This work came together in a slow way. Always something would get in the way - relationships ending, exile, loneliness, some recently discovered pain - and I had to hurt again, hurt myself all the way away from writing, re-writing, putting the book together. Finally, I had to stop and check it out, as in “what’s going on here.” And there right in front of me, facing me, was the reason I was having so much trouble completing this work. In the other two books I had not said very much about myself - about Gloria Jean. There was a logic to this - a strategy, some thought behind my use of the pen name bell hooks and it was connected with feelings about representations of the self, about identity. And even when people would write stuff about me that had no relationship to me, things that were sometimes just not true, i had no urge to explain. But in this book I was doing things differently - and what was slowng me down had to do with disclosure, with what it means to reveal personal stuff. In the very construction of this book, taking back, laid out in the first essay, is the explanation for my uneasiness, my reluctance. It has to do with revealing the personal. It has to do with writing - with what it means to say things in print. It has to do with punishment - with all those years in childhood and on, where i was hurt for speaking truths, speaking the outrageous, speaking in my wild and witty way, or as friends sometimes say, “do we have to go that deep?
—bell hooks, Talking Back: thinking feminist thinking black (via monaeltahawy)
I loved interviewing Annie. Here she is!
Francois Ozon’s In the House (or Dans la Maison) is actually quite good. It’s an intelligent film with brilliantly portrayed, complex, interesting characters along with pathos and moments of poignant humor. The film is very aware of social class dynamics, showing the interplay of working class, middle class, and the intelligentsia. Germain is a jaded teacher who sees the writing talent in his student Claude, a smart, working class kid with a sadistic streak. As Germain nurtures Claude’s “gift”, both their lives spiral out of control. Using an engaging meta-narrative to show the story-within-the-story through its chapters and revisions as Claude integrates Germain’s instruction, Germain becomes obsessed with his student and the story he writes. We begin to wonder about the potential maliciousness of Claude’s manipulations, not only of the family “in the house,” but of Germain himself. Who is really the teacher and who is the pupil? Where is the line between fantasy and reality?
I took testosterone for you. You started smiling at me. You trusted my heart like I was a grandson; you trusted my intelligence like I was a Real Boy who had grown up able to ask questions in class instead of spending hours after school quietly researching the answers for myself. You trusted my…