I discovered ‘The Word Pretty‘ by Elisa Gabbert accidentally. I read the first page and found it beautiful and so decided to read it.

‘The Word Pretty‘ is a collection of essays. Many of the essays in the collection are about books and bookish things, my favourite kind of essays. There are essays on keeping a notebook to record thoughts, on translations, on the pleasure of reading introductions to books, on the beauty of paragraphs, on the importance of punctuation, on poetry, on aphorisms. There are also non-bookish essays on photographs, on different words used to describe beauty, on the interplay between time, money and happiness. There is an even an essay on the Alcatraz prison.
The essays in the book are interesting and pleasurable to read. I enjoyed reading them. I liked both the bookish essays and the non-bookish ones. That is the good news.
I have one or two quibbles with the book though. That is the bad news. After reading a few essays at the beginning, I felt like Elisa Gabbert was quoting a lot of other writers in her essays. This is normal, of course, in today’s essays. But when a particular essay is about books, there are quotes from the introduction to the book and what other writers or reviewers thought about the book, and one has an increasingly nagging suspicion that Elisa Gabbert hasn’t read the book. She even says that in one of her essays – “I’m a promiscuous and impatient reader, so one of my literary guilty pleasures is reading the introductions to great books and not the books themselves.” She talks about the Tao Te Ching, but she hasn’t read the book itself (or has only dipped into it) but quotes from the introduction to it. This trend keeps continuing through the rest of the essays in the book, that one starts wondering whether Elisa Gabbert has read the book in question or whether she has just read the introduction to it and maybe a couple of reviews or essays about the book and maybe the Wikipedia entry on it, and has then written this essay. Even when she says that she has read the book, for example, in the case of ‘Le Grande Meaulnes‘ (‘Lost Estate‘) by Alain-Fournier (one of my favourite books), it is hard for us to believe it, because she quotes from the introduction and not from the book, and whatever she says about the book can be found in a Wikipedia entry or a typical review – that is, the essay is probably derivative and offers secondhand opinions. I’m not sure that she has read ‘Le Grand Meaulnes’. But I think she did read the two Javier Marias books that she has written about. Writers writing about books that they haven’t read is common these days, but it is still frustrating when we encounter such instances.
The other quibble I had was this – in one of the essays Elisa Gabbert says that lately she is drawn more towards translated fiction and she likes reading them more. Then she goes on to write about Javier Marias’ books. So far so good. But then, there is no evidence in the rest of the book that she prefers translated fiction (or poetry) or enjoys reading them. No names of non-English writers are even mentioned. It is a cool thing, these days, to say that one prefers translated fiction. It is also very cliched.
One more quibble I have – the last one, I promise – is that Elisa Gabbert criticizes different writers and their works in the essays – sometimes she criticizes a writer for ‘overwriting’ a book, sometimes for ‘underwriting’ a book, sometimes for using too much pronunciation, sometimes she hates the title of a book. But when someone criticizes her owns books in review sites like Goodreads, she takes offence 😊 To her credit, she writes about both, in her essays.
I enjoyed reading ‘The Word Pretty‘. If you like reading nice bookish essays, this book is for you. It will make pleasurable reading on a Sunday afternoon, when you are sitting in your garden, with a cup of tea, and enjoying the fragrance of the flowers, the sounds of the birds, the flitting of the butterflies, and your dog or cat enjoying time on your lap.
I’ll leave you with some of my favourite passages from the book.
“When I was seven or eight, I confessed to my mother that I couldn’t stop narrating my life back to myself; I thought it meant I was crazy. No, she said, it means you’re a writer.”
“I’ve always believed that the secrecy of diaries is pretense; with their naked confessions, they seem designed for others to discover and read, unlike notebooks, which are coded, often impenetrable to outsiders.”
“I read that Kafka’s Metamorphosis is difficult to translate into Japanese because of “insect appreciation” — that is to say, the Japanese do not experience revulsion at the prospect of a man-sized beetle. What to do, then — convert Gregor Samsa into something that the Japanese do find disgusting? Or let it become a new story in a new context? Which is more accurate, more faithful to the original? Imagine reading Metamorphosis without understanding why Gregor’s family is repulsed by him — after all, he has transmutated into something wondrous, something perhaps better! Everything is translatable, but nothing is perfectly translatable : tidy words become gangly phrases, the “Kafkaesque” becomes fantastical, innuendos appear or disappear, polysemy and rhyme seem to teleport to a new location in the poem. Meaning dissipates in the processing, decays over time, but it’s remarkable how much is retained, the way it’s remarkable how good the Lascaux cave paintings are…Problems in translation are not much of an argument against translation. The work can remain what it is while also being transposed, twisted, given new significance, like a glove turned inside out.”
“There are probably people who go through life with a permanent mind of poetry. I am not one of those people. I fall in and out of it, and not at will. As I write this, I am not in it, and have not been for three or four months, which is to say, I have not been able to focus on or become absorbed in any book of poetry. Oddly, I have continued to write poetry. I continue to think about poetry, almost daily…one doesn’t need a mind of poetry to talk about poetry. But I don’t want to read it. Or— and this is how it feels, when I’ve lost my mind for poetry — poetry doesn’t want me to read it. I can look at the words on the page and feel fairly certain that they represent good poetry, but I remain unmoved and unengaged. It’s like looking at an attractive person when you’re freshly in love with someone else : an empty appreciation that leads nowhere. When I’m in the mood for poetry, it’s not a seduction on my part; it’s more like the poem and I have chemistry.”
Have you read ‘The Word Pretty‘? What do you think about it?