February 28, 2022

Uma tristeza de Carnaval, com irresponsabilidade, exclusão, omissão e ausência de política pública

 

 

Foliões durante bloco de carnaval na região central do Rio de Janeiro


Nabil Bonduki

Em 2022, estamos presenciando um tremendo retrocesso na política pública de Carnaval nas principais cidades brasileiras, como São Paulo e Rio de Janeiro.

As prefeituras resolveram se omitir, sem formular, em diálogo com todos os setores, uma política pública global para o Carnaval na atual conjuntura, que levasse em conta tanto o controle da pandemia como a importância cultural da principal festa brasileira.

Conduzida sob uma lógica liberal, talvez nem consciente mas coerente com a lógica geral dessas gestões, o Carnaval de 2022 quase sem interferência do Estado, se transformou em um negócio comercial privado, sem controle sanitário, sem organização, planejamento e sem infraestrutura pública.

Estamos vivendo o pior dos mundos em termos de gestão pública: irresponsabilidade sanitária, omissão na fiscalização e exclusão dos que não querem descumprir as regras e/ou não podem pagar para curtir a folia.

Cancelaram o Carnaval de rua, aquele que é livre, democrático e gratuito, sem diálogo com os blocos e dar nenhuma perspectiva para um segmento cultural que tem uma crescente importância na vida e no espaço público das cidades e que ficou desamparado.

Adiaram o desfile dos sambódromos para abril, atendendo aos interesses das Ligas de Escola de Samba, permitindo ainda que essas agremiações promovessem eventos privados em suas quadras, que estão acontecendo sem controle sanitário.

Finalmente, as prefeituras permitiram grandes e imponentes festas privadas de Carnaval, sem limite especial de público, com shows de artistas famosos, amplamente divulgadas e pagas, muitas delas a peso de ouro, como mostrou a Folha.

Ao permitir esse formato, o poder público estimulou a organização de festas de toda natureza, em qualquer lugar e a qualquer preço, sem nenhum controle pois, afinal, se alguns podem, todos podem se divertir.

E a pandemia? Dane-se a pandemia, afinal é Carnaval, onde nada é proibido! Parece que todos querem relaxar e gozar, até mesmo o poder público que é responsável pela saúde da população, apesar do desgaste que isso pode gerar.

Com uma média diária de óbitos por Covid em torno de "apenas" 700 brasileiros (em um só dia, três vezes o total de mortos da tragédia de Petrópolis!), parece que precaução é coisa do passado. Afinal, como disse o presidente negacionista, um dia todos vão morrer.

Assim, corre-se o risco de se ver interrompida a queda nos números de mortos e de casos, verificada nas duas últimas semanas. Pior, de ver surgir, espero que não, uma nova variante, que poderá ser apelidada de "Carnivale".

Como alertou Rosana Leite de Melo, chefe da Secretaria Extraordinária de Enfrentamento à Covid-19, "é arriscada a realização do Carnaval não apenas pelo aumento do número de casos, mas porque as aglomerações poderiam gerar o surgimento de uma outra cepa".

O avanço da vacinação é relevante para reduzir as internações e mortes, mas não garante 100% de proteção. Ademais 25% da população ainda não tomou a segunda dose e só 34% tomou a dose de reforço. Lembrando que mesmo quem tem sintomas moderados ou leves da Covid —em decorrência da vacina— pode ter sequelas que custam para o SUS e para a saúde da população.

Como a situação se assemelha a um "liberou geral", apesar do cancelamento oficial do Carnaval de rua, as prefeituras perderam a autoridade para evitar concentrações no espaço público, como está ocorrendo no Rio de Janeiro.

Como a Folha informou, diversos grupos se reúnem nas ruas, orientados pelas redes sociais e vão fazendo a festa, parados ou em curtos desfiles. O clima é de improviso pois "sem estrutura de banheiros, esquema especial de limpeza ou cadastramento de ambulantes, a folia tem deixado as ruas da região central com lixo e xixi".

É um enorme retrocesso na organização do Carnaval de rua, que se estruturou nas últimas décadas para garantir a infraestrutura necessária para festas no espaço público. Mas, do ponto de vista do controle epidêmico, a folia na rua, se não evoluir para grandes multidões, ainda é menos perigosa do que as festas em ambiente fechado, onde a transmissão é mais intensa.

Isso porque a irresponsabilidade está prevalecendo nesses eventos privados. Após a Folha divulgar que a Mangueira não estava exigindo comprovante de vacinação em um evento em sua quadra, várias agremiações, como a própria Mangueira, Salgueiro e Viradouro, proibiram acesso do jornal às suas festas, em uma espécie de censura.

Em festas de Carnaval em ambiente aberto ou fechado, a exigência do uso de máscaras e distanciamento é uma piada. Onde já se viu pular Carnaval sem poder beber cerveja ou beijar?

Na primeira coluna do ano, defendi, com muita tristeza, o cancelamento do Carnaval de rua, por óbvias razões sanitárias. A ocupação cultural do espaço público, especialmente no Carnaval, nos moldes em que foi regulamentado em São Paulo durante a gestão Haddad, com a minha contribuição, significou uma conquista para o direito à cidade e à cultura.

Como o avanço do ômicron revelou, suspender o Carnaval era uma medida necessária. Mas na mesma coluna alertei para a necessidade de também se proibir as festas privadas e os desfiles nos sambódromos.

Dias depois, as prefeituras de São Paulo e do Rio de Janeiro, seguidas pelas demais cidades brasileiras, cancelaram o Carnaval de rua, sem oferecer alternativas aos blocos, adiaram o desfile das escolas de samba para abril, mas não criaram restrição para as festas privadas, fora aquelas para "inglês ver": comprovante de vacina, uso de máscara e distanciamento.

Criou assim, uma estranha sensação de ambiguidade, onde ninguém mais sabe qual é o comportamento que deve ser obedecido.

Ao abdicar de formular uma política coerente para o Carnaval de 2022, agindo no improviso e privilegiando algumas modalidades que transformam a cultura em negócio, o poder público transformou o evento em um vale-tudo, onde o lucro é privado e os prejuízos, que virão no futuro, em vidas e despesas na saúde pública, serão de responsabilidade do Estado.

Se eu estiver excessivamente cauteloso, espero que esteja, e a pandemia terminar sem novos sobressaltos até abril, as prefeituras precisam chamar os blocos de Carnaval para o diálogo na perspectiva de recuperar o evento de rua ainda este ano, mesmo que em formato reduzido.

A retomada do Carnaval de rua, democrático, livre e gratuito é indispensável para garantir de forma organizada e com infraestrutura adequada, o direito à cultura, à folia e à cidade. ​

folha

Mundo se preocupa com amparo dos ucranianos; e os outros refugiados?

 

 

Ao tentar justificar súbita empatia por aqueles que fogem da Ucrânia, repórteres e comentaristas revelam o quão pouco se importam com outros povos em guerra



Desde que a Rússia invadiu a Ucrânia, na semana passada, repórteres e comentaristas têm dito todo o tipo de barbaridade. Ao tentar justificar sua súbita empatia pelos ucranianos, revelam o quão pouco eles se importam com os outros povos em guerra.

Nem é preciso ler nas entrelinhas. É tudo dito abertamente, sem constrangimento. O jornal britânico Telegraph, por exemplo, escreveu no dia 26 que os ucranianos são "como a gente" e que, por isso, a invasão russa choca tanto. Afinal, os moradores de Kiev assistem à Netflix e têm contas na rede social Instagram. É impensável, por essa razão, que sua cidade seja bombardeada.

Um correspondente da rede de televisão americana CBS expressou semelhante surpresa explicando que a capital ucraniana não é um lugar como o Iraque e o Afeganistão. "Esta é uma cidade relativamente civilizada, relativamente europeia", disse ele no ar. "Você não esperaria que isso acontecesse aqui."

Já na rede britânica BBC, um ex-membro do governo ucraniano explicou que estava emocionado porque via "europeus loiros de olhos azuis sendo mortos todos os dias" por mísseis e helicópteros do presidente russo, Vladimir Putin. "Eu entendo e, é claro, respeito a emoção", respondeu o apresentador da TV.

Mesmo na transmissão em inglês da Al Jazeera, rede sediada no árabe Qatar, um comentarista expressou indignação com o fato de que os ucranianos têm que se refugiar em outros países, como a Polônia. São pessoas prósperas, de classe média, não refugiados do Oriente Médio, disse. E piorou: "Eles se parecem com qualquer família europeia que poderia viver na casa ao lado".

Não é que a invasão da Ucrânia não deva preocupar. Está claro o risco de que a guerra envolva outras potências, nas próximas semanas. A Rússia, como todo o mundo gosta de lembrar, tem um grande arsenal nuclear. Os bombardeios e a morte de civis têm, sim, que nos incomodar. Mas sempre, não só às vezes.

Todos esses comentários dão conta da desumanização do chamado sul global. A ideia implícita, e às vezes explícita mesmo, é de que é esperado um país árabe ou africano estar em guerra. É habitual, também, que a sua população tenha que se refugiar. Como se essa fosse a sua natureza, sua essência. O absurdo, impensável, é quando isso acontece com o mundo desenvolvido.

Como o pensador palestino Edward Said explica no seu livro clássico "Orientalismo", de 1978, a maneira com que a gente se refere a determinados povos têm consequências reais.

A desumanização dos árabes e dos muçulmanos pelas potências europeias ao longo dos séculos está diretamente ligada ao projeto colonialista que tanto dano causou no mundo. A ocupação francesa da Argélia, que durou mais de cem anos, dependia da construção da imagem dos argelinos como um povo inferior, selvagem, que precisava da ajuda dos mais avançados.

A essencialização e inferiorização do "outro" é o que permite que alguém escreva, sem titubear, que é chocante o bombardeio dos ucranianos porque, como a gente, eles assistem às séries da Netflix e postam no Instagram. É o que permite, também, um repórter dizer que a Ucrânia é civilizada, ao contrário do Iraque —sem mencionar a ironia de que a Mesopotâmia foi o berço da civilização, na Antiguidade. Sem entrar no mérito, também, que as invasões dos "civilizados" EUA destruíram o Iraque em 2003.

Só com essa empatia toda é que as pessoas conseguem construir essa imagem de cidadãos heroicos empunhando armas nas ruas de Kiev. Quando são os sírios lutando em Damasco, ou os iemenitas aquartelados em Sanaa, eles geralmente aparecem apenas representando o papel de selvagens e de terroristas.

É essa atitude, em resumo, que ajuda a entender por que é que, de repente, o mundo inteiro parece disposto a receber e amparar os refugiados, desde que eles sejam ucranianos, europeus e parecidos conosco. Loiros, de olhos azuis.

Já sírios, iraquianos, afegãos, sudaneses —esses não. Afinal, ser refugiado é a natureza deles. Não há novidade, não há nada de indignante. Que venham nadando, que se afoguem no Mediterrâneo, que se cortem com o arame farpado. É como as coisas são, mesmo.


folha 

February 26, 2022

Russia’s Assault in Ukraine Slows After an Aggressive Start

 A residential building was hit by missiles in southern Kyiv, Ukraine’s capital, on Friday.


Helene Cooper and

On the first day of President Vladimir V. Putin’s invasion of Ukraine, his generals and troops followed a textbook strategy for land invasions. They attacked the country’s military installations and air defense systems with missiles launched from the air, sea and land, seeking to take ownership of the skies, and sped forces to Kyiv, the capital, with the goal of decapitating the government of the democratically elected president, Volodymyr Zelensky.

But then, things slowed. It is one thing to cross the border of another country with tanks and artillery, protected by warplanes above, Pentagon officials and analysts say. It is another thing entirely to lay siege to cities and an army populated by people willing to put their lives on the line to protect what they view as their sovereign right to self-determination.

Within a day of entering Ukraine, Russian forces lost some momentum, senior American and British officials said, as Ukrainian fighters mounted a resistance. No population centers had been taken, a senior Defense Department official told reporters at the Pentagon on Friday. Nor had Russia yet managed to achieve air superiority over Ukraine, partly because the Ukrainians are using mobile systems and partly because Russian missiles have hit old air defense sites, which could show a flaw in Russia’s intelligence. The Ukrainian air defense and missile defense systems were degraded, he said, but the country’s air force was still flying planes and denying air access to Russia.

In addition, officials said, Russia was conducting most of its initial operations during the day, suggesting that its ability to fight at night — a hallmark of the American military — was less effective.]

Ukraine’s military was battling to push Russian forces back from Kharkiv, Ukraine’s second largest city.

Credit...Tyler Hicks/The New York Times

“Ukrainian armed forces continue to offer strong resistance,” said Lt. Gen. Jim Hockenhull, the British chief of defense intelligence.

That said, Pentagon officials warned that Russia had sent in only one-third of the 150,000 to 190,000 troops it had massed at Ukraine’s borders, so Moscow could intensify pressure at any time. Military officials said Russia was still in the initial phases of an operation that could take two to three weeks to seize most of the country.

Officials said Russia had begun an amphibious assault from the Sea of Azov, near Mariupol, in the south. Thousands of Russian naval infantry are coming ashore there, with military officials assessing that the plan is to move toward the city. The Russian military, with its decisive edge in cyberwarfare, tanks, heavy weaponry, missiles, fighter planes, warships and sheer numbers, dwarfs that of Ukraine.

But wars are not fought on paper alone. While Russia has established attack lines into three cities — Kyiv in the north, Kharkiv in the northeast and Kherson in the south — Ukrainian troops are fighting to hold all three. Significantly, the senior U.S. defense official said, Ukrainian command and control remains intact.

Russia’s attack lines are bottlenecked, a second official said, as Ukrainian troops fiercely engage against the Russians. The resistance, the official said, is why the Russian troops massed at the border have not all crossed. But the official warned that more of those troops would flow quickly to the cities — particularly Kyiv — if the forward elements break the Ukrainian troops who have held them up.

“It’s not apparent to us that Russian forces over the past 24 hours have been able to execute their plans as they deemed they would,” John F. Kirby, the Pentagon’s chief spokesman, said later Friday. “But it’s a dynamic situation.”

As some Russian troops entered a northern district of Kyiv, missile strikes hammered the city and rockets crashed into residential buildings. If Russian intelligence has figured out where Mr. Zelensky and the rest of the Ukrainian leadership are hiding, the Russian military will probably try to take them out with rockets and airstrikes, a senior Biden administration official said in an interview. But if that does not work, Russian forces might resort to urban combat, a more difficult endeavor.

“The easy part is attacking with missiles and hitting airfields,” said retired Col. David Lapan, a 30-year veteran of the Marine Corps. “But the narrative that they’ve overrun Ukraine is very premature. We’re just a couple of days into this, and it could go on a long time.”

Military volunteers received weapons after the Ukrainian government announced that it would arm civilians to resist the Russian invasion.


Credit...Brendan Hoffman for The New York Times

Senior Pentagon officials echoed that view. Russian troops are surrounding Kyiv with an aim to isolate and possibly lay siege to the capital, the senior Biden official said. He said the Russian forces had a list of Mr. Zelensky’s leadership team, and would seek to kill or capture those officials if targeted airstrikes did not accomplish Mr. Putin’s aim of eliminating the government. But Ukrainian troops and citizens are fighting back, he said, which means that Russia, for all of its military might, may not have an easy time reaching its objectives. It would get bloody, he said.

It already has. In an exchange captured in an audio recording that has been shared and tweeted around the world, a Russian warship ordered 13 soldiers protecting tiny Snake Island in the country’s south to “surrender” or “be bombed.” A Ukrainian border guard defiantly responded: “Russian warship,” then used an expletive to reject the demand.

The warship opened fire and killed all 13 border guards. That small battlefield victory for Russia, one Pentagon official said, could inspire Ukrainians and cost Mr. Putin in the public eye at home.

“The Ukrainians are badly overmatched in technology and sheer combat power, especially in the air and at sea, but are fighting on their homeland to protect their children and families,” said retired Adm. James G. Stavridis, the former supreme allied commander for Europe. “Motivation is far higher on their side, and the intangibles can help.”


Ukrainian emergency services officers in Kharkiv removing the body of a rocket they said was fired by Russian forces on Friday.
Credit...Tyler Hicks/The New York Times

The Russian military attack continued on Friday as it started the day before: with the terrifying thud of artillery strikes on airports and military installations all over Ukraine.

The Pentagon said that the Russians, using missiles and long-range artillery, were facing particularly strong resistance near Kyiv and Kharkiv.

But Russian troops were also ratcheting up their cyberattacks on media sites and other communications, as well as against a major dam that supplies power across southern Ukraine, the senior Pentagon official said. He added, however, that Mr. Zelensky and his top civilian aides were still in communication with Ukrainian commanders.

Why Russia has not launched even larger cyberattacks across the country, and shut down virtually all communications, to cut off military units from their commanders in Kyiv and from each other remained a bit of a mystery on Friday.

U.S. military officials said it could be that efforts to safeguard Ukraine’s communications in anticipation of a major Russia attack were helping. Or, since it is believed that many of Ukraine’s internet and phone communications go through Russia, Moscow might be leaving some lines open to eavesdrop on Ukrainian civilian and military officials.

By Thursday night, Russian special forces and airborne troops had pushed into the outskirts of Kyiv. And on Friday, Russian airborne forces had blocked Kyiv from the west, the Defense Ministry claimed, after capturing an airfield in the area in an assault that used “more than 200 Russian helicopters.” If accurate, that could create an air bridge that allows Russia to fly in hundreds of troops to help encircle the capital.

Ukrainian forces, which officials said had shot down several Russian jets and a helicopter in the earlier hours of the conflict on Thursday, were battling all along a broad front line to maintain control over their country.

By midday Friday, Russian forces had fired more than 200 missiles, mostly short-range ballistic rockets but also cruise missiles and rockets fired from the Black Sea, at targets across Ukraine, according to the senior Pentagon official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss sensitive military assessments.

The targets were primarily military: barracks, ammunition depots and air fields, the official said, in an expected move to destroy as much of the outgunned Ukrainian military as possible, as well as to help weaken any guerrilla movement that could rise up from the ashes of a defeated Ukrainian army.

Russia insisted it was not bombing civilian targets and was trying to limit casualties in the Ukrainian military. “No strikes against civilian infrastructure are being carried out,” Foreign Minister Sergey V. Lavrov said Friday.

NEW YORK TIMES

Residents looking to flee at a train station in Kyiv. Russian troops are surrounding Kyiv with an aim to isolate the capital.
Image
Residents looking to flee at a train station in Kyiv. Russian troops are surrounding Kyiv with an aim to isolate the capital.
Credit...Lynsey Addario for The New York Times

But the senior Pentagon official challenged that claim, saying some civilian residential areas had been struck, though the official could not say if they had been deliberately targeted.

How the battle for Kyiv ends will likely signal Mr. Putin’s larger plans for Ukraine.

“Putin’s M.O. is to install new government and have them do the dirty work,” said Representative Michael Waltz, a Florida Republican and former Army Green Beret who traveled to Ukraine in December. “It’s unclear if he is underestimating the level of Ukrainian nationalism that’s developed since 2014.”

Mr. Waltz said he met with Ukraine’s top commando on that December trip. “He was very focused on developing a resistance organization,” Mr. Waltz said, “but I’m not sure he had enough time.”

February 22, 2022

The Comedian-Turned-President Is Seriously in Over His Head

 President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine, center, surely never imagined the job would get quite so intense.

Ms. Rudenko is a Ukrainian journalist and the chief editor of The Kyiv Independent.

 It’s not hard to guess what President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine must be craving right now: one normal day.

The comic-turned-president surely never imagined the job would be quite so intense. First, he got tangled up in the impeachment of Donald Trump. Then he had to deal with the Covid pandemic. And now he’s facing the prospect of a full-scale invasion by Russia.

Russia, of course, has been waging a war in eastern Ukraine since 2014. But now the threat is total: Up to 190,000 Russian troops have amassed near Ukraine’s borders and in separatist regions, and an invasion, bringing devastation and disaster, could come at any time. It’s a gravely serious situation. And Mr. Zelensky, a comedian for most of his life, is in over his head.

When Mr. Zelensky took power in Ukraine in 2019, converting his TV fame into a stellar political career, no one knew what to expect. His opponents said he was so inexperienced, he was bound to be a disaster. His supporters thought that he would break away from the old ways and end corruption. His harshest critics claimed that Mr. Zelensky, a Russian-speaking man born in eastern Ukraine, would all but sell the country off to Russia. Others said he was an oligarch puppet.

Yet the truth is more prosaic. Mr. Zelensky, the showman and performer, has been unmasked by reality. And it has revealed him to be dispiritingly mediocre.

After his nearly three years in office, it’s clear what the problem is: Mr. Zelensky’s tendency to treat everything like a show. Gestures, for him, are more important than consequences. Strategic objectives are sacrificed for short-term benefits. The words he uses don’t matter, as long as they are entertaining. And when the reviews are bad, he stops listening and surrounds himself with fans.

He started brightly. Early in his tenure, Mr. Zelensky commanded more power than any of his predecessors had. His fame and anti-establishment allure landed him with a parliamentary majority, a handpicked cabinet and a mandate for reform. At first, it seemed to be working. His government opened up the farmland market and expanded digital services across the country. He began an enormous road construction program, proclaiming that he wanted to be remembered as the president who finally built good roads in Ukraine.

But the successes largely stopped there. Mr. Zelensky’s other major project, a campaign he calls “deoligarchization” that’s aimed at capping the influence of the very wealthy, looks more like a P.R. move than serious policy. Despite his campaign promises, no progress has been made in fighting corruption. According to Transparency International, Ukraine remains the third-most-corrupt country in Europe, after Russia and Azerbaijan. Anti-corruption and law enforcement agencies are either stalling or run by loyalists appointed by the president.

Corruption just doesn’t seem to worry Mr. Zelensky much — at least when those implicated are close to him. In March 2020, when his chief of staff’s brother was caught offering government posts for money, Mr. Zelensky did nothing. More recently, a top lawmaker was caught on camera drunkenly offering a bribe to a police officer at the site of a car crash he might have caused. The public was outraged, but Mr. Zelensky mumbled a disapproving comment and moved on. Even the president’s beautiful newly built roads are mired in controversy. The procurement process is thought to be rigged and the prices too high.

Scandals and tolerance for corruption have chipped away at Mr. Zelensky’s popularity. Sixty-two percent of Ukrainians don’t want him to run for re-election, and if an election were held today, he’d garner about 25 percent of the vote — down from the 30 percent he easily won in the first round of the 2019 election. He’d still be likely to win, but the historic 73 percent he scored in the second round feels like a distant memory.

The president’s tense relationship with the press doesn’t help, either. A former actor used to the sound of applause, Mr. Zelensky is notoriously thin-skinned when it comes to criticism and challenging questions. He is visibly irritated by traditional journalists: In November, this fractious approach led to unseemly confrontations at a news conference.

It’s not just the media Mr. Zelensky struggles to work with. His first year in charge was chaotic. His hastily assembled team quickly fell apart, and yesterday’s allies turned into some of his harshest critics. There were constant reshuffles. New ministers were given very little time to prove themselves and were kicked out if they didn’t.

The churn eventually stopped, but at a cost. Mr. Zelensky, stung by the fallout, came to largely rely on the loyal rather than the qualified. A former movie producer and longtime friend was made chief of staff, joining other friends and confidants of Mr. Zelensky in wielding outsize power. The security service is overseen by a childhood friend, a former corporate lawyer, and the president’s party in Parliament is run by a loyal former I.T. businessman. The circle around the president has become an echo chamber.

In the process, Mr. Zelensky has turned into a version of the politician he campaigned against: insular, closed off, surrounded by yes men. In normal circumstances, that would be bad enough. But now, when Ukraine is menaced by Russia, it may be affecting Mr. Zelensky’s judgment.

That’s become ever clearer in recent weeks. As the West pursued megaphone diplomacy to discourage an invasion, Mr. Zelensky tried to downplay the threat. But this understandable effort to project calm and steady skittish markets was undermined by his showy style.

 

In a tone-deaf address in January, for example, a patronizing Mr. Zelensky effectively mocked Ukrainians for their proneness to panic and laughed off a possible invasion. The very next day, he claimed Russia might invade Kharkiv, Ukraine’s second-largest city. Instead of being comforted, the country was confused. No wonder 53 percent of Ukrainians think Mr. Zelensky won’t be able to defend the country if there is an invasion.

Yet Mr. Zelensky’s behavior, odd to the point of erratic, obscures a truth: He has no good options. On the one hand, any concession to Russia, particularly over the conflict in eastern Ukraine, would likely bring hundreds of thousands of people to the streets — threatening him with the fate of Viktor Yanukovych, the president overthrown by a revolution in 2014. Any decisive move against Russia, on the other hand, risks giving the Kremlin a pretext for a deadly invasion.

The show must go on, of course. The crisis continues. But the president’s performance — strained, awkward, often inappropriate — is hardly helping.

 NY TIMES

February 20, 2022

Dubliners

 




The centennial of Ulysses is in 2022, and coming back to the book after a gap of some years I remember the way it makes me fall asleep somewhere in the middle of Stephen’s walk across Sandymount Strand. The first two episodes—all fine. Surprisingly easy. What’s all the fuss about? Then the book unlooses itself entirely in the mind of Dedalus and starts to dream: “He comes, pale vampire, through storm his eyes, his bat sails bloodying the sea, mouth to her mouth’s kiss.”

Hang on. Did Stephen actually visit his aunt’s house, or just imagine that he did? Is he still thinking of his mother’s death? There is a dead dog on the strand, and also a live dog called Tatters, and this living dog is actually quite funny, as he smells a rock and pisses on it, then pisses at an “unsmelt” rock. “The simple pleasures of the poor,” according to Stephen, but is he also taking a leak? Or is he doing something else now?

I have felt it before, the same swooning sense of complexity, the same delicious struggle not to allow my own thoughts in. The attempt to make sense, fill in blanks, tell the real from the imagined, becomes tiring the way a profound conversation is tiring, when the subject is important but not clear. It is a kind of strenuous dreaming, very like writing fiction. Joyce has been in our brains, playing in the place where meaning is made, and this can feel disturbing or delightful. Something has been done to the act of reading itself. It seems as though he is inviting us to write his book for him, or with him, as we go along.

On June 16, 1904, Stephen Dedalus, a young writer, is mourning his mother and in need of a better father. Leopold Bloom, an adman, is avoiding his unfaithful wife and mourning a long-dead infant son. They meet, drink, recognize something in each other. Apart from this, nothing much happens. There is a funeral. People wander around Dublin while thinking. Momentous events (Molly Bloom’s adultery, the birth of a baby) happen elsewhere. Meanwhile, the reader is left with men blathering on, singing, arguing, lapsing into reverie, playing with themselves. Bloom dodges the man who is heading uptown in order to sleep with his wife. He is subjected to anti-Semitism in a pub. At dusk he masturbates, covertly enough, on a beach.

The title may be taken from Homer’s great epic, but this is all very far from heroic. Unless the book itself is heroic; it keeps doing monumental things—outlandish, never previously attempted. The English language is regrown from its historical roots in the basement of a maternity hospital, the whole caboodle goes completely mad in a brothel. Bloom dusts himself and Stephen down, and the prose comes strenuously together in a great rhetorical to-and-fro until, at last, it runs easy and wild in the mind of Molly Bloom.

Perhaps it has been, after all, pretty epic, though we are still not sure what kind of journey we've been on. We stalk the references, and this can be reassuring. Buck Mulligan “is”a real man named Oliver St. John Gogarty; the old woman who comes to sell him Sandy-cove milk “is”Athena, from Homer's Odyssey . Many of the answers we find to the questions that the book provokes don't, in fact, answer anything much. As Molly says, “If I asked him hed say its from the Greek leave us as wise as we were before.”The Homeric correspondences are so constantly disappointing, they are a joke in themselves, and yet they tell us that we are reading a story, so we refer to the chapters—as Joyce, finally, did not—by the titles of episodes from the Odyssey on which they are obliquely based. And there we are, writing the book for him again. 

 

People say that they finished Ulysses or that they could not finish it, as if either outcome were some kind of big deal. But I have never managed to finish Ulysses , even though my eyes have seen all the words it contains. You can finish it all you like; the next time you pick the book up it will be different, because you are different. Ulysses invites meaning, then throws it back at you, multiplied. 

 

 

I bought my first copy for under a fiver in a bookshop in Kinsale when I was fourteen. This was, of course, a precocious thing to do, but—consider—when Joyce was fourteen, he bought his first sexual experience on the street. If that happened today, we would call social services. How much did he pay, I wonder? Bloom remembers his own first, Bridie Kelly on Hatch Street, who could be had “for a bare shilling and her luckpenny.”So perhaps that's how much loose change Joyce had in his young pocket as he came back from the theater, which in those days cost as much as fifteen shillings or as little as sixpence. Young James Joyce may have asked the girl or woman her name (but I do not think he did) and she most certainly asked him for that extra penny. In Paris, seven years later, he was so destitute he wrote to his mother complaining that, after starving for forty-two hours, he had blown her rescue money on a single meal costing a shilling. 

 

A lot of energy has been spent talking about the rudeness of Ulysses . Now that I know more about the world, I sometimes follow the money instead. The book is set on a day when Dedalus, who owes money everywhere, gets paid much less than he needs in order to make good. The men who bump into one another around Dublin are interconnected by debt—they are borrowing and lending, buying drinks or, like Bloom, failing to stand their round. 

 

Bloom's goodwill is patient and material, however—he is a charitable man—and when he sees Stephen's sister in the street, he is shocked at the state of her: “Good Lord, that poor child's dress is in flitters. Underfed she looks too. Potatoes and marge, marge and potatoes.”This girl, Dilly, begs money from her father, Simon, for food, also in the street—“I'm sure you have another shilling”—and she spends a penny of what he gives her on a secondhand French primer. A girl who burns old boots to keep warm wants to learn French. These glimpses of hunger and hopefulness are so pathetic and shaming, you might think the farting and the frottage were just there to distract us. 

 

It was the bodily functions that caused all the trouble. When the book was published it was feted, vilified, banned. Edna O'Brien said, however, that “what hurt Joyce most was the response of his family,”which makes you wonder what he thought he was doing when he wrote all that. In fact, when his relatives described the book they might have been describing themselves. His blackguard of a father looked at it through his monocle and said that his son was “a nice sort of blackguard.”His brother Stanislaus, who could be cold, said the novel “lacked serenity and warmth.”Stanislaus also disliked the way the book wants to get bigger as it goes on and is so reluctant to close: “As episodes grow longer and longer and you try to tell every damn thing you know about anybody that appears or anything that crops up, my patience oozes out.”

 

Nora said nothing. She read only twenty-seven pages, including, Joyce said bitterly, the title page. Where did she stop?

 

Here's a different question. Do you read Ulysses in an intellectual fashion? Does the challenge make you feel brilliant, pedantic, a little bit pretentious—does it make you feel, that is, like Stephen Dedalus? Or do you go with the flow, read feelingly, sensuously, let this gorgeous stuff work inside you as if you were Leopold Bloom, a man who pictures his penis floating in the bath as a languid floating flower?

 

Reading Ulysses without notes—just as it is, just as you are—is an act of either arrogance or submission, both of which are available to the very young. For me, at fourteen, it was like mainlining language, getting high on words, just the pleasure of them, their intricacies and density. I also read it one word at a time, which is not a bad way, childish as it may seem, to read a book that is so disruptive of the sentence.

 

My Dublin aunts lived, in a slightly Edwardian atmosphere, not far from Bloom's fictional home, so I'd had glimpses of this world already. Here on the page were their violet-flavored cachous, which Bloom called “kissing comfits.”Here were their odd-sounding religious “sodalities,”which had nothing to do with turf sods, or sodomy, or solidarity. “I declare to my antimacassar,”says one narrator, and I knew an antimacassar was not another kind of auntie, it was a doily that aunties put on the backs of chairs. I also knew what a bowsy was and what was a gusset. To these pleasures of familiarity were added the headier delights of Joyce's linguistic violations and his refusal to tell the inside of a character's head from the outside world. I did not understand Ulysses , but I certainly understood (before it sent me to sleep) the possibility that anything at all might come to mind, and that this was a deeply subversive, potentially filthy and wonderful assertion to make about the human soul.

 

 

 

No wonder my mother was not pleased to find me reading it. My copy was put in the attic to wait until I was eighteen. At which time I climbed the ladder, took off its dusty newspaper wrapping, and read the thing. It was my pass into the adult world. This was some years before the popularity of Bloomsday, that happy pantomime of literary Dubliners going about in straw boaters or long skirts on June 16. Ulysses was still a book, a private as opposed to public experience, and some of the conversations about it felt a bit pervy. It seemed to attract a certain kind of knowingness in clever men, and the way they looked at me, if I talked about reading it, managed to make me feel ashamed.

 

Is this Joyce's fault? The culture of Joyce commentary can be an invitation to pedantry for men who are interested in everything that isn't sex between two people. Was Bloom masturbating at, to, or for a young woman on Sandymount Strand at dusk? The prepositions seem important. Gerty McDowell, the woman in question, certainly seems to enjoy it. The episode is written as a high romance; she thinks like a woman in a novelette or like a consumer of the advertisements in a woman's magazine. Perhaps this is why she is so interested in her own underwear and has an impulse to show it off at just the right moment for Bloom.

 

The slyly inadequate correspondence from Homer is that she represents the marriage-minded Princess Nausicaa, who helps Odysseus after he is cast up on her shore. Joyce described the episode as “the projected mirage,”and this may explain Gerty's rhapsodic participation in Bloom's excitement. Of course! The text shows Bloom's projection, not Gerty's reality. She isn't thinking about her underwear; she is thinking, like any young person on a beach, about life, love, art, and her dinner. When Joyce was asked what really happened between Bloom and Gerty, he said, “Nothing…It all took place in Bloom's imagination.”

 

But he also said the episode dealt with “female hypocrisy,”which seems a typically sour comment about women, and also unfair. When Joyce lived in Zurich he wrote some highly romantic letters to a woman named Martha Fleischman, on whom he had become fixated after he saw her “pulling a chain”in her bathroom opposite his apartment. Later, in the street, he realized that she had a limp. Each of these

details shades his infatuation with paraphilia—coprophilia, voyeurism, devotism. Sexuality stalls at the fetish, and though Joyce loves to be high-flown as well as low-minded, the parody can seem gleeful, while the smallness of his interest disconcerts.

 

The prose is not small, however. Gerty's thoughts are written not by a hack writer of romantic fiction but by a great prose stylist, and the reader is also transported. The moment when Gerty limps away is—for us, if not quite for Bloom—one of great sympathetic enlargement. An image of Gerty will return in the brothel section to accuse Bloom, as one of a series of sadomasochistic fantasies that culminate in his being feminized and violated. Later again, we learn that he has not come inside his wife, Molly, in the ten years since their son died. A book that avoids intercourse has room for everything else—fantasy, imagination, remembrance, reproduction, and love.

 

If Gerty is a third-person object, to Bloom and to the book, Molly is triumphantly a first-person subject. Sometimes petty, often vain, and very far from monogamous, Molly considers various partners past and future, including the young Dedalus, and she rails against the double standards imposed on women. She thinks about sex a lot, about motherhood very little, and about her dead son only fleetingly. She does all this without punctuation. The thrill and difficulty of reading Molly comes from the libidinous rush of a style that constantly threatens to slip or surprise, and it can be hard to find a discussion of her character that does not feel dated. She is earth mother or adultress, cheap or mythic, she is “an invitation to the readers’voyeurism,”and seldom allowed to be just herself.

 

What would happen if she used a few full stops? Molly farts a bit, gets her period, and uses the chamber pot. Such anatomical events are not more shocking because they happen in a woman's body—unless they are. They do not read as arousal, and only sometimes as the writer's prurience. “Of course hes mad on the subject of drawers,”Molly says about Bloom, because she is no fool, but she also fell for him because she saw that “he understood or felt what a woman is.”Joyce may have had his own kind of good time writing Molly, but this adventure in female desiring is the opposite of misogynistic, not just because of the freedom of her voice, but because there is no doubting that Molly is in charge of herself: “theyre not going to be chaining me up no damn fear.”

 

 

 

These days I read everything slowly; my brain is like an old computer file with too much information in it. I slow down, stop. I go back over it again. This is also a good way to read Ulysses , with a guidebook, notes, the Internet at your fingertips. And I read as my parents used to watch Irish-made films: in order to identify the locations and, loudly, point them out. The Oval pub still exists and was up till recently frequented by newspapermen; Davy Byrne's is still moral; the reading room of the National Library remains open to scholars. I gave birth in the same building as Mina Purefoy, I swim with Buck Mulligan, and mourn the passing of friends in the chapel at Glasnevin.

 

 For a while I lived in a house named in the book, a fact that seemed, until just recently, not especially thrilling. The address 13 St. Kevin's Parade is given for Moses Herzog, referred to in the “Cyclops”episode as someone to whom money is owed for sugar and tea. There I “lived in sin”back in 1985—the phrase was in active use in my Catholic family, and it made the relationship feel forbidden and doomed. My fellow sinner is, in 2021, usefully sitting across the room from me, so I can ask him to confirm the number of the house. A quick search discovers (on Twitter!) the relevant page in Thom's Official Directory of 1904 , which Joyce used as a reference while writing Ulysses . The house is three up from the intersection with Clanbrassil Street, which is close to where the Islamic Relief center now stands. M. Herzog is listed by Thom's at that address, though the official census of 1901 shows an Isaac and Abraham Herzog. In fact, Thom's misspells and misgenders four other residents of the street who then turn up, botched, in the pages of Ulysses .

 

There are few or no Jewish residents now in Dublin's “Little Jerusalem,”the network of redbrick streets where Bloom was born and where Molly later walked, while pregnant, with Mrs. Moisel. I had no idea, when I lived there in 1985, that the house opposite had once served as a synagogue. The disappeared community was made up of migrants from Lithuania, who moved on to larger houses in better areas, and eventually left an increasingly Catholic, economically stagnant Ireland altogether.

 

Of course, Molly did not actually walk these streets with Mrs. Moisel, because Molly did not, strictly speaking, exist. It's also a bit of a stretch to see her accepted so easily in a conservative Litvak enclave. Molly went to Mass, her father-in-law was Hungarian, her husband, Bloom, was twice baptized and nonpracticing. Joyce got the religion of the residents exactly right, and their culture slightly wrong. Even so, because of his insane attempt at accuracy and his weird, often libelous insistence on cramming the book with the names of real people, it is possible to fall through the text into a place like Little Jerusalem, which Ireland's homogeneous, nationalist history-making has more or less forgotten.

 

Because the text is so unstable and, for many different reasons, inaccurate, you can also fall into a shouting match with six academics and your Dublin mother, who may consider you have got your facts, or your interpretation of the facts, a tiny bit wrong. This, with a sacred text like Ulysses , means entirely, horribly wrong. Joyce was a genius, so even his mistakes were made on purpose. There is no such thing as a mistake. Stick a pin in any page and you will find a fight.

 

Is the Pidgeon who gave poor Mary Shortall the pox a reference to the Holy Ghost? Hmm. According to the prostitute Kitty Ricketts, Mary was “in the lock with the pox she got from Jimmy Pidgeon in the blue caps had a child off him that couldn't swallow.”The line is followed by a recurring joke about the “pigeon sacré”who put the Virgin Mary into an embarrassing condition. I chase the bird, flapping and cooing, through the text. Stephen is reminded of the joke about the Holy Ghost when he sees the Pigeonhouse from Sandymount Strand—this building was named for John Pidgeon, who had an eatery there in the 1760s, but there is no clear relation to Jimmy. In the post office Bloom thinks about the problem of pox-bearing British soldiers (the blue caps) while waiting for the postmistress to retrieve his letter from a “pigeonhole”—but that is surely just another decoy among many.

 

One commentator says that Pidgeon was a common Dublin name, but there were only eighty-two of them in the 1911 census. Among them is a Robert Pidgeon who worked in the General Post Office, and might well have been the father of our postman in the 1970s. He was a smiling man, who was rumored to have fifteen children—“so far as we know,”my father used to say, darkly. He also got great mileage from the phrase “the pigeon post.”

 

It is possible to spin out from this single pin stuck in the text to a historically shifting map of the real Dublin—the concrete chimney stacks of the Pigeon-house are visible from any point along the bay.

 

I, meanwhile, am back in the punning proliferation of my comically (not) cuckolded father, who found in Mr. Pidgeon's name a daily pleasure. Habit is also important here, and what could be more habitual than the post? I am reminded of a style of nurturing masculinity, which is always mild, always funny, and this informs my experience of Leopold Bloom. Don't ask me to read Ulysses without my own father there—why would I want to do that?

 

 

 

For some years now, I have lived close to the Joyce Museum in Sandy-cove, which is housed in the Martello tower where Joyce once slept and where he later set the first chapter of Ulysses . The sea, I am happy to say, is no more snot-green than Homer's was wine-dark. But though the water resists Joyce's famous description, the squat, round stone tower belongs almost completely now to the book. It is populated by shades both fictional and historical, and by living people who are their familiars. I walk through a neighborhood of Joyce tourists and badly behaved Joycean ghosts. There, up the road, is the house where the real playwright J.M. Synge lived and a fictional Dedalus pissed against the hall door—unless, as he says, it was Mulligan. (“—Me! Stephen exclaimed. That was your contribution to literature.”) Another example of Joyce fixing the real to the literary by a transgressive use of waste matter.

 

Recently, just to get the full experience, I sat on a bench near the Forty Foot, the swimming spot below the Martello tower where Buck Mulligan goes for his dip, and I read a page or two. It was a mild September afternoon. The day was so windless and still, I could hear a man address a quiet friend, one leaving, one arriving, both of them with their towels rolled.

 

“Hello there, young Thomas,”he said. “Were you aware that a certain gentleman is home this week? Your presence may be required.”

 

And it seemed to me a continuation of the book I held in my hand.

 

The dialogue in Ulysses uses tricks of speech that are as real and abiding as the streets of the city that Joyce worked so hard to recreate. This tone is not exactly camp, but it is rakish, mock-heroic; a glittering game that fills the verbal space between men who like each other—but not too much!

 

“I've been in since four,”the man went on, cheerfully. “Went for a walk, took a Barry White in the new jacks they have up there. Lovely.”The local council had recently reopened a nearby public restroom, so this good news was both personal and civic. It was also astonishingly male.

 

I felt a theory coming on. I wondered at the way male speech often confuses top and bottom, why Irish men are so happily described as “talking shite”or “bollocks,”or why an “old fart”is by default male. So many of the men in Ulysses are heard huffing and blowing, not to mention gassing about politics. Perhaps, for Joyce, speech was just another thing that came from the body and lingered on the air. If you ask me what Ulysses has to offer—despite the maleness of the text, despite the author's perversion, despite the way it exists not on the page but in your reading of the page—the answer is still “Everything, everything, ■

 

 

NEW YORK REVIEW OF BOOKS

Illustration by Paolo Ventura