Tuesday, February 16, 2016 — Juniper and Bones

I can­not smell juniper with­out think­ing of small bones. I have very strong smell mem­o­ries, some­times stronger than visu­al mem­o­ries. I can still call up in my mind the smell of the north rim of the Grand Canyon, the myr­i­ad smells of dif­fer­ent deserts, the scents of tama­rack and black spruce as you get near the Wînipâkw, the smells of the blessed neem trees in Kano, the spring lilacs in Cana­di­an towns, the com­fort­ing scents of fresh­ly-sawn lum­ber, the many smells of snow in dif­fer­ent settings.

Hold that thought, for I must digress.

I just re-read Edgar Pangborn’s A Mir­ror for Observers for the eighth time. The only oth­er nov­el I’ve read as many times is Lewis Carroll’s Through the Look­ing Glass. Reg­u­lar reread­ings of Carroll’s mas­ter­piece would not sur­prise any­one — I’m sure there are peo­ple who have read it dozens of times — but you might find it puz­zling that I would give equal loy­al­ty to a sci­ence fic­tion nov­el writ­ten in 1954, by an author who was respect­ed in his day, but nev­er a high-pro­file celebri­ty in the field. A Mir­ror for Observers is not even his best known book (though it is his best). I read the book in child­hood, and it imprint­ed itself on my mind so vivid­ly that I hard­ly need­ed to reread it, for I could play out every scene in my mind at will. But, at reg­u­lar inter­vals through­out a life­time, I have read it with full attention.

Edgar Pang­born was an Amer­i­can writer who went to Har­vard at the age of fif­teen, then trained at the New Eng­land Con­ser­va­to­ry with the inten­tion of becom­ing a con­cert pianist and com­pos­er, but end­ed up writ­ing pulp fic­tion. In the 1950’s and 1960’s, he wrote a series of sto­ries and nov­els that were well-received, but prob­a­bly had more impact on the next gen­er­a­tion of writ­ers in the field than on the gen­er­al read­er­ship. He lived much of his life reclu­sive­ly in Bearsville, New York, a tiny ham­let in the Adiron­dack moun­tains, and died in 1976. His best known work was the nov­el Davy (1964), a fine work. But A Mir­ror for Observers did not always remain in print, and I had var­i­ous crum­bling paper­back copies until it was re-issued in hard­cov­er in 2004.

So why am I so devot­ed to this low-pro­file book, and why did I reread it this time?

Some recent events, both pub­lic and per­son­al, have forced me to think about things that I expe­ri­enced decades ago, which I have nev­er been able to prop­er­ly artic­u­late, but which will be quite under­standible to those who know me. A Mir­ror for Observers address­es the moral issues these events embody. The book is about, among oth­er things, per­son­al respon­si­bil­i­ty for pub­lic, col­lec­tive evil. Pang­born was unusu­al­ly sen­si­tive to this issue, as few writ­ers have been. Look at the parade of renowned writ­ers and artists who have kissed the ass­es of tyrants and devot­ed their skills to pro­pa­gan­diz­ing for Con­ser­vatism, Com­mu­nism, Fas­cism, and all the oth­er Isms that have unleashed suf­fer­ing and hor­ror on the human race! Pang­born was absent from that gib­ber­ing and scream­ing crowd, and he could elo­quent­ly express why. The “mir­ror” in the nov­el is an archae­o­log­i­cal arti­fact, a bronze hand mir­ror from the ancient Aegean. He under­stood that the issues are old, and that one must look into a mir­ror to solve them. But much as I take plea­sure in reread­ing that fine book, since the 1980’s, I could not read it with­out the smell of juniper obtrud­ing in my mind. So to read A Mir­ror for Observers is, for me, a strange mix­ture of com­fort and dis­com­fort, famil­iar­i­ty and alien­ation, all keyed to my expe­ri­ence, and the smell of juniper.

I don’t wax nos­tal­gic when I smell juniper. Juniper makes me angry, bit­ter, and for­lorn. The mem­o­ry of it leaps up and spoils things for me at odd times. When I was in Ice­land, for instance, I care­ful­ly avoid­ed going to the Höfði. The Höfði is a house in Reik­javik that is pro­mot­ed as one of the city’s tourist sites. It’s noth­ing more than a rather nice house built in 1909, but Reik­javik has few old build­ings, and even few­er things with inter­na­tion­al his­tor­i­cal sig­nif­i­cance, so the fact that Ronald Rea­gan and Mikhael Gor­bachev held their sum­mit meet­ing there in 1986 looms large in the local imag­i­na­tion. Any­one who is dumb enough to think that the Sovi­et Empire col­lapsed because of the actions of Rea­gan no doubt would be inter­est­ed. But I avoid­ed it, and had no inter­est in set­ting foot in it. I have always held a spe­cial con­tempt and hatred for Ronald Rea­gan. Unfor­tu­nate­ly, the Höfði is on the water­front of Reik­javik, dra­mat­i­cal­ly vis­i­ble from Bor­gartún and only four short blocks from the main drag of Lau­gave­g­ur, so it is imposi­ble to avoid pass­ing it if you spend any time in the town. They say that there’s a ghost in the Höfði. It sup­pos­ed­ly came into the hands of Ice­landic Gov­ern­ment because the pre­vi­ous own­er, the British Con­sul, was dri­ven out by her haunt­ing. But for me the ghosts were more numer­ous, and less charm­ing. The Höfði reeked of invis­i­ble juniper, mak­ing me think of Guata­mala. No place could be less like Ice­land than Guatamala.

Cen­tral Guata­mala is a maze of undu­lat­ing hills, with very steep sides descend­ing into u‑shaped val­leys. The low­est land is cleared, farmed and dot­ted with scruffy bar­il­las of flim­sy hous­es with dark rust-brown cor­ru­gat­ed met­al roofs. But the hills are forest­ed with a mix­ture of pine and juniper called huitales by the locals. Very fra­grent. The hills once held many vil­lages, but most are now aban­doned. In the hill coun­try, Span­ish is sel­dom heard. The peo­ple speak a dozen or so lan­guages, among them Kiche, Kakchikel, Mam, Poco­mam, Pocom­chi, Ixil, Kekchi, Saka­pul­tek, Kan­jobal, etc., relat­ed, but mutu­al­ly unin­tel­li­ble. In the coun­try­side, most peo­ple are nom­i­nal­ly Catholics, but pre­serve a deep core of ancient Mayan reli­gion. The cities, and the upper class­es, how­ev­er, are pre­dom­i­nant­ly fol­low­ers of Evan­gel­i­cal and Pen­ta­costal Protes­tant church­es that orig­i­nate in the U.S.A. The country’s spo­radic attempts to func­tion as a democ­ra­cy have sys­tem­at­i­cal­ly, over many decades, been sab­o­taged by the C.I.A., which has time and again staged coups and installed blood­thirsty and cor­rupt dic­ta­tors, usu­al­ly to please the finan­cial inter­ests of the Unit­ed Fruit Com­pa­ny and oth­er glob­al cor­po­rate pow­ers. These dic­ta­tors waged con­stant war against the poor­est and the most help­less. By far the most cor­rupt and blood­thirsty of these mon­sters was José Efraín Ríos Montt. Ríos Montt, an ardent Pen­ta­costal who was a lay preach­er in the Cal­i­for­nia-based Church of the Word, announced that “the true Chris­t­ian has the Bible in one hand and a machine gun in the oth­er,” and com­mand­ed hor­rors iden­ti­cal to those of the most bru­tal Com­mu­nist regimes — in the name of “anti-Com­mu­nism.” His regime, of course, was in all ways absolute­ly iden­ti­cal to a Com­mu­nist dic­ta­tor­ship, except in name. In rur­al soci­eties, the peas­antry are the back­bone of resis­tance to total­i­tar­i­an dic­ta­tor­ships, which are usu­al­ly cre­at­ed by city-bred elites. Just as the Khmer Rouge, Mao, Lenin and Stal­in strove to break their peas­antries with mass exe­cu­tions, mass depor­ta­tions, and planned famines, Ríos Montt over­saw a planned pro­gram of geno­cide. More than three quar­ters of the vic­tims were eth­nic Maya, the rest Span­ish-speak­ing ladi­no peas­ants, who were, in Ríos Montt’s sys­tem of racial clas­si­fi­ca­tion, only slight­ly above the Maya.

This was the method, dubbed Operación Ceniza: The Gov­ern­ment forces would sur­round a vil­lage, then con­duct house-to-house search­es. First, all females between puber­ty and the age of twen­ty were sep­a­rat­ed out and repeat­ed­ly gang-raped. Then, usu­al­ly, their arms and legs where bro­ken so that they would suf­fer to the max­i­mum degree when they were lat­er exe­cut­ed. At first, many adult men fled into the for­est, think­ing that their fam­i­lies would remain unharmed, until expe­ri­ence taught them bet­ter. Those who were round­ed up usu­al­ly were forced to wit­ness wives, daugh­ters, and often their moth­ers gang-raped, then tor­tured and exe­cut­ed. The elder­ly were par­tic­u­lar­ly sub­ject­ed to tor­ture, but the fiercest sav­agery was saved for small chil­dren. These were usu­al­ly clubbed to death with batons (sup­plied by the Amer­i­can tax­pay­er) or burnt alive. Most of the remain­ing men, after being forced to dump the shat­tered corpses of their fam­i­lies into hasti­ly dug pits or ditch­es, were then herd­ed into huts and either machine-gunned or blown to bits with hand-grenades. In the west­ern high­lands, in the area of Hue­hueten­go, for exam­ple, this was done in more than six hun­dred vil­lages. The moun­tains still have many emp­ty villages.

Bod­ies decay quick­ly in hot, moist cli­mates and bones dis­solve in Guatamala’s luvi­so­lic for­est soil. But in 1984, there were still plen­ty of aban­doned vil­lages sur­round­ed by trench­es and hum­mocks of vis­i­bly dis­turbed soil, dec­o­rat­ed with the frag­ments of thou­sands of children’s bones. Usu­al­ly, there was the smell of juniper. Vil­lagers would say noth­ing, even if they could speak Span­ish. Men­tion­ing these events to out­siders would quick­ly lead to “dis­ap­pear­ing.” But it was essen­tial that each vil­lage have sur­vivors, and where it was uncer­tain that enough men had fled into the for­est, some were spared on pur­pose. That was part of the pol­i­cy. You can’t spread ter­ror unless every­one knows. There was also a sys­tem­at­ic pro­gram of scorched earth. Crops were burned, roads to mar­kets sealed, all food con­trolled. Those who sub­mit­ted meek­ly, and hand­ed over their youth for brain­wash­ing in the mili­tias, might get the hand­ful of dried beans nec­es­sary to avoid star­va­tion. “Fri­joles y fusiles” Ríos Montt called it.

This was the doc­trine of Operación Ceniza, deter­mined not in Guata­mala, but by those who had trained the sol­diers and death squads in spe­cial camps in the Unit­ed States, who paid for every­thing, and who had planned and orga­nized every step of the oper­a­tion: the Admin­is­tra­tion of Ronald Rea­gan. Rea­gan per­son­al­ly overode Con­gress in order to dis­patch mil­lions of dol­lars worth of heli­copters, arms, and amu­ni­tion to Ríos Montt. Many mil­lions more were hand­ed over in secret. Vis­it­ing the dic­ta­tor in 1982, Rea­gan anounced that the mass-mur­der­er was “a man of great per­son­al integri­ty and com­mit­ment.” And Ríos Montt was only one of a long list of mass-mur­der­ing mon­sters that Rea­gan cul­ti­vat­ed, financed, pub­licly praised, and loved to be seen with socially.

All of this hor­ror was com­plet­ed by the time the Repub­li­can Nation­al Con­ven­tion ush­ered in Rea­gan’s sec­ond term. The Rea­gan Rev­o­lu­tion was tri­umphant in the Unit­ed States, and even his strongest polit­i­cal oppo­nents bab­bled inane­ly about what a gosh-darn love­able fel­low he was. Nev­er­the­less, the Rea­gan Rev­o­lu­tion’s march­ing men required the ser­vices of a vast num­ber of pros­ti­tutes, hus­tlers and drug deal­ers to keep up their morale. That’s when I got to know quite a few Repub­li­can Par­ty offi­cials, some of them fair­ly high up the lad­der. In the strip joints and bars, they were not par­tic­u­lar­ly secre­tive about their views, and about what they knew. “Fam­i­ly Val­ues” Repub­li­cans were noto­ri­ous among the hook­ers and hus­tlers. “Some of them are real sick­os,” one lad told me, “I mean, not just guys out for some fun, I mean real dis­gust­ing per­verts.” When­ev­er I talked to some of these exem­plars of Repub­li­can Fam­i­ly Val­ues, the self-styled “rev­o­lu­tion­ar­ies” of the Con­ser­v­a­tive move­ment, the same pat­tern repeat­ed itself: after drink #1, absolute denial that any attroc­i­ties had occurred in Guata­mala, it was all just lies told by “pinkos” and “left­ists” and “dirty hip­pies”; by drink #4, yeah, nudge-nudge wink-wink, sure of course there were attroc­i­ties, can’t be helped if some of “our friends” get car­ried away; after drink #6 it was a dif­fer­ent sto­ry. Killing women and chil­dren was a jol­ly good thing. “Best thing in the world. Exter­mi­nate the lit­tle nig­gers,” was how one coke-snort­ing slob put it.

That taught me every­thing I need­ed to know about the Con­ser­v­a­tive move­ment, just as inten­sive study of the past, read­ing all of Karl Marx’s dis­gust­ing racist and geno­ci­dal writ­ings, and some ter­ri­fy­ing expe­ri­ences in Africa had taught me what I need­ed to know about the Com­mu­nist move­ment. Among oth­er things, that they were the same thing.

Leave a Comment