table of contents

04/13/2016

Andrea Nightingale on J.A. Baker's “The Peregrine”

Prof. Andrea Nightingale has worked primarily on Greek and Roman philosophy and literature. She has also written on the philosophy and literature of ecology (in the modern and postmodern periods).  She has been awarded a fellowship at the Stanford Humanities Center, an ACLS Fellowship, and a Guggenheim Fellowship.   She is a Harvard Senior Fellow for […]

download transcript [vtt]
00:00:00.000
Bird of prey, bird of prey, flying high, flying high. Am I going to die? Bird of prey,
00:00:17.920
bird of prey, flying high, flying high. Take me on your flight."
00:00:30.320
This is KZSU Stanford. Welcome to entitled opinions. My name is Robert Harrison.
00:00:42.480
We're coming to you from the Stanford campus.
00:00:53.440
I don't know if entitled opinions is a form of avian life, a winged creature of some sort.
00:01:05.120
I don't know if it's a UFO. I don't know if it's a chariot of empty hazelnut drawn by a team
00:01:12.640
of little enemies through the moon shines watery beams. Thank you Mercusio.
00:01:18.320
Maybe it's just an aerial migration of thought or a little gnawetic dust from a nearby galaxy
00:01:25.520
or a canary in Jupiter's sulfur mines. One way or another this program takes to the air when the
00:01:33.520
season comes around. We lift off from our dish at KZSU into the planet's thermal currents,
00:01:41.040
riding the airwaves, following the contours of the continents, searching you out until our airborne
00:01:48.800
embassy, alights in that little ear of yours, and sweeps you up into the ether of another episode
00:01:56.640
of the radio program you cannot live without. I mean you friends, the friends of entitled opinions,
00:02:05.360
you the thoughtful ones, you the expectant ones. You who wait for this paragrain raptor to reach you
00:02:14.320
from its Stanford perch wherever your outpost may be on this, our fair earth. This, our third stone
00:02:23.120
from the flaming sun.
00:02:33.120
You may have guests that I have flight on my mind today. Some days it's the earth that calls
00:02:46.400
on others, it's water, every now and then fire. But today it's the air or better yet the sky.
00:02:54.000
That's because on our show my guest and I are going to be talking about one of the great poets
00:03:00.000
of the sky and modern literature, J.A. Baker. Baker doesn't just depict or represent the sky,
00:03:07.760
he gives us an ecstatic phenomenology of its ruffled, rippling, plasmic field, and reveals it for
00:03:14.480
what it is, the living membrane of this, our third stone from the sun.
00:03:18.880
Let's get his biography out of the way so my guest and I can concentrate on his astounding
00:03:25.200
prose. J.A. Baker was a native of Essex County, he came from a lower middle class British family,
00:03:32.320
finished school at age 16, and a few years later he settled into a job as regional manager of an
00:03:39.360
automobile insurance company, although he never learned to drive himself. We don't know much about
00:03:45.600
him except that he was an amateur naturalist who spent as much of his free time as he could,
00:03:50.480
wandering a patch of the Essex countryside around his small rural hometown of Champsford.
00:03:57.840
That patch included the Chelmer Valley to the east and the confluence of the Chelmer and Black
00:04:04.240
water rivers to the west, with Danbury Hill, the highest ground of Essex at its center,
00:04:10.080
at its edges, the dark silts of the north seas edge. This rectangular patch of countryside
00:04:18.400
now lies within a commuter belt less than an hour from downtown London, but in his day it was
00:04:24.320
a quiet rural area that Baker traveled by foot or by bicycle until rheumatoid arthritis got the
00:04:31.360
better of him in the 1970s. He eventually died of cancer caused by the toxic drugs he was taking
00:04:38.560
for his arthritis. That was in 1987, he was 61 years old.
00:04:43.280
Baker is the author of only two slim books and a couple of essays. His whole output amounts to
00:04:50.880
350 pages of prose, the most remarkable English prose of the 20th century, in my opinion.
00:04:58.400
Certainly the most remarkable in his genre, which we could call nature writing. One of his books is
00:05:04.800
the Paragrene published in 1967. The other is the Hill of Summer published two years later.
00:05:11.200
His last piece of writing is a short essay called "On the Essex Coast," which he wrote for a
00:05:17.680
local magazine in 1971. Our show today is devoted to Baker's The Paragrene,
00:05:24.720
dedicated to his wife, the book deals with Baker's obsession with rare Paragrene Falcons that
00:05:31.680
withered in Essex in the late 50s and early 60s. Baker spent 10 years following them around the
00:05:37.920
countryside and his book, which takes the form of a journal, offers a fiery but meticulous
00:05:45.520
poetic account of what its author observed about this endangered species, the Falcon,
00:05:51.600
which captivated Baker's soul and dominated his life for more than a decade.
00:05:55.920
And in England in those years, the Falcon was a highly endangered species, due to the
00:06:02.720
agrochemicals that had caused the population to crash. Fortunately, they were able to make a comeback
00:06:09.280
after those chemicals were banned. The year it was published, again 1967, the Paragrene One
00:06:16.000
England's prestigious Duff Cooper Prize. Not long after that, it faded into oblivion,
00:06:22.320
but like the Paragrene, it has since made a comeback thanks in large part to the New York Review
00:06:28.720
Classics book series, which republished it in 2007. It was then reissued in England by
00:06:35.520
Collins along with the Hill of Summer in 2011, and I'm doing my share to help the comeback,
00:06:42.160
having conducted a public conversation about the Paragrene with filmmaker Werner Herzog
00:06:47.920
in February of this year. We aired that conversation on entitled opinions very recently,
00:06:53.360
and today I'm devoting another full show to Baker's book.
00:06:56.960
I'm joined in the studio today by my friend and colleague Andrea Nightingale,
00:07:02.400
who was well known to the entitled opinions for Gaid thanks to prior shows I've done with her,
00:07:08.720
either on Epicurus, Plato, and Moby Dick. Andrea is a professor of classics at Stanford.
00:07:15.360
She and I share a passion for Baker's the Paragrene. It's a pleasure to welcome her back to the show
00:07:21.840
Andrea thanks for joining us today. It's great to be here Robert. What is it about J.A. Baker's
00:07:27.600
the Paragrene that makes it such a special book for you? I see it as an experimental piece of writing,
00:07:36.800
piece of nature writing, and I'll explain why. In most cases of nature writing, and here I'm
00:07:44.240
going to leave aside scientific texts or bird guides, but the nature writers tend to put themselves
00:07:53.360
into the book, so you immediately confront the persona of the writer, and your experience of
00:08:00.480
that book is going to rise and fall with whether you like the writer. So, for example, there are a
00:08:06.480
lot of people who do not like Walden because they find the row his persona annoying. Another writer
00:08:14.080
that comes to mind is Edward Abbey, a lot of people just find him off-putting, but Baker does something
00:08:21.360
very different. He does not put his own persona or personality into the book, and indeed he more
00:08:30.000
or less depopulates the whole book taking all humans out of the book, leaving, of course himself in,
00:08:36.640
as what he calls the "watcher." Now, be given that he tells us so little about himself. There is this
00:08:47.040
sense in which the reader is trying to gain purchase, right, and it doesn't really have a human to
00:08:53.200
rely on, and he's doing this for a very specific reason. First of all, as we'll see later on, he was,
00:09:02.640
I think it's fair to say, "Miss Anthropic," so I think taking all of the humans out of the book, and this
00:09:08.960
also includes place names, that sort of reflection of his misanthropy, and so he really just gives us
00:09:21.040
the bird world. Now, I should mention that the area that he was bird-watching in is about an hour west of London.
00:09:31.280
It was rural, it had towns, it had plenty of people. He has taken all of those people out. So the place
00:09:39.200
that he is representing for us is partly fictionalized because indeed he had to take all the people
00:09:46.960
out. Also, he takes ten years of bird-watching and puts it into one year. By year it's actually simply
00:09:54.720
the fall and the winter and the coming of spring, which is when the paragrins were in that area.
00:10:00.000
So there is something you could say, partly fictionalized, and yet the book comes across,
00:10:08.000
as offering you this very realistic portrayal of birds. It's done in diary entries, which last
00:10:17.440
maybe three or four pages, and you see the same thing happening again and again every day, right? He's
00:10:23.360
there looking for paragrins and sometimes finding them, sometimes not, watching all of the birds,
00:10:30.960
describing them all, and then finally the paragrins, which is sort of the apex of his day.
00:10:37.440
And this happens day after day in the diary entries. You'd think this book would get very boring,
00:10:43.840
right? There's very little reference to himself, and I could add actually that this book could
00:10:50.000
have been written by a woman. That's how little he tells you about himself. In fact,
00:10:55.440
he signs the book J.A. Baker, given that the book was almost lost, Robert. This could have been
00:11:01.920
written by a woman. The only reason I mentioned that is not because I want to somehow
00:11:06.320
feminize the book, whatever that would mean, but simply make it clear to the listener that we don't
00:11:12.800
know much at all about the watcher, as he calls himself. So as I say, you have the same thing
00:11:20.560
happening day after day, and yet everything seems different and exciting all the time.
00:11:28.400
So somehow he's bringing this bird world to the reader while eliminating as much as he can
00:11:35.520
the human world. I agree that the human world has been put into brackets or into suspension,
00:11:44.880
and that even the watcher is rendered anonymous and somewhat abstract. At the same time,
00:11:54.880
let me read you what he says in the beginning pages of his book about what his ambition was in the
00:12:01.280
paragraph. And he says, "I have tried to preserve a unity binding together the bird, the watcher,
00:12:06.720
and the place that holds them both. Everything I described took place while I was watching it,
00:12:13.120
but I do not believe that honest observation is enough. The emotions and behavior of the watcher
00:12:18.800
are also facts, and they must be truthfully recorded." Now I have a strong suspicion you'll agree with me
00:12:27.920
that indeed the emotions and behavior of this watcher are truthfully recorded.
00:12:37.120
Yes, yeah. Even though it doesn't take on the form of a personal subjectivity.
00:12:41.920
That's exactly right. You do get a lot of his emotions, the wonder, the joy, the ecstasy,
00:12:48.960
obsession that comes through on every page. And I think that carries the reader in a lot of ways.
00:12:56.480
I'd like to make one more comment about this passage that you read. There's this opening section,
00:13:04.160
very short, called the beginnings. It's a short chapter, offering a certain number of programmatic
00:13:10.720
statements, and one of them is what you just read. He's trying to preserve a unity binding
00:13:17.360
together the bird and the watcher. A few things he also says in that same passage is first of all,
00:13:24.400
he doesn't want to sentimentalize the birds in the sense that he will leave out the killings,
00:13:30.640
right? And so he does offer us many scenes in which you see the paragon, stooping,
00:13:37.200
and flying down in a kind of nose dive and killing a bird of prey and eating it. So he does preserve
00:13:46.880
the killings of the paragon. He also mentions in that same short chapter the fact that human beings
00:13:55.280
are killing the paragons because of DDT and the pesticides, which you mentioned earlier.
00:14:01.840
So you have these two killers that are presented very early on and two very different kinds of
00:14:08.880
killers. I think this is important that the bird, of course, the paragon is killing to eat,
00:14:14.720
whereas the human beings who are destroying the land are killing in a different way.
00:14:19.520
So that's just one programmatic point. Notice also Robert that he says binding together the bird,
00:14:28.320
the watcher, and the place. I was mentioning that the place is partly fictionalized. What do you
00:14:36.080
think? Well, I think the place is fictionalized in the sense that you wouldn't be able to
00:14:42.400
necessarily recognize where in England or even on the continent it would be because as you said,
00:14:48.720
there are no place names and except for very few exceptions, any particular human constructions that
00:14:55.440
would identify it. And yet the place as a place of nature, I think, is extremely present.
00:15:02.880
And in fact, let me, let me read you a sentence or two from the last thing you ever published,
00:15:07.360
which is that essay on the coast of Essex that I mentioned. And he says the following, "For me,
00:15:14.160
the wilderness is not a place. It is the indefinable essence of spirit that lives in a place,
00:15:20.800
as shadowy as the archetype of a dream, but real and recognizable. It lives where it can find
00:15:26.800
refuge, fugitive, fearful, as a deer." So on the one hand, I would say, yes, it's the place as such
00:15:34.480
as fictional. But if we're talking about the spirit of a place, I think the spirit of this patch
00:15:39.840
of countryside in Essex is very present. No, I really like your point because I'm not even
00:15:45.680
fully comfortable with fictional. That doesn't even quite work. I do think that there's something
00:15:50.800
fugitive about the place and that there's a spirit that he captures. And you know that he was
00:15:57.440
doing this very deliberately as a writer and an artist to leave the people out so he could capture
00:16:04.960
that spirit. So I like, I prefer this way of putting it.
00:16:09.760
And do you find that that place comes alive in the prose, but primarily because he tries to describe
00:16:19.280
the landscape and the sky and the sea, not so much from the human perspective, the way a human being
00:16:27.840
would see it, but really from an aerial perspective, almost like the bird, the bird is in touch with
00:16:33.120
north and south. It understands the coast where the sea meets the land. It knows valleys, it knows
00:16:39.520
mountains and hills. And so much of the description of this place seems to have the generic
00:16:46.560
perception of a bird in flight looking at the land from a kind of panorama that is usually not
00:16:54.800
accessible to us as human observers. I mean, it's so interesting because this book is a kind of
00:17:00.400
meditation on seeing. He says at one point the hardest thing of all is to see what is really there.
00:17:07.680
And he's very, very interested of course in the paragraph, it's ability to see which is,
00:17:14.560
you know, well beyond anything we can see. And sometimes he does adopt the viewpoint of the
00:17:20.720
paragraph. But a lot of times he will be watching a paragraph appear and also disappear. I think
00:17:28.560
the disappearances are very, very important. It's not like watching a nature TV show where you see it
00:17:34.160
and you just keep seeing it. No, it's this way in which a bird or bird appear and then disappear.
00:17:41.360
And this is from the perspective of somebody who's really inside that world. But if I can just say
00:17:48.240
one quick thing about seeing, this is a passage that talks about the very first peregrine that he
00:17:55.200
ever saw. He says that he came late to bird watching. And he then says, "This was my first peregrine.
00:18:04.240
I've seen many since then, but none has excelled it for speed and fire of spirit. For 10 years,
00:18:11.120
I spent all my winters searching for that restless brilliance, for the sudden passion and
00:18:16.720
violence that peregrines flush from the sky. For 10 years, I've been looking upward for that cloud
00:18:23.600
biting anchor shape that crossbow flinging through the air. The eye becomes insatiable for hawks.
00:18:31.360
It clicks towards them with ecstatic fury, just as the hawks eye swings and dilates to the
00:18:38.160
luring food shapes of gulls and pigeons. So I think that it is very interesting that he
00:18:45.520
is saying that his own eye is hungry, it's insatiable for this food, but of course the food is
00:18:53.680
the vision of the birds. So he often links himself together with the peregrine as a hunter
00:19:01.200
or even occasionally as a predator, but it is important to emphasize that he is simply a hunter in that
00:19:09.040
he's hunting with his eye. And he's not hunting, of course, the way that the peregrine is hunting,
00:19:16.400
but he does identify himself with the peregrine as a kind of hunter.
00:19:22.560
You see, for me, that passage that you read it, also it's almost like an allegory of
00:19:29.440
the expression, love it for sight. He is telling us what his subjective investment in the peregrine is,
00:19:37.200
and it is he fell in love with this bird that first time. And the eye becomes insatiable for hawks.
00:19:46.480
It clicks towards them with an ecstatic fury. And like most lovers who, if you're a medieval,
00:19:54.080
as medieval as like me, if you read the treatises like from Andreas Kapilano, he says that love is
00:19:59.440
a melody that begins through the eye. It happens through the eyesight. And then what does the
00:20:05.120
lover want from, he wants or she wants acknowledgement from the beloved? And my sense is that this
00:20:14.960
whole journal, if there is any kind of plot or there's not much plot at all, but if there is something
00:20:24.160
that sustains it from beginning, middle to the end, it's his attempt to hunt the peregrine
00:20:30.560
through his eye, see the peregrine, but also to receive acknowledgement from the bird in these
00:20:37.600
privileged moments that he describes of having his gaze returned by the bird.
00:20:42.960
It's true. I mean, he doesn't say that early on that he's hunting for this
00:20:47.200
acknowledgement, but late in the book, he gets very excited when he sees the peregrine looking at
00:20:53.680
him and sharing that view. It doesn't dominate the whole plot, but I think that what you're saying,
00:20:59.120
because of course there really isn't a plot. There are just these characters, the watcher,
00:21:04.000
the hawk, and the prey, but the love that you're talking about is on every page.
00:21:12.640
It's a kind of long love letter for the peregrine. Definitely. And it's a love that's a love of
00:21:18.480
perception as well. But remember, at the end of the book, I think it ends where he follows the
00:21:25.440
peregrine who's just about to take off for the continent because it's a month of April,
00:21:30.720
and he sees him going towards the sea coast and rushes over there by bicycle, and then there's a
00:21:38.080
wall, and he looks at the peregrine as they're very close in a person on a tree, and they just look at
00:21:45.280
each other. Yeah, that's the ending of the book. Yes. And so that is... Although interestingly, Robert,
00:21:50.720
he is feeling quite miserable because he knows that the peregrines are leaving.
00:21:54.880
So he almost never makes a religious reference, but he does talk about the peregrines as
00:22:03.280
departing gods at this point when they're about to migrate. So just before the beloved is about to leave,
00:22:11.760
he gets very close to it with this last moment of togetherness.
00:22:19.440
You're right. There are not a lot of religious references per se, orthodox ones anyway,
00:22:25.200
but do you find that there's a religious, let's say, a spiritual fervor in there that takes on
00:22:32.160
this ecstasy that we associate with states of spiritual rapture?
00:22:38.000
I don't know. I think the word spiritual might work. I think he was very deliberately trying to keep
00:22:46.880
religious discourse out because if you look at 19th century, nature writing, early 20th century,
00:22:54.000
there were a lot of references to the Bible or to various sorts of religious states of ecstasy,
00:23:02.080
he definitely has that spiritual ecstasy, no question, but I find it interesting that he is not
00:23:08.320
going to use the discourse of any given religion. It's sort of as though it's his own private
00:23:15.680
religion, in a way. I mean, notice that he doesn't even want to say to the reader,
00:23:20.960
you too can come and do this with me. It's very much a kind of solo act.
00:23:28.160
Yeah, so there's a Christian way of religious references that there's very little of that, for sure.
00:23:37.200
There's also a more pagan religious spirit that he might be more comfortable with and so far as
00:23:42.400
it's more based in the world of nature and in the world of appearances. I think so.
00:23:47.440
But this condition of rapture, which I find even though he never connects it with that word,
00:23:56.720
I don't even know if he ever uses that word once in the book, but for me, his relationship to the
00:24:03.120
rapture, the Falcon, is one of a kind of rapture and he's always on the look for,
00:24:08.800
or not just a sight of the rapture, but that experience of being swept away,
00:24:13.360
of being ravaged by its spectacle. That seems to have a religious fervor to me,
00:24:20.880
of his own kind of religion. No, I take your point because he does
00:24:25.600
normally put himself in the position of the hunter, right? The watcher is the hunter,
00:24:30.080
but at times, I think what you're saying is that he's also maybe more subtly setting himself up as
00:24:38.880
the prey in the sense that he wants to be. Well, that's exactly. And raptured by the bird.
00:24:44.880
That's what I brought this up in my conversation with Bernard Herzog
00:24:48.960
back on February 2nd. It didn't get very far because we moved on to other things, but it's,
00:24:54.800
if you look on page 154 in our volume, no, this is a New York review
00:24:58.880
issue, if I can read that he's speaking about the, the Falcon, he says, "After two minutes of
00:25:06.320
uneasy glaring, he flew straight at me as though intending to attack. He swept up into the wind
00:25:12.480
before he reached me and hovered 20 feet above my head looking down. I felt as a mouse must feel
00:25:21.200
crouching, unconcealed and shallow grass, cringing and hoping." And then he says, "The
00:25:29.440
hawk's green bladed face seemed horribly close." And this, to me, indicates that
00:25:35.920
as you said, there was a desire perhaps to be caught up in the talons of this bird. And we know
00:25:44.480
that there is a myth in the tradition you're very familiar with, the Greek mythology,
00:25:51.120
where this, in fact, does have a religious aspect and I'm thinking of Ganymede. I brought this up again,
00:25:58.080
the Ganymede complex, maybe that's being too, uh,
00:26:01.120
- Oh, interesting. - reductionistic, but nevertheless, who was Ganymede? He was the son of
00:26:06.800
Trose after whom Troy is named. Young, beautiful boy caught the eye of Zeus, and
00:26:16.480
Zeus takes the shape of an eagle and grabs him from Mount Ida and takes him up into the sphere of
00:26:24.160
the gods to be the cup bearer of the gods. And I'm going to add another religious reference here
00:26:31.520
to which is Dante's version. But before you get to Dante, we do need to at least point out that
00:26:36.800
that was a rape, right, that Zeus was raping. Well, rape and rapture had the same
00:26:42.000
- that's true. - Yes. Make that point.
00:26:46.640
Yeah, it's true. When you get to Dante, it's, it's, um,
00:26:50.720
- de-sexualized. - Well, I'm not sure. So let me read you what Dante has a dream in Purgatory,
00:26:56.400
and let me read this. He says, "In a dream, I seem to see an eagle hovering in the sky with
00:27:03.520
golden feathers and open wings intent to stoop. And I seem to be where his people were
00:27:09.680
abandoned by Ganymede when he was carried off to the highest
00:27:13.360
consistatory. The highest consistatory would be Mount Olympus.
00:27:17.440
Then it seemed to me that having wheeled a little, it descended, did the raptor bird.
00:27:24.640
Terrible as lightning and carried me off up as far as the fire. There it seemed that the bird
00:27:32.080
and I burned, and the imagined fire was so hot that my sleep had to break.
00:27:39.200
It's amazing. I think that's a sexual, that has a lot of
00:27:42.640
s-heroic intensity. Very much so. It's definitely erotic.
00:27:46.080
That idea of burning in the circle of fire, which would be the sun, it would be,
00:27:49.680
I mean, is Dante being, uh, merging with the fire there? I'm just curious.
00:27:57.840
Well, you know, it's hard, it's hard to say what this would consist in. It would consist in
00:28:04.080
some kind of ultimate self-immolation. It was in a certain sense. And people have read
00:28:12.240
Baker's, the pair of green. I'm thinking of Helen Mcdonald who has been getting a lot of
00:28:17.520
attention lately because she wrote a book last year called Ages for Hawk and everyone loved it
00:28:23.360
because it's not just about the bird, but it's also about her human experience, her
00:28:27.840
lost her father, the grief. In a certain sense, you could say that that book by Helen Mcdonald
00:28:34.000
is where Baker says that the emotions and behavior of the watcher are also facts and they must be
00:28:40.240
truthfully recorded. She records those facts of her own life and the birding are two different,
00:28:49.200
well, they're connected, but they're very, very different. Yeah. And she actually
00:28:55.680
has a few statements in her book about Baker where she said,
00:29:03.040
"I saw in the paragrene the writer's awful desire for death and annihilation. A desire disguised
00:29:10.960
as an elegy for birds that flew through poisonous skies. I was frightened of Baker and what he
00:29:16.880
meant. In Baker's book, I saw no hope at all and his hawks were icons of extinction,
00:29:23.120
hours, theirs, and his own." She actually later recanted that in an interview and said,
00:29:30.880
"All I could see in J.A. Baker's a paragrene at the time was a desperate desire for death and
00:29:36.000
extinction. A hopelessness I found chilling. I read it again recently and that is and how it seems
00:29:40.480
at all." The point being, when you asked, what would it mean for Dante to be
00:29:44.960
seared in the fire in the divine fire, it might mean a certain kind of death of
00:29:50.960
a sludge or getting at is a kind of Baker's attempt to at times to merge with the bird,
00:29:59.920
right, which of course isn't impossible for a human person to do, and yet he seems
00:30:04.640
so eager to almost become the bird. And at times it almost feels like he's succeeded,
00:30:13.360
but he's always very clear that he is earthbound, so you have the aerial and the earthly.
00:30:20.160
But I do agree with you Robert in those sort of moments in the book where he is almost merging with
00:30:27.920
the bird, you would end up with him being extinguished. And so is it a death wish? I mean we should
00:30:38.880
perhaps talk about the mesanthropy because maybe that can help us with this question about the death
00:30:46.880
wish. Well, first thing, do you believe is a death? I don't believe it's a death wish. I actually do.
00:30:52.400
I think it's a wish for a certain kind of transcendence. Me too. It's static transcendence, but
00:30:56.400
oftentimes you carry that it's what Jacques de la Colle would call the jouiseus if you can have your
00:31:04.080
foolish wish we saw us, that does mean death. It does. And so I mean, but yeah, perhaps, I mean,
00:31:09.680
the only I do not see this as a death wish. I'm really responding to McDonald's point here
00:31:15.920
and saying that of course any nature writer who attempts or writes about an attempt to merge with nature
00:31:22.720
is already in some sense volunteering for a kind of departure from human life.
00:31:31.840
For sure. But the reason I wanted to bring in the mesanthropy is that there does seem to be
00:31:39.200
this sense that he is incredibly ashamed to be a human being. He thinks of the human species as
00:31:46.320
effectively a failed species. And he calls them killers. I'll just read a few lines here.
00:31:55.440
Here's one passage. I've always long to be a part of the outward life to be out there at the
00:32:02.960
edge of things, to let the human taint wash away an emptiness and silence as the fox sluffs his
00:32:10.400
smell into the cold unworlyness of water, to return to the town as a stranger. So the notion of the
00:32:19.440
human taint is desired to be a part of the outward life away from humans, not to be almost non-human.
00:32:28.240
And elsewhere he says we are the killers. We stink of death. We carry it with us. It sticks to us
00:32:36.800
like frost. We cannot tear it away. Now when he's using the word killers there he's really talking
00:32:44.240
about, he's not talking about the fact that we have to eat to survive, but the fact that we are
00:32:51.040
dominating the earth and destroying it, killers in that way. So I mean some people have suggested
00:32:59.360
that this desire to merge with the bird is fueled by the mesanthropy. I don't really agree with that,
00:33:07.120
but it has been said. Yeah, and merging with the bird, the element of fire is, for me,
00:33:15.280
crucial in the notion of being wrapped up into heaven, because it's not only in the myth of
00:33:22.800
Ganymede, you have it in the Hebrew and Christian traditions. No, the day of rapture is exactly what
00:33:28.720
is going to happen where we're going to be carried up into the heavens, which is identified as the
00:33:34.480
sphere of fire, you know, by Dante. And how many times does Baker associate the Falcon with fire?
00:33:42.480
I'll just give you a few sentences, 135. The paragrene hissed among the golden plover like a
00:33:49.440
burning brand. A page later, the paragrene hurled toward the gap of light that was the sea
00:34:00.560
ricocheting across the green land like a swift rebounding flame. Also she was holy of the
00:34:07.280
sun, the wind and the purity of the sky. So this association of the bird with some fiery element
00:34:13.840
would mean that the becoming the bird would be a wave of accessing this sphere that we will never
00:34:22.960
ourselves, because we are earthbound. It's true. And I do think that he feels, I mean, he talks about
00:34:30.000
the fact that he has to plow through snow and go over fences and get on his bike with his clay
00:34:38.000
feet as he refers to them while the hawk gets to just fly. So he feels, and in fact, at one point,
00:34:44.320
he compares himself to Caliban with the Falcon being aerial. And of course, Caliban being a
00:34:50.880
very negative character in the Tempest. So he wants to sort of depart from the earthly and the
00:34:58.720
terrestrial, but he never can. So I think that what you're saying is that he's able to, at times,
00:35:06.400
have that sense of rapture which lifts him right away from the earth for a time.
00:35:12.880
And I believe that he does that also in the way he writes this book, that the only form of soaring
00:35:20.560
that he can enjoy is really soaring in his prose in the poetic transports where he can lift us along
00:35:31.120
with himself into the air through the power of his poetry.
00:35:37.280
Absolutely. So writing becomes a form of aerial transcendence for him.
00:35:43.200
I mean, one of the things that's interesting is that at times he, you know, has that sense of rapture,
00:35:51.920
and at other times he feels that he almost got it, but he didn't quite get it. So I'll just read a
00:36:02.480
passage here. Here we have a case where you have a female peregrine who stoops and then disappears.
00:36:12.880
"Bending over in a splendid arc she plunged to earth. My head came forward with a jerk as my
00:36:20.720
eyes followed the final vertical smash of her falling. I saw fields flash up behind her. Then she
00:36:28.080
was gone behind elms and hedges and farm buildings, and I was left with nothing but the wind blowing.
00:36:36.400
The sun hidden, my neck and wrists cold and stiff, my eyes raw and the glory gone.
00:36:42.880
So there's an example of where he's starting to kind of have that moment, but it doesn't quite happen.
00:36:50.960
But at other times he most certainly does in some of those stoop scenes.
00:36:56.400
And don't you find that the peregrine arouses not only him, but it arouses the whole place,
00:37:04.480
the whole environment, and especially the other birds, the birds that are going to be the
00:37:08.880
prey of the falcon. When the falcon appears on the scene, there's an agitation in the whole
00:37:18.080
environment, and birds take to the sky, or that all of a sudden there's an arousal and the sky
00:37:23.440
is animated with some spirits, fiery spirit, and it's destructive, it's threatening, but it's
00:37:30.800
alive as it can be. Yeah, I mean it is clear that the birds of prey feel an enormous amount of fear,
00:37:38.800
fear is important in this book. And so he'll have this scene where everything is kind of calm,
00:37:43.520
and the birds are doing their normal thing, and all of a sudden a peregrine comes, and the whole, as you say,
00:37:50.480
the whole area is animated, partly by fear, and the other birds are fleeing or trying to get away,
00:38:00.000
and the peregrine is there as this being that has transformed all of the other birds, and certainly Baker
00:38:09.520
has spent a lot of time watching the birds in order to find the peregrines, right? In other words,
00:38:14.800
he can't always see the peregrine, but once he starts seeing this agitation among the birds,
00:38:21.200
and the kind of terror, and then he knows that the bird is there somewhere.
00:38:27.200
Yeah, in fact, I think he loves the prey as much as he loves the falcons in his other book,
00:38:31.760
the Hill of Summer, it's really about the birds of Essex, the other birds, not the falcons.
00:38:36.000
That's why I said he's a great poet of the sky, because the sky is the element of the birds.
00:38:46.000
Actually, our friend, Christy Wampol, who was a production manager of entitled opinions a few
00:38:55.920
years back now, it's Professor of French at Princeton. She actually turned her onto this book, and she wrote
00:39:02.880
something that has yet to be published because it's just recently written. But let me read to you
00:39:10.240
what she says about how Baker describes the sky. She writes, "His chronicle is as much a biography
00:39:16.400
of the sky as it is of the falconer's journal. If the land and the birds were stripped away,
00:39:20.960
the sky alone would provide ample marrow for his manuscript. For him, the firmament is never
00:39:25.760
an afterthought. His pen warps the usual behavior of light, of meteorological phenomena with clouds and
00:39:31.520
sunlight that tend to flake crumble, bleed, and pulse at times. Light is granular at other times,
00:39:38.400
aquaists, moonlight prisms through clouds, their edges sing by fluorescence, iridescence,
00:39:44.000
phosphorescence, and so forth." So these qualities of the sky that come alive through the process
00:39:54.320
in the way he talks about the sky as an element. So different than the one we actually experience,
00:40:01.360
we just think of sky as open air and maybe they're cloud, so that changes the sky. For him,
00:40:09.120
the sky has crevices and caverns and lagoons and all sorts of different ways that the birds
00:40:19.200
claw the air and rip the air and perch on the air, so the air becomes this element that we normally
00:40:26.240
do not experience. Exactly. It becomes plasmic. It does. And so I think he does help us to see the air
00:40:35.360
in a whole new way. There's just no question about it. Even if you take the birds out, you would
00:40:40.960
still the way he talks about the air and also just the quality of light changes the way everything
00:40:49.040
looks. So he has all of these descriptions of the sun. I think on the solstice he says the sun was a
00:40:56.240
withered apple. But I do, he is a poet of the air. But again, there is this kind of tension between
00:41:07.120
the aerial and the terrestrial, he being an earthbound creature. Here's a passage that shows how
00:41:18.160
the prey, the birds of prey get agitated as you say, get aroused as it were, and the way that the
00:41:28.080
paragrin effectively changes the whole scene. The paragrin was clearing the entire hill of its
00:41:36.480
pigeons, stooping at each wood in turn, sweeping along the rides, flicking between the trees,
00:41:42.640
switchbacking from orchard to orchard, riding along the rim of sky in a tremendous celebration of
00:41:49.680
rebounding dives and ascension. Suddenly it ended. He mountain like a rocket curved over
00:41:57.840
and splendid parabola, dived down through cumulus of pigeons. One bird fell back, gashed dead,
00:42:07.680
looking astonished, like a man falling out of a tree. The ground came up and crushed it.
00:42:14.240
The ground comes up. I mean, it's fascinating the way he's playing with.
00:42:19.840
He's put himself into that bird's body. He has. And that's, as I said, the only aerial
00:42:25.520
transcendence available to him is through his prose. Yeah, I mean, he does really give a new
00:42:32.160
meaning to the winged word, that's a Homeric phrase. His sentences and his prose capture the motion of
00:42:41.200
the flight when it's going quickly or slowly or moving in circles. The rhythm of his sentences
00:42:49.280
capture that. And if we want a sense of what it means to be earthbound, like a human being is,
00:42:56.160
unlike the birds, there's that there's a passage that I drew attention to in the
00:43:01.600
here's our conversation about the mouse. And he mentions that at the site I'm reading at the
00:43:10.080
site of the lane to the fort. I found a long-tailed field mouse feeding on a slope of grass.
00:43:15.760
He was eating the grass seeds, holding the blades securely between his skinny white front paws.
00:43:22.080
I could have picked him up, but it seemed wrong to separate him now from the surface he would never
00:43:27.520
leave until he died. His life is eating to live to catch up to keep up, never getting ahead,
00:43:36.160
moving always in the narrow way between a death and a death, between stotes and weasels,
00:43:42.480
foxes and owls by night, between cars and custrels and herons by day.
00:43:49.040
So that sets a desire for this rapture of being ravaged by the taken up to the other sphere could be
00:43:55.440
a deliverance from this fate of those of us who are earthbound, which is in between one death and
00:44:02.400
another always in this narrow lane where death is in any case going to come and put an entry.
00:44:06.080
I mean he does treat water and air as the kind of primary elements where he takes earth to be
00:44:14.240
a kind of lesser place. It does not catch us when we fall, he says. So I think he does want deliverance,
00:44:23.280
but there are two ways to be delivered either for him to identify with the peregrine as a hunter,
00:44:30.000
right, when it stoops or as you're pointing out to identify himself with the prey who's being
00:44:38.320
eaten and or lifted off into the yeah or transfigured perhaps, but although I think he takes both positions.
00:44:47.040
And what you said about the earth and the other elements, I have a quote that confirms that. He says,
00:44:52.080
"Like the lives of so many air and water creatures, he's speaking about a seal here,
00:44:57.280
like the lives of so many air and water creatures, it seems a better one than ours. We have no
00:45:03.920
element. Nothing sustains us when we fall." Yeah, it's fascinating, isn't it? I mean one of the things that
00:45:11.040
I find interesting is that many people have bird envy. By that I simply mean that we want to fly,
00:45:18.720
not in airplanes, but you know with wings. And he definitely has something of that kind,
00:45:25.440
but he seems more interested in the fact that the falcons can see in ways that humans can't see. He
00:45:36.080
really seems more excited about seeing than about flying. So for example, here is a passage about
00:45:46.480
freedom, the freedom of the bird, which I think is bird envy is that they have this freedom that
00:45:52.960
we don't have, but for him it's the freedom of the eye. Like the seafarer, the paragon lives in
00:46:00.720
a pouring away world of no attachment, a world of wakes and tilting of sinking planes of land
00:46:08.320
and water. We who are anchored in earthbound cannot envisage this freedom of the eye. The paragon
00:46:16.720
sees and remembers patterns we do not know exist. The neat squares of Orchard and Woodland,
00:46:22.720
the endlessly varying quadrilateral shapes of fields, he finds his way across the land by a
00:46:30.080
succession of remembered symmetries. So here he's talking about being anchored in earthbound
00:46:37.680
and that the bird is free, but it also has this freedom of the eye.
00:46:43.520
Exactly. To see the world the way the bird sees it, he tries. He does his best to imagine it.
00:46:49.520
And therefore the paragon is full of these projections beyond the actual perception into a
00:46:59.280
conjugation of perception with imagination. Yes, absolutely. And this might be the source of the
00:47:06.400
many so-called factual inaccuracies of the book which have been pointed out by ornithologists
00:47:14.080
and other experts on falcons that many of the observations that Baker claims who have made,
00:47:22.960
you know, with the eye witness are highly unlikely that his falcons oftentimes behave in ways that
00:47:31.280
no one else has seen behave, that sometimes their flight patterns don't correspond and certainly the
00:47:37.360
behavior of the prey, the suicidal behavior of some of his prey, birds of prey. So he has been
00:47:45.920
a question if not sometimes outright attacked aggressively for factual inaccuracies, but
00:47:51.840
again, this is something we discussed with the hairstyle. It depends on what you are trying to be
00:47:58.240
true to. That's exactly right. He has a much richer, thicker sense of the notion of the fact,
00:48:05.040
right? For him a fact, you know, includes the behavior and the emotions of the watcher, but it also
00:48:12.320
he's really getting at a truth that is deeper and therefore is not going to be
00:48:22.160
accurate in a scientific sense in every single case and I'm not even convinced that
00:48:28.720
the scientific errors that the errors that the scientists find are necessarily errors. He could
00:48:35.920
have seen those things, in fact. He could have. It's hard to know. Let's say that they were misperceptions
00:48:43.520
or the thing about science is that in order to see the world scientifically, namely objectively,
00:48:50.720
you have to break the spell of the phenomenon. That's exactly right. You have to be
00:48:55.840
distant, can't exactly detach from it. Yes. Does the exact opposite? And so you can see why scientists
00:49:01.600
don't, or at least some don't approve, but kind of going back to your sense of baker projecting
00:49:10.240
himself into the bird world or a given bird. Let's think about this passage where he starts as the
00:49:20.640
watcher and then he projects himself into the bird, right? So he's sort of leaving that subjective
00:49:26.800
position. I found myself crouching over the kill like a manxling hawk. My eyes turned quickly
00:49:34.800
about alert for the walking heads of men. Unconsciously I was imitating the movements of a hawk
00:49:41.680
as in some primitive ritual, the hunter becoming the thing he hunts. I looked into the wood.
00:49:49.280
In a layer of shadow the paragrin was crouched, watching me, gripping the neck of a dead branch.
00:49:57.760
We live in these days in the open, the same ecstatic fearful life. We shun man. We hate their suddenly
00:50:08.400
uplifted arms, the insanity of their flailing gestures, their erratic, scissoring gate,
00:50:15.040
their aimless stumbling ways, the tombstone whiteness of their faces. So there he goes from the eye
00:50:22.560
to the we, we himself and the bird projecting himself into the subjectivity of the bird as it were.
00:50:30.720
And if you take a passage like that and any number of other passages in the book, you say,
00:50:36.240
well, this is not technically and scientifically the way things are in themselves. There are no
00:50:43.280
white tombstones in the eyes. But this is like a vango if you were to tell vango that the night sky
00:50:51.040
never looks like the way you painted it. Well, clearly the exaggerated and expressive brush strokes
00:50:58.160
that someone like vango used was not trying to get at the factual truth of the world as it appears
00:51:07.760
objectively, but to do justice to the way that world appears to him in his own subjective
00:51:16.800
perception of it and trying to be and I think that's what Baker means by saying that one has to
00:51:22.640
the emotions and the passions of the of the of the water also have the status of facts. I'm not
00:51:30.960
the facts of that phenomenological perception are of a different order than the facts of the way
00:51:38.000
the scientists can can line them up having taken out as much as possible the subjectivity of the
00:51:45.760
observer. No, I mean, you put that very beautifully and I think that the fact that he decides to
00:51:50.240
eliminate every single human allows him to break through into that sort of phenomena, the phenomena
00:51:59.440
that he is representing, which are true facts to him. And in fact, for the reader come across as
00:52:06.960
at least for this reader as a as a truth and also just the way he captures this kind of
00:52:14.240
evanescence and changing and disappearing and reappearing of things that are happening all day long
00:52:22.080
to do that in language. It's astonishing. It's very difficult to do.
00:52:26.240
Right. Well, Andrea, we're getting to the end of our hour. I just wanted to ask you, you know,
00:52:34.880
by way of conclusion, you do you teach nature writing often to do environmental
00:52:42.560
eco criticism and other kinds of writing? Is there anything in your canon of works that compares to
00:52:50.480
the paragrain and that you know? No, I mean, Baker is really a poet. And I mean, one question
00:52:58.960
that I would ask you and we have little time here is that there's a passage about the beauty that
00:53:06.640
he sees in a killing. And so, you know, again, is he a set of sizing these scenes? I do think
00:53:18.800
that, you know, the behavior and the emotions completely change this book and take it out
00:53:24.160
indeed of nature writing in any ordinary sense. Yeah. I don't know. Do you want to maybe read that
00:53:31.600
passage? Sure. It's I think it's my favorite passage actually in the book because it goes to the
00:53:37.120
heart of this terrible paradox of the sheer beauty of the natural world when it is tied to the most
00:53:47.200
violent purposes, which is that of killing. And here he's describing not a paragrain Falcon,
00:53:55.120
but he's describing another hawk of Merlin and he says, the Merlin had seen the Lark go up and had
00:54:02.240
circled a gain height before making an attack from behind the Merlin's wings looked very straight.
00:54:08.160
They seemed to move up and down with a shallow flicking action, a feebrile pulsation much faster than
00:54:14.400
any other falcons. It reached the Lark in a few seconds and they fell away toward the West
00:54:21.040
jerking and twisting together the Lark still singing. It looked like a swallow chasing a bee.
00:54:28.080
They rushed down the sky and zig-zags and I lost them in the green of the distant fields.
00:54:33.760
Their rapid shifting dancing motion had been so deft and graceful that it was difficult to
00:54:40.400
believe that hunger was the cause of it and death the end. The killing that follows the hunting
00:54:46.880
flight of hawks comes with a shocking force as though the hawk had suddenly gone mad and had
00:54:53.120
killed the thing it loved. The striving of birds to kill or to save themselves from death is
00:54:59.600
beautiful to see the greater the beauty the more terrible the death. I mean that we're used to
00:55:06.720
nature writing talking about the sublime or something beautiful. This kind of beauty I don't find.
00:55:15.360
I mean he finds the beauty in first of all the striving of the bird to kill and the striving of the prey
00:55:25.680
to not be killed and that takes on all of these motions and these extraordinary odds.
00:55:32.160
It is a dance. It is a dance and he can't even imagine it as something that really comes down to
00:55:40.640
hunger and just something simple. Why is it so beautiful is the question?
00:55:47.520
And you know that's a huge metaphysical question. I know. I had to put that in.
00:55:52.240
If the scientists or the evolutionists are right then this overwhelming beauty of the planet,
00:56:00.800
the way we know it in all its subtleties and nuances and of the speciation and the
00:56:06.640
especially birds and the plumage of birds and that this unimaginable beauty has the most miserable
00:56:16.240
impoverished purpose which is to satiate hunger momentarily before it goes on absurdly
00:56:24.640
you know to the next meal and this procreation with it with that all this beauty could be rooted
00:56:32.080
in such absurdity is mind-boggling to me. It is. And Baker brings that out in a way that
00:56:39.840
you know the other thing I was thinking when the falcon disappears after the end of this season
00:56:46.720
all the birds in Essex are probably celebrating joyous. They are. He actually says that.
00:56:52.400
And yet were there not a bird of prey present in their evolutionary history they could never
00:57:00.320
be so beautiful. They could never fly in such metaphysical ways. They've co-evolved.
00:57:05.280
And that's why their dance is so beautiful because this co-evolution has made the mortal enemies
00:57:11.040
and this disconnect between the vileness of purpose and the sheer transcendence of the beauty.
00:57:20.080
I don't know what to make of it. It's astounding. Also just the fact that he likes to go and find
00:57:26.640
to the prey which the paragon takes the feathers and eats all the meat. He's actually hunting for
00:57:32.800
the prey as well. He clearly sees something beautiful in the corpses. Of course it's the dance ultimately
00:57:43.760
but he's seeing a beauty that most nature writers would refuse to see or would not want to see.
00:57:51.600
Yeah we might be able to end on a verse from a Wallace Stevens poem "Death is the mother of beauty and
00:57:57.600
from her alone shall come fulfillment of our dreams." I don't know if that applies. I like that.
00:58:04.640
Although he's really talking about human death things here. It's not it's bird death.
00:58:10.000
So Andrea I'm going to leave you with a track from a new album by the band Yes called Fly from Here
00:58:19.440
and remind our listeners that we've been engaged in a conversation with Professor Andrea Nightingale
00:58:24.080
who teaches in the Department of Classics here at Stanford. I'm Robert Harrison for entitled
00:58:29.520
opinions and we'll be with you next week and thanks again Andrea for coming on.
00:58:34.960
Thank you so much. This was so much fun. Bye bye.
00:58:44.720
[Music]
00:58:54.720
[Music]
00:59:04.720
[Music]
00:59:14.720
[Music]
00:59:24.720
[Music]
00:59:34.720
[Music]
00:59:44.720
[Music]
00:59:54.720
[Music]
01:00:04.720
[Music]
01:00:28.720
[Music]
01:00:30.720
[BLANK_AUDIO]