Authors: Jhumpa Lahiri
He sees his wife and another man in the kitchen, they're making breakfast the preceding morning. It would have been their last carefree breakfast before his return. He sees his wife in her bathrobe, serene, her hair uncombed. She is spreading jam on a slice of bread for her lover. Then the scene dissolves, the suspicion vanishes. He knows that nothing has changed, and that the slice of bread belongs
to him, just like the house, and the wife he's known for more than twenty years. He made it and then forgot to eat it that morning two months ago, when he was about to leave. It often happened, he's an absentminded man.
He pours the coffee, spreads butter, then jam on the new piece of toast. He has breakfast in the nocturnal, absolute silence, until he hears in the distance, for a few seconds, the sound of a car driving rapidly along the street.
He doesn't want to tell his wife the dream; he's ashamed of it. The meaning of the dark road, the absent car, the shadows always on one side: it seems too obvious, even transparent.
He goes back to bed beside her. He holds her in his arms, even though she isn't aware of it. Then he thinks of another car trip, many years earlier: their honeymoon, an entire month spent on the road in another foreign country. They drove together every day, for almost the whole day, traveling through the countryside of that land. He still remembers the endless road, the intoxication of speed. When he was young, untried, still looking forward to everything, the journey didn't seem like an abyss.
Now he realizes the deeper meaning of the dream: the astonishment at having spent his life beside the same person. Without stopping, without obstacles, in spite of the shadows always alongside, the danger. Now he sees that first journey, their beginning, in half-light; he prefers the lucid truth of the dream. Only, at that time, whatever the dream was, he would have shared it with her.
I
n 1939, fifteen years before he died, Henri Matisse began to move away from traditional painting and develop a new artistic technique. It involved cutting up pieces of paper that had been painted in gouache, in various colors. Matisse then combined and arranged the different pieces to create an image. He fixed the elements first with pins, then with paste, often directly on the wall. He stopped using the easel, the canvas. His main tool became a pair of scissors rather than the brush.
The method, a sort of synthesis of collage and mosaic, arose out of certain limitations. The eyesight of the seventy-year-old painter, which had greatly deteriorated, was one factor. Further, after a serious illness in 1941 he used a wheelchair, and was often forced to stay in bed. One day he was inspired to make a “garden” in the house, an exuberant jumble of leaves and fruit attached to the walls of his studio. It was a collective process: Matisse had his assistants paint the paper. He was no longer able to execute his works by himself.
The result was a distinctive form, a hybrid style, notably more abstract than his painting. He continued to play
with the same elements that he had always portrayed: nature, the human figure. But suddenly another energy emerged, a different language.
The images on paper were more simplified, crude compared to the ones on canvas, but they required painstaking, complex workmanship. One recognizes the hand and the eye of the painter, but they have changed. We follow the thread between the new method and the earlier paintings, and are aware of a turning point, a radical move.
For Matisse, cutting was not only a new technique but a system for thinking about and expanding the possibilities of shape, color, and composition. A rethinking of his artistic strategy. The painter said: “The conditions of this journey are a hundred percent different.” He compared his methodâwhich he called “painting with scissors”âto the experience of flying.
Matisse's new approach was at first received with distrust, with skepticism. One critic found it, at best, “a pleasant distraction.” The artist, too, was unsure. Cutting, for Matisse, began as an exercise, an experiment. Without knowing what it meant, he followed an unknown path, exploring on an increasingly vast scale. In spite of the difficulties, this was a period of intense, fertile work. Gradually he embraced this method completely; it remained, until his death, a definitive step.
Last year, as I was finishing
In Other Words,
I saw a show, in London, devoted to Matisse's final creative stage. I encountered a series of lyrical, bold, wide-ranging images. I observed a surprising dialogue between negative and positive space. I understood how white space, like silence, can have a meaning.
I was struck by the essential effect of the images on paper. There is nothing superfluous. They show the seams, the cracks. Being literally cut into pieces, the images communicate a sort of deconstruction, an almost violent act of demolition. And yet they are harmonious, balanced. They express a new beginning. Every image, first cut out, then reconstructed, suggests something temporary, suspended, vulnerable. It evokes other permutations, other possibilities.
As I went through the show, I recognized an artist who at a certain point felt the need to change course, to express himself differently. Who had the mad impulse to abandon one type of vision, even a particular creative identity, for another. I thought of my writing in Italian: a similarly intricate process, a similarly rudimentary result compared with my work in English.
Writing in another language represents an act of demolition, a new beginning.
In Other Words
is the first book I've written directly in Italian. It originated in the fall of 2012, in a private, fragmented, spontaneous way. I had just moved to Rome, after spending almost my whole life in America. I spoke Italian, but my knowledge was elementary. I wanted to master the language. I had a notebook in which I took notes in Italian, on Italian. I wrote down new words, grammatical rules to learn, phrases that struck me. I wrote all this in
the usual manner, starting at the beginning of the notebook and filling the pages one after another.
At the same time, starting on the last page and proceeding backward, I began to take notes of another type, not on the technical aspects of the language but on the experience of diving into the depths of Italian. These notes were made fleetingly, a series of comments tucked at the end of the notebook, which I almost hid from myself.
Gradually the notes became sentences, and the sentences paragraphs. It was a sort of diary, written without forethought. I had been keeping another Italian diary, in which I described my daily life, my impressions of Rome. Here, instead, I described only the emotions inspired by the linguistic drive.
By spring I had filled up the notebook. The head had met the tail. I bought a new notebook, and put the first one away in a drawer. I continued to study Italian, but I stopped recording my thoughts backward. The following autumn I picked up the first notebook. I found a hodgepodge of thoughts, some sixty disorganized pages. At that point I had written just a few things in Italian and had shown them to a couple of friends. But I had no desire to share the contents of the notebook with anyone.
Here are some notes from the last page, which was also the first.
“language like a tide, now a flood, now low, inaccessible”
“reading with a dictionary”
“failure”
“something that remains forever outside me”
Rereading the notes, I almost immediately glimpsed a thread, a logic, perhaps even a narrative arc. One day, to better understand their meaning, I took notes on the earlier notes. I saw that there were points to develop, to analyze. Chapters, titles came to mind. I sensed a pace, a structure. In a short time I knew that the contents of the first notebook would become this book.
I needed more space. I bought an exercise book. More or less every week, from November to May, I worked on a different idea until I got to the last one. I had never before written anything in this rapid, farsighted manner, knowing already almost every step ahead of me, aware already of where the path would lead. In spite of the effort, the process of writing was fluid, immediate. Everything was extraordinarily clear, except the central element, except the subject itself: language.
How to define this book? It's the fifth I've written. It's also a debut. It's a point of arrival and of departure. It's based on a lack, an absence. Starting with the title, it implies a rejection. This time I don't accept the words I already know, the ones I should be writing with. I look for others.
I think it's a hesitant book and at the same time bold. A text both private and public. On the one hand it springs from my other books. The themes, ultimately, are unchanged: identity, alienation, belonging. But the wrapping, the contents, the body and soul are transfigured.
It's a travel book, more interior, I would say, than geographic. It recounts an uprooting, a state of disorientation, a discovery. It recounts a journey that is at times exciting, at times exhausting. An absurd journey, given that the traveler never reaches her destination.
It's a book of memory, full of metaphors. It recounts a search, a victory, a continual defeat. Childhood and adulthood, an evolution, maybe a revolution. It's a book of love, of suffering. It recounts a new independence together with a new dependence. A collaboration, and also a state of solitude.
Unlike my other books, this one is rooted in my real, lived experiences. Apart from two stories, it's not a work of imagination. I consider it a sort of linguistic autobiography, a self-portrait. It seems fitting to cite Natalia Ginzburg, who, in the foreword to
Lessico famigliare
(
Family Sayings
), writes, “I have invented nothing.”
And yet, from another point of view, I have invented everything. Writing in a different language means starting from zero. It comes from a void, and so every sentence seems to have emerged from nothingness. The effort of making the language mine, of possessing it, has a strong resemblance to a creative processâmysterious, illogical. But the possession is not authentic: it, too, is a sort of fiction. The language is true, but the manner in which I absorb and use it seems false. A vocabulary that is sought-after, acquired, remains forever anomalous, as if it were counterfeit, even though it's not.