4. Why It's Best to Say Cesar Aira Does Not Write Books
I had been reading Aira's novels as they were translated, but I stopped a couple of years ago. "The Linden Tree" is unusual, and now I need to use the present perfect progressive instead of the past perfect progressive: I have been reading Aira, I might still read Aira. It's difficult to get the tense right because Aira's novels inspire a kind of wavering devotion. I have decided that what wavers is my interest in the books as units.
His short novels are famously improvisational and unstructured, so finishing one isn't quite like finishing a normally structured novel: you may feel the book ended on page twenty, or that you've just read a fragment. Both can be true. All hundred or so of Aira's books can be imagined as a single book, although that's more an abstraction than an idea that could make sense in detail. And every one of his books continuously begs the question of why it keeps going, why it doesn't wrap up, why the author thinks the new material he's just introduced fits with what came before.
1 The two main ways of reading Aira
These questions are part of the experience of reading Aira. There is a generous interpretation available, which many of his reviewers adopt: it's said he practices a variant of magic realism (or, more accurately, surrealism), so that every unexpected anecdote or image is to be understood as expressive. In this reading, Aira's accomplishment is his mixture of realism and surrealism (or biography and dream, or history and fantasy). It's also said that Aira's accomplishment is his version of modernist stream of consciousness writing. He calls his method "la huída hacia adelante," or "the constant flight forward." As Alena Graedon put it in "The New Yorker," "Roughly, this means that he writes without rewriting, inventing as he goes" (January 27, 2017). In this reading every turn in subject matter is best seen as an expression of the author's inimitable imagination.
These are unhelpful diagnoses because they make it impossible to criticize any of Aira's narrative decisions. If every unexpected juxtaposition of images is surrealist, then any narrative assemblage can be expressive. If every surprising turn in the storyline is a reflection of the author's vivid fantasy, then none can be criticized for being less authentic.
In fact, I imagine people stop reading Aira because his narratives can get tiresome or uninteresting. He veers unpredictably, but the veering itself is predictable. These are ways of registering that neither the surrealism nor the stream-of-consciousness is working. He has achieved some wonderful things by writing the way he does, without planning and without revising, but he has also produced a body of work that is either immune from criticism or in jeopardy of being ignored.
"The Linden Tree" is unusual in that it's autobiographical. As reviewers have noted, it begins with a story about the undependability of the narrator's memory. He could check part of the memory by visiting the town where he grew up, but he can't be bothered. (He's too "unscientific.") Besides, he says, the subject of his memory--a linden tree--has been cut down (pp. 4-5). On the other hand, his entire life has been a series of "multicolored distractions" from the memory (p. 7). One reviewer of the English translation picked up on this and proposed it as the book's theme: the unreliability and crucial importance of memory.
But the book isn't about the tree. At the end the narrator returns to the linden tree, but that's just a sop to narrative closure. I can't imagine a reading in which those closing pages are satisfying: they don't address or explain what's happened in the 80 pages in between. It's difficult for me to imagine that Aira thought much about what he was doing at the end, except finishing "The Linden Tree" to get on with the next novel: otherwise he would have had his narrator talk about how ineffectual the last few pages are.
It's useful that "The Linden Tree" presents itself as an autobiographical text, because it brings out the importance and place of themes like the retrieval of memory. His other books, as far as I know, are presented as novels, so their themes and theories don't need to drive the narratives. But the ideas of memory that open and close "The Linden Tree" don't explain what happens in "The Linden Tree" in the way, for example, that Proust's narrator's claims about memory in the opening of his novel resonate all the way to the end.
2 An alternative criterion
So what characteristics of Aira could keep me reading? For me those would be the moments when the narrator, and implied author, struggle to make sense.
Aira's essay "Cecil Taylor," in English in "Bomb" magazine (February 13, 2015) provides an interesting parallel. The piece begins with a story about a prostitute. After a couple of paragraphs Aira introduces Taylor. He notes:
"The story of the prostitute who distracted the cat wasn’t necessary in itself, which doesn’t mean that the virtual series of all stories is unnecessary as a whole. The story of Cecil Taylor calls for the illustrative mode of the fable; the details are interchangeable, and atmosphere would seem to be out of place."
This is the sort of general reasoning that critics use to praise Aira's novels. The majority of "Cecil Taylor" is an account of a number of Taylor's early failures, embellished but all plausible. The essay is serious and devout about Taylor, and although Aira doesn't say he's been misunderstood in the same ways, it's clear throughout that Taylor's long decades of partial fame have been on Aira's mind. In another place Aira writes:
"An artist’s biography is hard to distinguish from the trials of its writing: it’s not simply a matter of representing representation (anyone could do that) but of creating unbearable situations in thought."
That idea is much more in line with my own interests, but "unbearable situations" and "trials"--which I understand not as narrative situations but as paradoxical, impossible, or implausible lines of reasoning--are not so much the norm in Aira's writing as entertaining, eccentric, and fortuitous images and thoughts. Here is an example of a passage that has more to do with "unbearable situations" than with "the illustrative mode of the fable." Early in "The Linden Tree" Aira is talking about his father, who was an incompetent electrician:
"My father's continual trips all over town on his bicycle were a kind of allegory of Electricity's invisible flight to the farthest corners... But if you think about it, everything is allegory. One thing signifies another, even the fact that I have ended up becoming a writer and composing this true account." [p. 24]
Of course it's not true that "if you think about it, everything is allegory," but the logical leap barely registers because right away it's clear that Aira is mainly interested in linking his father's profession to his own. It's also patently untrue that everything in the book is "true." There are a number of episodes that couldn't have happened as he describes them, and many more than couldn't have been experienced as he describes them, because they happened to a young boy. So the passing assertion that the account is true reads as a trick: he doesn't want us to think too much about it, and he presumably doesn't want to think about it too much himself. (That would be too "scientific.")
The passage continues:
"To follow the prompts of allegory, which also works by remote control, I too could be practicing a trade for which I am quite unqualified, manipulating objects--memories, for example--of which I know and understand nothing, in a state of utter puzzlement. But that doesn't alter the reality of the facts: my father was an elecrician and I am a writer. These are real allegories."
That last sentence, I think, doesn't make sense. The penultimate sentence does (he is a writer), but it doesn't have anything to do with his story or with allegory. Aira often writes himself into these corners: he theorizes a lot, but he also loses interest in his theories, doesn't link them together, and lets himself happily be led into stories that don't fit any theories.
It's normal to lose the thread of your own thought, to propose a theory and then get confused about it, or to launch into a new subject in hopes that it will reveal why it's pertinent. Few people think in a linear way or keep to a single level of abstraction or concreteness. The many passages in Aira's books that simply enact or exemplify this daily incoherence are sometimes entertaining but in the end uninteresting.
What keeps me reading is passages like the one I quoted, where the narrator is struggling to figure out what makes sense, and how. And this means I won't be reading books by Aira, but I'll be reading in books for certain passages. It's not that I've given up on what he is doing, it's that I understand that by its nature it isn't a project that results in books.