To read an exclusive English-language translation of Fabián Casas’ short story, ‘The Fantastic Four’, click here.
We found Fabián Casas waiting for us in an old bar in Colegiales. A stack of empty coffee cups and the complete works of Chekhov, 300 pages deep, has us wondering if we had arrived late, but Casas received us warmly and before long we were talking freely about poetry, travels, language, and what it’s like to be a great author with no imagination.
The author of fiction, essays, poetry, and screen plays, Casas is above all a deeply reflective person and the fact that he is having something of “a moment” doesn’t escape him, nor does it make him uncomfortable. His most recent books of fiction, ‘Ocio’ and ‘Los Lemmings’, have gone through successive reprints, only to sell out again. Lately, he finds himself rejecting the label of “Argentine writer”, indicative at once of a certain humbleness and his growing stature nationally and internationally. Generous with his time and his words, Casas opened up to us about becoming a “famous author” and how his head-space looks something like the bar from Star Wars.
What are you working on these days?
I spent all of last year writing a movie script, and this coming week we’re going to start filming. [Vigo] Mortensen is coming down, he’s going to act and produce the movie. [Lisandro] Alonso is the director. I’d never written for film before. I’m also writing an essay about Tolstoy, a very long essay that I’ve been working on for the last three years. I spent two years reading different authors talking about Tolstoy, in different languages, books that I found during my travels. And I finally sat down to write it, because I have to hand it over this year to Emecé so they can publish it.
I’m also working on a novel that I have to turn in next year, since I was contracted to submit two things. The novel I’ve been working on quite a bit. Lately I’ve been reworking it, and I like it better now because you can’t understand a word of it.
I like when I’m writing to feel as if I have a rock in my shoe, something that makes you ashamed, or uncomfortable. I’m not really sure what it is. Something about co-existing with the uncertainty.
You’ve also written some children’s literature. Is that something you will continue to work on?
Actually, just now I have a friend whose name is Nahuel Vecino. I had the urge to write something called “Mi Vecino Nahuel” [My Neighbor Nahuel] for kids. Because, since I don’t have imagination, the development of my books always comes from direct contact with people’s names.
Given the strong following you’ve developed over the years, do you have a sense of your audience, of who reads you?
When I used to write poetry, it appeared in small books that sold out quickly. They were small editions, for a limited audience of poetry specialists. And then ‘Lemmings’ was the start of something new. Now I don’t know who reads me. People stop me in the street, famous people call me saying they’ve read my books. It’s strange. But for me fame is worthless. It´s still strange to me how this all started, all different people from different places. Still, I couldn’t say if I have a particular reader or not.
Suddenly people are calling me, they write from Germany, from Brazil, from Italy. That´s what´s great about books, you don´t know where they are, but they´re circulating.
You’ve travelled quite a lot over the years. Some time ago, when you were working as a journalist with Olé you were awarded a grant to spend time at the Iowa Writers’ Workshop. What was that experience like?
I made good use of the grant. Aside from the workshop, I was swimming, running, eating. The truth is I had a great time with the grant. There are people though who get depressed, because it’s a long time and some people can’t handle it. I got to travel. I went to San Francisco, to see [John] Ashberry. That is, you had to explain why you were traveling, so I went to City Lights Books, where I read Ashberry, and later I went to see him. It was great. I also went to Portland and New York.
If you could meet any poet, living or dead, who would you like it to be?
I would have liked to have known Beckett. Still, you know how it is, you find yourself with the guy and you lose the urge. In general you have to read writers and not meet them, you know? But, as an idea, I would like to know Beckett. He’s an author that I’ve read a lot and his personality has always intrigued me. I’ve read at least three biographies about him, how he developed his writing and the things he had to break through and take apart to find his own voice. He’s an example of a really great author who took a long time to find his own voice. That part of him has always interested me.
You mentioned that at some point you had been translating the Objectivists poets from North America. How do you feel in the role of translator?
I don’t consider myself a translator. I do it because, it’s an activity, like…like going to see a movie. I went to see the Master, and I told all of my friends “go see it, it’s fantastic”. But with the Objectivists the deal was that they didn’t exist here. I had become fascinated with how the Objectivists were a small group, hidden within the North American canon, somewhere underneath the Beatniks, who are an international export. The Beatniks have their good writers, I don’t mean to say they don’t, but they’re easier to sell, to export, along with the whole outsider identity.
Later I was working on John Ashberry, who as a poet really blew my mind, but you have to spend a lot of time with it. So it came from wanting to share the poems.
Basically, as far as my relation with translation goes, I don’t produce, I don’t read books about translation, nothing. I read the translation that you guys did and it seemed like you had captured a certain intensity in the text, it seemed good to me.
And when they translate you, do you evaluate the translation?
If I can read the language, of course. Recently I was reading the Portuguese translation of ‘Lemmings’. And with Portuguese you can really work with the slang since it’s similar to our own. But then you also get the “false friends”, words that are so similar you thing they must mean the same thing and it ends up being a terrible mistake.
You’ve worked as a journalist, writing about football among other things, and it’s striking how you can speak in the same sentence about literature, football, philosophy, and so on. With such diverse interests and activities, how do you define yourself professionally?
I’m always aware when I’m working for a specific group and that you have a certain framework in which you have to work. For me, due to my training, there was never any difference between high and low culture. If there exist differences they exist to be criss-crossed. There are many times when my ideas about Lacan come to me when something happens while I’m watching a football match or something is said during the game. Or I see a popular movie, and that gets stored somewhere inside along with Hegel, and from there I start thinking, as if I were a welder. But I’m not original in that way, Walter Benjamin already did it a long time ago and he did it better. He was thinking in the bar, with his book about the Arcades, with his passage about how high and low culture are resignified. It seems to me like a very productive exchange.
I always prefer being a ‘welder’ to be being a ‘warrior’. Like the bar in Star Wars, with the guy with a fish head, and the girl with three tits [from the film Total Recall], I think that those are the ideal places where the things that really interest me start to emerge. The vital things, because they’re different, that’s where the exchange takes place. For me that kind of crossing is the anti-fascist place par excellence. Finding myself here with a Muslim, a woman, a man, a Jew, a black guy, it’s great. When you find yourself with the same set of people, who think the same, that’s where fascism comes in.
The bar from Star Wars is an interesting reference. Would you say you’re writing has some affinity with that space?
For me that’s where interesting things take place, always the great literature comes from there, from syncretism. I don’t know if it’s something you can detect in my literature, but it’s part of my personality, something I enjoy
Speaking of fascism, you’ve been called the “last author of the left”. How do you react to that label? Is it fair or accurate to call your writing “political”.
It makes me laugh. I consider myself a man of the left but I’m not a leftist militant. I identify the right with a certain view of nature. Because nature would have it that the weakest of the pack gets eaten by the lion and that way the herd is purified. The ones that remain are the best. I’m against all that, I want the weakest to have support, that they have their advocates. That they be protected. I consider myself leftist in that sense.
My cousin was always a reference point for me, like an older brother. He was an important figure in the JP [Juventud Peronista] and he took me along to places where they had occupied the university, and there was a kind of excitement in the 70′s that for me was beautiful, amazing. The type of thing, where people act politically and commit themselves to politics, to changing the world.
The Pope is Argentine, and he says that everything spiritual, the church, is apolitical. I think the exact opposite, everything spiritual is part of political progress, I can’t think about anything spiritual outside of politics. For me Christ was a completely non-transcendent figure. I don’t think anything exists up above, nothing at all, I think that’s a way to manipulate things. But I do believe that Christ was a political and spiritual leader. The spiritual acts he committed were also political acts. For example throwing all those guys out of the temple was a political act. It’s what the church needs to do. But I think that it’s impossible to change the church, for me change is always going to come from the outside. The counterculture is always invisible, you don’t know when it will appear.
What you’re describing reminds me a bit of Saint Augustine’s book, The City of God.
The story of Christ influenced me ever since I was little because I came from a Catholic family, and it always moved me to see Jesus washing people’s feet, to see Jesus in the Sermon on the Mount. Everything about him seems extraordinary to me, what he says and the way in which he says it and the way he reaches down to the people around him.
When we started translating “Los cuatro fantásticos” we wanted to capture some of the intensity in that story. In fact, the writer Alan Pauls has written a long essay, where he says of your books that this intensity has to do with how you employ proper names and “naming”, calling things, streets, people, songs by their names. Have you ever reflected on that aspect of your writing?
What I can say regarding the subject is that that I pay close attention to lexicon of the people I speak with. It seems to me that there in language, that’s where ‘Being’ is situated. It’s the same as when you are aware of the things that give you life, that give you pleasure. Because when you’re going to live, to live well, and you want to feel right, except when you might have some masochistic urge, you look to connect with the things that make you feel right, you don’t try to connect with the things that make you feel bad. Involuntarily, since none of us are Krishnamurti, you fall on bad times, moments of sterility and stupidity. But when you get in touch with good things, you connect with what you’re hearing, what you’re seeing, you try to find yourself with the things that transmit intensity, which for me is the opposite of cynicism and irony. For me wherever there is irony there’s no intensity.
So for me, I always have my ear trained and I look to capture something. Then I think how I would be able to take the word, cleanse it of the ordinary meaning it has and put it back in circulation with a new power.
You always have to listen. When I was a kid, in my neighborhood, when you played with figurines, when you lost them they used to say “melado”. I don’t know who invented the word, but there’s a ton of those kids, from different neighborhoods who are the same age as me and when I ask them “Do you remember the word “melar?”, this word that disappeared from the language. They say “Yeah, yeah, ‘melar‘ was when you lost all of your figurines” Who invented the word? Evidently, it wasn’t a word from the adult world, because it part of the kids’ code. Some kid invented it and it got around. But also these words, at some point, leave the language, stop working, and people stop saying them. And sometimes it’s a good thing, because you take that word, you use it again. You revive it.
Your texts are not only intense, they also tend to be very funny. Are you motivated to find humour? If so, does it come easy or is it something you labor over?
Humour feels totally natural to me. Actually, it doesn’t form any kind of a priori program for my writing, because I like a ton of things that aren’t at all funny, and are really dense. It’s just part of my nature, my personality. I think life is hell, and if you can’t introduce some humour… or at least some degree of excitement…You would go crazy if it weren’t impossible to convert the horror into laughter. You can’t go on. In that sense, it seems like a good counterweight. I also like people who can laugh at themselves, because when people don’t laugh at themselves, they spend their time thinking they’re important and that will destroy you.
Los Lemmings has made a great impact here in Argentina. Do you think that that impact has to do with a certain nostalgia or even melancholy for “the neighborhood”, which doesn’t exist anymore or has somehow transformed?
From my point of view, I see melancholy as a capital sin, as something really unproductive and negative. Especially now that I have a daughter I see it like that. I’m seriously happily with the life I have these days, I’m in a state of pure presentness. The past doesn’t interest me at all. I remember with fondness the good moments and the bad moments with sadness, but I don’t wish to be there again.
Everything I write springs from the fact that I lack imagination. It seems important to me that people, in whatever setting, whatever they’re doing, are able to recognise their own limits. “I am this person, this is what I do, I’m bald, I don’t have curls, I don’t look like Brad Pitt, I practice karate.” That’s what you are, what you do. I practice karate whenever I can, with my abilities, and just the same I write what I can.
So ‘Lemmings’ is a work about the things I know, not because I’m interested in defending that position, but instead searching among those things that happened to me for something that seems worth transmitting. Not to affirm that “I want to do populism” or “the neighborhood is my ideal”. I can only put forth what I know. Tolstoy could write just as much from the point of a Count or a peasant, that explained everything, but he was a genius. And the whole idea of the “literatura chabón”, for me literature can never be contained within all that. The moment you pronounce it, it’s no longer useful. Literature is the place where dogmas are broken, so it’s difficult to maintain labels.
You’ve said on various occasions that you don’t consider yourself an “Argentine writer”. How did you arrive at that?
I think sometimes that for me the most important thing is to not lose the human element. That can happen when you spend your time within certain norms that are really unproductive. So if you see yourself as an Argentine writer you can’t write. It destroys you. If you see yourself that way you can’t even think. I think [the label] serves insofar as something to repurpose, to take apart, to basically work against. The same thing happens when you start writing and discover some strength, over the course of many years writing becomes a strength. I have that strength, but for me writers have to work against their own strength. And in life, speaking from my own experience, comfort can be totally debilitating. I’ve realised this. I’m a person that can easily obtain a lot of things through work or whatever. But the comfort that brought was weakening me, instead of making me into something better. When I was a little kid, I lived in a poor family and that’s how I grew up, humble. We were really happy, I have really happy memories of my childhood. Not that I would want to glamorise poverty, of course.
The Japanese have a concept, one that I always liked. I travelled through Japan, and there I heard some guys talking about “wabi”, the idea of voluntary poverty. I travelled quite a bit. When I turned 22 I took off for two years traveling, and one of the things a person learns when they travel is you don’t want to have a heavy load. For me this applies to practically everything. You can’t carry too much, can’t be heavy, you can’t carry the weight of your parents demands or the idea that you have to be the great author of Boedo, or Argentina, that you have to have a girl, all of these things will destroy you.
You’ve travelled quite a lot through Latin America, right?
Yeah, I was gone from the time I was 21 to 24. At the time I almost needed my parents’ authorization to travel. I wanted to do Che’s journey, but without anybody dying. Even the literature I read there, Castaneda, etc. was very stimulating for me. The truth is I was very happy. Always throughout my life I had a certain nostalgia for that time period, up until I finally rid myself of that nostalgia, when I started to really feel self-realized.
I’m not saying that everything is always good, it’s not that kind of evangelical joy. I have my job, my partner that I enjoy, I have a very intense relationship. I adore my daughter. I never thought I would enjoy being a father so much. I enjoy what time I have to read. The friends I have are very important for me, they’ve supported me a lot, I couldn’t live without them. I feel good.


























