to demand emancipation; it was enough to remind the King and his bishops that a soul bearing individual responsibility before God could no longer remain, under human law, the property of a guardian. The impact was seismic. In 1858, barely two years after Hertha was published, the Swedish Parliament passed the law restoring legal majority to unmarried women. While Flaubert’s Emma Bovary was consuming her tragedy in the suffocating solitude of provincial Normandy, Bremer’s fiction was becoming the blueprint for a new civil code in the North. The contrast between these two endings reveals the chasm separating Gustave Flaubert’s aesthetic determinism from Fredrika Bremer’s pragmatic reformism. Both heroines succumb, yes, but their deaths belong to entirely opposite moral and political orders. Emma Bovary dies in the atrocious agony of arsenic poisoning, amidst the absolute collapse of her finances and her fantasies. Lacking analytical tools or any awareness of the civil structure suffocating her, Emma mistakes her legal and economic captivity for a mere lack of romance. Her tragedy is intimate, sterile, and private. Flaubert, in his surgical coldness, grants her neither solace nor transcendence: Emma’s death does not transform Yonville; it merely confirms the crushing victory of bourgeois mediocrity, embodied in the final decoration awarded to Homais the apothecary. Hertha, by contrast, consumes her health in the struggle, but not in sterility. Though illness breaks her body following the devastation of the city fire, her end is not a shipwreck, but a sowing of seeds. Hertha does not daydream about shop windows or sensational lovers; she identifies the legal foundations of her oppression with anatomical precision, establishes a school for the education and autonomy of young women, and leaves behind an enduring network of collective consciousness. Therein lies the ultimate counterpoint of 1856. Flaubert contemplates the world from a stance of impassibilité, convinced that art should not cure society, but diagnose its ugliness with unyielding beauty. Bremer, conversely, writes from the trenches of purpose-driven literature, convinced that a novel is a lever capable of shifting civil law. Emma Bovary’s agony is the destruction of a victim who does not know the name of her cage; Hertha Falk’s death is the deliberate sacrifice of someone who has just shattered her bars. 1856 was not merely a date on the timeline of the European novel; it was the crossroads where modern fiction parted ways. On one side stood the pragmatic conviction that literature can rewrite civil law and restore dignity to human consciousness; on the other, the cold certainty that art should serve only as a clinical mirror, deaf to the weeping of its own creations. Within that tension lies the ultimate lesson of this intersection. Emma Bovary and Hertha Falk represent two possible responses to the same 19th-century suffocation. Emma is the tragic ghost of dissatisfaction, consumed by a system she cannot begin to comprehend and trapped by fantasies that finish her off. Hertha, on the other hand, is the lucid mind that names her legal executioner, converts domestic injury into a political cause, and transforms suffering into law. One leaves me with the desolate beauty of an incurable diagnosis; the other, with irrevocable proof that fiction can shatter the legal order of a nation. In the end, this dialogue between Yonville and Stockholm leaves me with a question that continues to challenge literature today: Should a writer contemplate the cage from the icy distance … Get full access to Don't You Dare To Think Out Loud! at javiertruben.substack.com/subscribe

  6. Sep 20

    Weightless words

    I am blessed with an inexhaustible optimism, and every moment I live feels as though it overflows with infinite meaning, provided I give it my undivided attention. That is why I read aloud like someone eating after a long fast, savoring every bite slowly. And now, having finally learned to handle the audio console—after tweaking the knobs of the irons for four long years, and no longer recording rumble and hiss—it strikes me as quite an achievement, one that still feels as fragile as it is surreal; until now, my performances were simply winged words scattered to the wind, given their ephemeral nature. That is to say, I am now capable of recording my dreams without anyone else’s help. Forty years ago now, as beach days drew toward the end of summer, the coarse sand of these coastal latitudes required no towels, and the suffocating heat had given way to fair weather, I used to read Gustave Flaubert aloud to a girl who had come to visit me. For a soundtrack, I had only the murmur of the waves. Even back then, I was resolved to follow in the footsteps of the old masters, to write relentlessly for the rest of my days—which is hardly the same thing as merely stringing words together. In fact, I had already been writing poetry since 1980, though I now realize they were actually love songs. Like the rock songs I was listening to at the time. I say this without the slightest petulance, because when I began reading true poets, I immediately realized they did not write to sound “pretty”; rather, they wrote words with weight, in the manner of sculptors carving marble, stripping away everything superfluous from the words until, from a raw block extracted from the quarries of Carrara, they brought forth the wonders of Michelangelo Buonarroti. Unless you think them—unless you make them your own—words can find themselves reduced to the murmur of the waves. That was precisely why I had chosen Flaubert’s Novembre to entertain the correspondent who had actually come to say goodbye, having found the love of her life. Novembre is considered a work of juvenilia in the French writer’s canon, written when he was twenty and still steeped in the Romantic movement soon to be displaced by Realism. In fact, Novembre was published in 1928, nearly fifty years after his death. Like any true-to-form juvenilia, the magnificent writer Flaubert would later become is right there, devoid of the slightest artifice, pure and raw literary talent. The plot could not be simpler: a sexual initiation tailored to the era he inhabited—that is, at the hands of a prostitute who charges him nothing for her services, swept up, perhaps, by the ardor of the young protagonist. Though this last detail, clearly, is another romantic fantasy. Flaubert was such an inveterate whoremonger that he ended up consumed by syphilis. That walrus mustache of his mature years seen in all his portraits—he is, after all, an icon of French literature—was actually grown to conceal the teeth he lost to the mercury cure, those blue pills that wrecked his gums. But this biographical detail stirs no pity in me; if anything, pity is what one ought to feel for those poor prostitutes. Eulalie Foucaud, fifteen years his senior, initiated the young and reckless Flaubert at the Hôtel Richelieu in Marseille in 1840 while waiting for a ship to carry her to French Guiana, where her husband, a colonial official, awaited her. Perhaps all too aware of the severe hardships awaiting her, she feasted upon the jeune écrivain, who was likewise waiting for a ship to carry him to Corsica. Marseille in 1840 was the gateway to the Mediterranean for Frenchmen enduring the harshness of continental cold, naturally and effortlessly inviting relaxation. What is more, the lovers met at summer’s end, a time when farewells in the port city—heading toward destinations as exotic as they were sunlit—disposed one to all manner of sexual adventures. It is said that Eulalie was smitten with the jeune écrivain and wrote him letters he didn’t even deign to answer—perhaps caught up with the prostitutes of Corsica, insufferable in his erotomaniac delusion, beyond any doubt. Furthermore, her marital peace came to an early end in French Guiana, as her husband passed away a year after arriving. Gustave Flaubert’s romantic fantasy, for its part, transformed his rite of passage into a first-person novella under twenty thousand words. Naturally, he renamed Eulalie Foucaud simply Marie—a courtesan rather than the young mother he balled—whose backstory she narrates herself, following the classic story-within-a-story framework. Though I like to think that, in truth, the lovers surrendered to quiet confidences between acts of unbridled passion; after all, not everything is meant to be a sexual postcard. Marie, much like the immortal Madame Bovary would be years later, fell prey to her runaway romantic imagination, to lovers who were devout only before consummating their passions, to betrayals, lies, and other unkept promises. The first-person narrator—the jeune écrivain filled with infinite melancholy in a world without a hint of beauty—seems to truly listen to her as earnestly as he loves her. How I read Novembre to my correspondent amid the murmur of the waves remains in my memory—not because of the jeune écrivain Flaubert was, nor for the foregone farewell itself, but because of the cruel whip-crack life would gift me just a week later, with the furies of the autumn equinox. And I use the verb gift advisedly, for ever since, weightless words—words lacking gravitas, those that fail to lock together like the stones of the sunken cathedral in the depths of time, those that stir in me nothing but weariness and boredom, empty chatter—ceased to matter to me forever. Get full access to Don't You Dare To Think Out Loud! at javiertruben.substack.com/subscribe

  7. Sep 14

    Altering History to Serve the Story

    To a greater or lesser extent, all authors have Charles Dickens as a pebble in their shoe. No matter how much I want to forget his narrative mastery, he is always there, trashing any delusions of grandeur, making me feel like a complete klutz. My childhood preferences always went to Great Expectations, and later, somewhat more grown, to Scrooge’s second chance in A Christmas Carol. But it is in this wiser age that A Tale of Two Cities astounds me, above all for the perfect musical cadence of its first page. For that very reason, a week ago, I naively thought I could rejoice in the new series Amazon made. And into a well all my joy fell. To excuse the butchery of A Tale of Two Cities, critics offer a lazy false equivalence: Dickens took liberties with the French Revolution, so screenwriters and casting directors can take liberties with Dickens. Égalité, perhaps. But there is a vast gulf between a 19th-century novelist harnessing history to serve the story, and Amazon destroying the story to serve compliance. This “Tale” fits what has become a predictable pattern among literary adaptations, and period pieces in general. The artificiality isn’t just about painted backdrops and CGI mobs. It’s about overly noble characters, their stagy exchanges, the manicured squalor of the poor, and, for the rich, an opulence that might have arrived courtesy of Wayfair. Again, this isn’t something specific to A Tale of Two Cities or its presenters. There seems to be a stylistic monopoly at work among the streamers of “original content” that renders innovative storytelling—and any semblance of cinema—invalid. This afflicts nearly all historical dramas today, and I despise it. I don’t want to watch a period drama with all the characters acting like contemporary people. Part of the allure of period pieces is seeing how people at the time acted and felt, and how profoundly that differs from today. Nor do surface details escape this contamination. A production will invest heavily in authentic townscapes and domestic architecture, only to cap the illusion by adorning the women with modern hairstyles foreign to the epoch. The visual slip is telling, but the psychological anachronism runs deeper: their sensibilities are neatly calibrated to satisfy a contemporary ideological template, entirely severed from historical reality. By the way, I have no problem with Black actors finding employment, but the clear violation of historical accuracy is jarring. The so-called color-blind casting only goes one way. Imagine the outcry if a white actor played Martin Luther King. It is fascinating how we have fallen headlong into such stupidity, how we are wrecking our immense cultural capital without anyone raising an eyebrow or protesting, simply for fear of being called a racist. Though this we actually deserve—we’ve even begged for it! Because I must force my memory to recall any actor playing Jesus who was a Jew, instead of an Aryan with blue eyes and a blond mane. Or an actress playing Cleopatra who was truly Egyptian and not an American beauty like Elizabeth Taylor. George Orwell, in his essay on Dickens: “When one reacts very strongly to an individual piece of writing, one has the impression of seeing a face somewhere behind the page. It is not necessarily the actual face of the writer. What one sees is the face that the writer ought to have.” While Orwell points to the reader’s kindness toward the author, by the will and grace of the imagination, this gives no moral ground for us to adapt however we please, in accordance with the idiot narcissism of presentism. I remember very well my efforts to reflect the historical truths of a medieval trilogy, thinking how I was going to put down in black and white the fear of being skinned alive in the woods of France by brigands during the Hundred Years’ War. Two thousand years ago, Cicero made the function of the fiction writer quite clear in Latin: docere, delectare, et movere—to show, to entertain, and to move. Call me a dreamer, but if I write, it is because reading Charles Dickens convinces me that one can show without plagiarizing a Wikipedia entry on a historical epoch, and naturally, without appending the clumsy wedges of overt indoctrination; entertain without collapsing into delirious fantasies, endless pursuits, and wholesale slaughter; and move an audience without indulging in the cringing, nowadays-fashionable victimhood, which poses as though we had endured the indignities of a savage African war. That is simply laying it on thick. While Dickens shows, delights, and moves us through the horrors of the workhouse and child labor during the Industrial Revolution—as he did in David Copperfield, Oliver Twist, and Hard Times—he never once strains to impose a Marxist analysis, which carries a rich, dark irony, given that he was a contemporary and, from 1849 onward, practically a neighbor of Karl Marx. Naturally, this pathetic Amazon streaming production is a visual medium. That entails constraints from which the novel is exempt, standing as a superior art form wherein the reader must supply the imagination and cannot remain passive before the page. The novel is a timeless, intimate, and silent encounter. The novel is a mysterious kiss between two absolute strangers. No matter how utterly the author has spent himself in creation, without a reader who arrives unhurried at the proposed rendezvous, the novel does not click. It’s precisely like a kiss—you can’t do it alone. Alas, the storyteller who uses the human voice like the curlicues of his fountain pen goes to the back of beyond. Like my mother did long ago, when she worried because I didn’t speak so much as a single word, and instead delighted my ears with amazing stories about my Castilian ancestry. Those stories about the Old Country, where I never lived except in passing, explain who I am, what I did with my fleeting life, and why I shall write dangerously until the end of my days. Get full access to Don't You Dare To Think Out Loud! at javiertruben.substack.com/subscribe

  8. Sep 3

    Two Eulogies for the Price of One

    Truth be told, I am not a fan of writing eulogies for people I haven’t met personally. But today, September 3rd, I will make an exception to this rule. Because it catches me in a soft spot due to my condition as a lunatic who doesn’t want a cure, nor would I want one if it were offered. I have always pampered the sources of imagination and those who awaken it; the more you let yourself be carried away by it, the more it begins to make sense. Just like life itself. And like a good book. I will start with the departure that hurts the most, the singer Cassandra Wilson, to whom I owe a personal debt. For the times she rescued me from the edge of the abyss, so many years ago now, that I don’t consider myself the same person, even though in reality I am. It was the last year of the previous century; I had returned from a trip to the hellhole where I lived, where I couldn’t even fit the white sofa I owned because there was no room. But as long as the desk, the books, and a mattress fit, I could keep writing passionately. By twists of fate, from having a bright apartment on the beach, I had gone to living as if I had been kidnapped in that f*****g hellhole, where at night cockroaches crawled out of the shower drain. Thank goodness it didn’t have a kitchen, only an electric coffee maker. But I couldn’t complain, as I had a window facing west, even if it was barred. I used to write at night back then, rolling myself a cigarette laced with weed—not too much, lest I lose the necessary eloquence. I had the solitary life I always wanted. Because there is a difference between unwanted loneliness and deeply desired solitude. This didn’t mean that from time to time I didn’t miss a redheaded girl I once knew, who had dumped me very sensibly upon realizing she was wasting her time with a textbook lunatic. The thing is, lunatics aren’t in as high demand as achievers, what can you do? For such nocturnal trances, I used to put on some music, but always at a low volume so as not to disturb the neighbors’ rest. Cassette tapes were still in vogue, especially the ones where I recorded my favorite radio show, where a velvet-voiced announcer presented her musical discoveries. And that was how, on one sweet solitary night, I started crying my eyes out listening to Cassandra Wilson covering Cyndi Lauper’s highly famous song Time After Time. Because that redhead, up close and properly intoxicated by alcohol, had for me the spark of Cyndi Lauper and the majesty of Kate Pierson, one of the singers of The B-52s. The human voice is certainly intangible. But when I searched YouTube for that aforementioned Cassandra Wilson cover, I heard it much better than on that tape—not because of the obvious advance in audio technology, but because I am inordinately happy. How could I not be? I must have had a scandalous number of farewells to get to today. And yet, I now find meaning in what I left behind, so much so that I can time-travel at will without any fear. The second eulogy goes out to Glo, a woman of boundless courage, known as Gloria Steinem. I confess I have a certain weakness for the feminists of the ‘60s, when everything was still left to be done. And when I say everything, I mean things we take for granted today, forgetting the defiance and the struggle that destroyed the lives of many activists back then, for they were true pioneers in a world full of cojones. On top of that, she was an intrepid reporter. The night she infiltrated a party at the New York Playboy Club as a Bunny in April 1963 remains for the annals of journalism history. A Bunny’s Tale is a faithful portrait of how women were treated without the slightest respect, even by the very women who never even considered questioning the status quo. Because they mistakenly thought that deep down it benefited them to have a sugar daddy. By the way, I say this thinking about OnlyFans, which is a nightmare return to the past. In fact, a large number of women without education or resources are tempted by OnlyFans. Because they can’t find well-paying jobs or have debts. Even college-educated women find in this odious app a way to finance their university debt. That is why A Bunny’s Tale is as relevant today as it was 63 years ago. I know some will say I’m losing the plot for comparing a harmless app for w*****s with harsh physical reality. But the nature of the transaction, even if consensual and economically beneficial for the girl offering herself digitally, is still a step backward. Just when it seemed women were no longer sexual objects, new ways to reverse the situation arrive. That is why feminism still has so much to do. Because the patriarchy has had the upper hand for thousands of years—exactly since we ceased to be a nomadic hunter-gatherer society. These two goddesses who have left a massive void in me today, even though I didn’t know them personally, once served as my inspiration to try and stop being a scoundrel and a rogue, even if in reality I haven’t succeeded. Heaven knows I try. I think masculinity is in crisis and digital natives are having a really hard time because they are incapable of handling rejection, have lost the spirit of adventure, and end up as involuntary celibates, also known as incels. The poor b******s prefer to w**k themselves to death watching rapey porn. I also think I would have liked to chat with Glo about the mess we are currently in—if not outright calling it decadence—with birth rates hitting rock bottom and baby strollers turned into doggie strollers. Get full access to Don't You Dare To Think Out Loud! at javiertruben.substack.com/subscribe

About

A transnational author and voice crafter. Wrote a few novels and a medieval trilogy. And works hard to upload them on ACX before the inevitable vocal fold atrophy. javiertruben.substack.com