Sunday, August 18, 2013

A Review of FINDING BILLY WHITE FEATHER, a short story by Percival Everett published in the Spring 2013 issue of Virginia Quarterly Review

Finding Billy White Feather, a short story by Percival Everett, is among those packed into your survival kit of art and ideas, and stowed between the covers of the Virginia Quarterly Review, Spring 2013.
Everett does not waste your time.  The story begins:  “Oliver Campbell had never met Billy White Feather.”  That is enough to start.  You will learn the rest along the way.
A story is like a car.  Literature is supposed to take you somewhere—when it’s not up on blocks. 
This story is not up on blocks.  It is a four hundred horsepower 4 X 4 and it took me to Everett’s destination quicker than a dog with hot sauce on its ass.  Such is the power of the story.
This time, I think I could have stayed right there, and been happy about it, and telephoned back home to tell them to sell the house and to wire me the money.  I like the way these people talk.
Oliver is a rancher, and a good one by the sounds of it.  Mrs. Campbell (Lauren) is the best wife that ever skipped happily off an altar.  The ranch folk include Hiram Shakespeare, a ranch hand named Oscar, a ranch owner named George Big Elk, Duncan Dwight (a lawyer who investigates cattle rustlers), and Sam Innis—the local vet.
I like these people.  Sam delivers the second of two meditations.
A horse gives birth to twins.  I hate to call the two foals a plot device, but in their brief lives, that is the work they do.  They are beautiful, but they don’t make it.  The vet tells us it was “failure to thrive.”  He tells Oliver:  “I’m going to do an autopsy on them, but nothing is going to turn up.  It just happens.”
The supporting cast also lives on Everett’s pages.  They include store clerks, waitresses, and the boss of a hamburger stand.  They each sound like they should.
The one person we never encounter is Billy White Feather and his is the first, and the foremost, of our two meditations in this story.  Flannery would say that any good character resists summary.  We never meet Billy, but nine characters each summarize him and each differently.  So, do we have an identity crisis here?  A crisis of the self?  Is Everett telling us that people are unknowable?  Or that their descriptions are inexpressible?
Billy shows up twice at Oliver’s ranch.  There is evidence.  He is around, yet we never see him.  Oliver never meets him.
The point is that none of those nine opinions is flattering.  Some of them sound like they would kill Billy if they had the chance, and maybe a chance to get away with it.  I have some ideas about this.  Permit me.
Drama is the Greek word for “deeds.”  In Finding Billy we don’t have many deeds.  In their place, we have meditations, and so the story line is not an arc.  It becomes a chain of incidents, at the end of which Billy White Feather is never found.  Yet the title continually reminds us that we do find him.
I wonder if Everett worried over his ending.  Maybe it came out pure and true in a single exhalation of the unconscious.  I am not saying his ending is wrong.  I am saying that I can imagine other endings.  Some of them would complete the arc of the story line.
The neat thing is that maybe a lot of different endings would work.  So, what does that say about a story that is so facile?  It might be saying something good about it, something very special.  The ancient Greeks had many versions of their fables.
At the end of the story, “a woman” tells Oliver, “Fuck you,” and slams the door.  Then a five sentence coda, then oblivion.
We never find Billy White Feather.  Nonetheless, we find much else.  Some of it we know, without knowing how we know.  And some of what we know has no name.  The reader must become a mystic.  The reader must find the theme and provide an end.
This is an example of “creative ambiguity.”  This is an instance of where the reader does the work, if he wishes, if he can.  The ineffable is a difficult subject for an impatient mystic.
Sometimes an idea is like a baby bird.  If the author holds it in his hands, it flies away.  Some ideas resist becoming concrete.  Maybe motivation helps.
We have an ending, but not an end.  In place of the story’s end, we have a meditation.  You expect a meditation with a poem.  You expect a story to have an end.
Everett cannot (or will not) come out and say it.  He has to make you come out and say it.  The end is up to you.  Everett provides us an ellipsis (a workplace for us to finish it).  Americans are impatient mystics. I'd rather not wait for Wakan Tanka to appear to me at the end of a buffalo dance.  I’d have to change my life so I could read my stories.
There might be an end if the main character had a motive equal to his actions.  Oliver drives into the next state trying to find Billy White Feather.  He has every reason not to go.  Everett’s problem is that Oliver has no good reason to make the trip.  Everett is messing with my willing suspension of disbelief. 
I’d like to see Oliver assume that someone had murdered Billy.  I’d like this to be a part of the finishing coda, just after the door slams in his face.  Everett has taken pains to show nine characters with opinions of Billy ranging from dislike to hatred.  There would be no shortage of suspects.  All we need is nine more sentences, earlier in the story—each a little different, yet each foreshadowing menace.  This provides a motive for Oliver’s obsession with finding Billy White Feather.
We don’t have to have blood stains—just complete the story’s arc.  Maybe Billy has tricked Oliver into driving far away so that he can appear at his ranch at the end (when Loren is alone, a la Hitchcock).  Maybe Oliver can complete the arc by unwittingly bringing a message to the story’s final place and final character.
I’d like to think that Everett wrote it with a murder.  I’d like to think that the Virginia Quarterly Review (God bless ‘em) turned up their nose and said, “We don’t do murders around here.  Perhaps you should turn this in to Ellery Queen, Mr. Everett.”  I’d like to think that Everett is a practical man and said, “Fine, fine.  I’ll revise and send it back in tonight.”  Everett wants to thrive.  The vet was right.  Life persists like that.
I wonder if Oliver is Everett's alter ego.  Percival and Oliver each have three syllables.  Hiram Shakespeare addresses Oliver as brown man.  Maybe one of Everett's great-granddads was a Buffalo Soldier, or maybe Everett wishes he had been.  That would be very cool.  Even just wishing it is cool.
Oh, before I leave you.  Did you know that a “white feather” is a conventional symbol in Europe?  Was I supposed to be meditating on this during the read?  All things considered, it remains a remarkable story and any problems with it might be mine as a reader.  Perhaps I am just an oaf.  There are many of us.  Barbarians are not at the gate, only oafs.  Can we have a place at Mr. Everett’s table, too?  We want to thrive, too.

Offered by the booktender of the Good Story Saloon (August 18, 2013)


No comments:

Post a Comment