Monday, April 16, 2007

Anarchy! (a small attempt at a book review)


"Book" (Zine) "Review:" Off the Map (by Hib and Kika)

This was a zine written by two girls who spent a summer backpacking and squatting across Europe. This book changed my life and I really can't tell you why, though I do know it's in part due to the absolutely gorgeous (in my opinion) language/writing and in part it just taught me a different way to view the world. (Also, I should add that had it not been for my friend Laurie bestowing me with this book as a gift, I may have gone through life never knowing about it. So I'm ever grateful to her for this.)

My friend (Laurie) said when our friend (Malka) read this, she (Malka) felt like they (the book's heroines) were just mooching, expecting others to take care of them, give them handouts.

I didn't feel that way at all. Instead, I felt they had to trust in a system that possibly wasn't there (anarchy, specifically this definition: a theory that regards the absence of all direct or coercive government as a political ideal and that proposes the cooperative and voluntary association of individuals and groups as the principal mode of organized society). There were many uncertain nights where the late hour pressed in on them and they still didn't know where they were sleeping. They spent many a night in a yard or field under the great big sky full of stars, which may sound fun in a story, but the reality of that can be scary and icky.

I think the purpose of the book/zine was to tell what happens when you dream and hope, and when you try to find, and have to count on, human goodness. They found it. They always were appreciative. But they got burned a lot too; were treated less than human for how they looked; had too many instances of stumbling uncomfortably, painfully even, through the cities trying to find a semi-private place to relieve themselves because no businesses would let them use their toilets and washrooms. If someone did accommodate them they counted their pennies and bought a coffee, if it was someone's home they went above and beyond cleaning up after themselves and did dishes and housework, earning their keep.

I guess mostly I think what they did was very brave, and if they made an entire life out of it instead of a summer then I would argue that it was mooching. What they had to do, asking for people's help, having limited ways with which to repay, relying on human kindness, I personally would have a very hard time swallowing my pride and doing. I know it was a choice they made, a conscious decision, but to me it was a study in human nature, and a very beautiful one at that.

[gets off soapbox now, puts it away for a while]

8 comments:

Jessica Krug said...

I haven't read this book, and so perhaps I shouldn't comment.

What I do know, though, is that I spent a lot of time in my younger years hitchhiking across the country. And it's not anarchy - it's a modified capitalism. Everyone has capital on which they trade, without saying a word. When I was a fifteeen-year-old girl hitchhiking to Florida from Kansas City, I had the capital of being a very young and vulnerable seeming girl, on my own. People gave me rides and places to sleep either because they thought they could take advantage of me or because they wanted to make themselves feel great about protecting me from the kinds of people who would take advantage of me. Kindness? Folks I met in particular communities that were similar to where I come from regarded me as part of their own. I don't think of that as kindness, though...

A couple of white girls travelling around Europe? I don't mean to be cynical, but there's a lot of history and politics involved there, and it should be obvious that it would have been a different book entirely if that has been Black. Or if they had actually come from poverty, where trying to understand the extent of others' kindness isn't a summer vacation activity. I really don't mean to sound like an asshole, here, but I find a lot of punk posturing very tired.

Am I wrong? Do they analyze their racial and class and national privilege and the opportunities it affords them?

Laurie Stark said...

I think that was Malka's point, too, and I agree with her. These girls went to a private college in the Pacific Northwest, they could probably have afforded to go to Europe and stay in hostels.

I can see both sides of it because I also think there's a lot of value in demonstrating that spending isn't always necessary. I think there's a lot of value in presenting a life outside of the sort of olympic-sport consumption that most Americans engage in. The downside (and this is also what Malka was saying if she'll allow me to paraphrase) is that if you're still BENEFITING from that system, then maybe what's the point?

I don't know if there's a point or not.

Anyway, when I read that book several years ago, I thought it was very inspiring and beautiful in some ways which is why I wanted to share it. I'm glad you liked it so much.

West Coast Midwestern said...

I appreciate the different viewpoints. I don't think these girls ever claimed to be poor, though they did go to Europe with a very small budget; it's not like they were taking from people and then buying all kinds of trinkets and souvinirs or anything like that. They decided to live with very little, and stuck to it.

I think their trip across Europe was a personal kind of education, to see what would happen. I don't think I have what it takes to do something like what they did. If I do someday, I won't have a fallback plan like they assumably had. But I don't think the book is any less beautiful or inspiring, and I guess that was the main point I was trying to convey, that and that I didn't think they were just trying to mooch off the system. Also, I don't know what would have happened if it was black women versus white women, or even two young men instead of two young women. I just know I thought what they did was pretty neat. Call that what you want, supremely naive or uneducated, or something else. I just think sometimes something can be as simple as beautiful, and doesn't need to be muddled up with all kinds of other things.

Jessica Krug said...

I understand what you are saying, and I'm not trying to argue that there is no value in the book or that it has nothing to teach.

I guess I just feel like only certain folks have the option of "not muddling things up." To not have to think about what these statements or actions mean for the vast majority of the world's people (who are poor people of color) is not uncomplicated or unproblematic by any stretch.

West Coast Midwestern said...

Jess, I don't want to live in a fluffy land of bunnies and self-deception of what is really going on in the world. But I do, from time to time, just want to find joy in something I read and leave it at that. Otherwise I may lose all will to live.

West Coast Midwestern said...

I guess after rereading this post plus everyone's comments (after a night's sleep too) I just want to say I can understand everyone's points, includidng Malka's. I see my points too. I don't know what any of that means. I haven't ready any other books like this one so maybe if I read a bunch more I'd find it "tired" too, like Jess pointed out. I don't know. But anyway, I do truly appreciate the viewpoints and opinions.

Laurie Stark said...

I love how Malka's views are being expressed all throughout this discussion without her even knowing about it. I may be completely misrepresenting her original point.

Anonymous said...

(as I just now catch up with my blog reading...)

I don't think you guys misrepresented my points, I think that was pretty much accurate to what I said about the book. I definitely see why it's inspiring to read about traveling without a traditional itinerary, hostel bookings, etc - like the idea that you can just pick up and go and see where life takes you is really appealing. Plus, the hopefulness which goes along with that. I also completely agree that getting out of olympic-sport consumption mindset is something to strive for!

I think this is a book that, depending how you look at it, could be either really inspiring or annoying or both at once. I did think (and this might have been projecting) that those girls were trying to play like they were anarchists, free from society's rules, proving that you don't have to use money, etc...while at the same time not a single thing they did would have been possible without the capitalist system they are so against, and they surely would not be able to pay for their private college without it (and probably, though this is an assumption, their parents' money.) It's one thing to depend on your community while also contributing, and call yourself part of a community, and another to live off of other people's work and call it anarchy.

I'm not saying what they did is wrong but when I was on my trip I was definitely thinking a lot about these issues. All of the money I spent on my trip I earned, but at the same time, there was a lot of money I didn't HAVE to spend because I was crashing with my dad in Paris (most people's fathers do not have apartments in Paris), or because train rides in Hungary are really cheap on the american dollar (most Hungarians are not earning $12/hour) etc.

And the fact that I was even able to take a month and a half off to do this is because I have been so supported in my life, educationally and financially. And maybe equally importantly, I was raised with the mindset that international travel is possible and actually no big deal. What I'm saying is that even though I paid the cash for my trip myself, I was only the position to do that because I do come from so much privilege.

I just felt that the girls in the book, with all of their ideals, were acting like they were the self-sufficient heroes for defying the expectations of society and making their own rules, while maybe not recognizing their debt to so many other people and lucky circumstances which handed them the opportunity to be rebels on a silver platter.

Longest comment ever, I'm sorry you guys! I'm sorry I missed this conversation earlier!