What is important is to love: The Worst Thing of All is the Light by José Luis Serrano

The worst thing of all is the light because it’s always the same, but we are not ever the same, and then that light reminds us of the others we were before, once, those others who did things that now we would not do, that we don’t admit to having done. In spring, the light of a clear, bright day, when the wind has left the air clean and pure, leads us to clearer days, days of youth, of holidays. Or that yellow light of autumn, also clean, sharp at the final hours of the afternoon.

Light, light, light. Such is the thread along which the thoughts of Edorta, a middle-aged man, run through the course of his free-flowing poetic reflections, a diary of sorts, addressed to, but not meant to be read by, his long-time friend Koldo. As he reaches for a way to understand and articulate his tangled and conflicted feelings, light serves as a mechanism of memory, sometimes consoling, at other times cruel. But Edorta’s musings are only half of The Worst Thing of All is the Light, an inventive, metafictional novel that sets an exploration of the boundaries between friendship and desire against a parallel examination of the relationship between imagination and reality.

Edorta and Koldo are the creations of Spanish writer José Luis Serrano, but within this double stranded novel, they are also the evolving characters taking shape in the mind of an “author” who is, presumably, a fictionalized representation of Serrano himself. In a series of journal entries, the author/narrator records the activities and conversations that mark each day of a vacation he and his husband are spending in Bilbao. His report, which details where they go, what they eat and what they talk about, is addressed to his husband directly, with the all familiarity two decades together has wrought. These dated entries, each illustrated with a scenic photograph, occur over the course of ten days in August of 2014 and appear to set up the proposed novel the author is planning to write: the story of a very close friendship—one that might even be described as love—between two heterosexual men. He’s not sure if he will be able to pull it off (his husband is even more skeptical) but he knows it will require an inventive approach, perhaps one that plays a fragmented diary of some kind against an author’s journal within which the potential narrative structure and details are formulated and debated. His husband plays the foil, devil’s advocate and, sometimes, the anxious spouse:

“But then, aren’t you going to write a normal novel?”

“I never write a normal novel. What’s more, I’ve always made it clear that I’m unable to tell a story, There will just be snippets, bits of what could have been the novel. Perhaps a diary by Edorta.”

“And these dialogues.”

“That’s right. Perhaps not these, but others I make up based on these.”

“And will I be myself? I’m worried about being myself in your novel, worried that you’ll put me in your novel.”

With chapters that alternate between the author’s journal and Edorta’s diary, the novel that exists is the one that the author is planning to write—the final project and a self-conscious analysis of that project in its formative state. This is where the metafictional game lies, where the boundary between literature and reality blurs and where questions about the “fictional” characters, their relationship, and the nature of love and attraction arise. As the author and his husband debate the possibility of platonic desire between men from the outside in so far as they can intellectualize beyond their own homosexuality, Edorta explores the matter from within, in trying to articulate the quality of his affection for Koldo while holding to an assumption of his own heterosexuality.

Edorta’s diary offerings are undated; each one is named after a song released by the Bristol-based UK independent Sarah Records(1987–1995), and opens with the artist name, catalog number, and a few lines of lyric. These sections resemble a form of stream of consciousness, admittedly composed in writing, but unfolding without clear direction or specific chronology as if Edorta is trying to sort out his feelings on the page. Consequently, allusions—to the light in particular—and scenes from the past are revisited repeatedly. Where he is writing from, temporally speaking, is intentionally vague, though he does often correct himself, pulling out of his revery to recall that adult life, relationships, and children have made the endless days of youth but a memory. Their occasions to actually be together are now few and time-constrained. His longing is palpable, his prose dense with fervid imagery:

Today I lug the grief of not being able to say the unsayable, fighting with the anguish of being and not wanting to be, of sinking into oblivion forever or of turning back, before even being, before myself, where there is not even oblivion. Life breaks loose from the poplars in tatters, and the branches, outlined in green-black shadows, shrink inward in their extinction of dying rapture, paralysed, surprised by the cold of November, overwhelmed in its frozen casket of gargoyles and waits.

The confluence of a grown man’s sense of loss with an adolescent ardor enhances the interrupted, unstructured memories and reflections that the novel’s “author” seems to want to capture with Edorta’s diary passages.

The two alternating streams form an intriguing novel that presents itself—openly—as a meditation on the nature of attraction, love, and memory within a discussion of the questions that arise in the process of formulating a story that a writer wishes to tell. But does it work as a cohesive whole? Certainly neither half of the equation—the author’s descriptive vacation diary or Edorta’s endless poetic entreaties to Koldo—would hold as a sufficiently interesting narrative on its own. Yet together they complicate one another, less to provide one complete story (even with the metafictional reshuffling of expectations that occurs as the novel nears a close) than to continually raise questions about the exercise of creating and inhabiting characters to flesh out a story that an author may or may not be able to realize. As such, much hinges on the idea of platonic love and the degree to which sexuality influences the way one conceives of and is able to realistically depict an attraction that differs from one’s own.

Are Edorta’s feelings for Koldo of a different order than anything his friend can ever return? On several occasions he tries to reassure himself that they are not. Certainly he recalls and cherishes moments of intimacy that seemed to have distressed and embarrassed Koldo. But he is unable to let go of the need to define and claim his love, whatever it may be, even if he would not be the first person, regardless of orientation, to be hopelessly attracted to someone who, shall we say, plays for “the other team.” Of course, as the author’s creation, one has to ask, who exactly—Edorta or his creator—is unable to accept that their affection for the other might just be of a different order? The author’s admitted obsession from the very beginning of the novel is: “What is important is to love whether or not it’s reciprocated.” However, if, at the end of the day, to love truly is enough is a question that may prove easier to ask than to answer.

The Worst Thing of All is the Light by José Luis Serrano is translated from the Spanish by Lawrence Schimel and published by Seagull Books as part of the Pride List.

Author: roughghosts

Literary blog of Joseph Schreiber. Writer. Reader. Editor. Photographer. View all posts by roughghosts