Kathy Wang's latest novel ponders satisfaction, and how to achieve it in our absurd modern world
Advertisement
That kind of droll, deadpan aperçu characterizes Wang's prose, as well as (in close third-person point of view) Joan's reasoning. Her parents are, in fact, hella mean. Wang continues blithely: '... and she was married for only six weeks before she stabbed her husband. The year was 1975.'
Get Starting Point
A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday.
Enter Email
Sign Up
Awake now? With that bold fillip we start to grasp Joan's uncanny nature — both demure and shockingly brave — and Wang's smooth control of a bucking-bronco of a story, as we enter the awareness of a young Asian woman, transplanted from scarcity, facing the triple-whammy of American luxury, mores, and prejudices.
Advertisement
When Joan next marries Bill, a wealthy older white man, she inherits his lush world of (Northern California-based) affluence — his fabulous designer home — and his selfish, quarrelsome extended family, including spoiled grown twins. (We want to jump into some scenes and shout at all of them.) Joan manages the transition with resourceful wit and courage — even if she's often baffled. Take the lonely anguish of dinner party small talk, 'lobbing tedious little bombs back and forth indefinitely.'
And then, the thesis: 'Oh, how did people do any of this? Sometimes Joan wished there was a place she could visit to feel less alone: a restaurant with very friendly servers where she might order a bowl of spaghetti and casually surrender her insecurities. When she was little, she used to daydream of a place she named in her head the Satisfaction Cafe ... not stretched to fantastic outcomes but ... a reasonable amount of happiness.'
There — and in other remarkable passages — beats this work's eloquent heart: the perpetual riddle of universal loneliness, and Joan's consuming vision to remedy that. '[A] global deficit in satisfaction ... obsessed Joan.' Wang gives generous thought to the formula. 'Joan had discovered this was what people wanted, to be asked about themselves. … As time passed, [she] became increasingly convinced of a serious epidemic of lack of attention in the world.'
Joan raises young children: 'What an incredible experience parenting was: all the ways one could suffer.' She endures a cavalcade of ordeals and losses — some bizarre; many darkly funny. Yet alert readers will recognize that life regularly delivers exactly such ironies and absurd insults, one flowing into the next naturally as a tinkling creek. Against practical wisdom and others' attitudes, Joan sets about creating and fine-tuning her cherished cafe, where countless odd souls find consolation and connection — including, ultimately, Joan herself.
Advertisement
Every detail mesmerizes: food (oh, the food!), landscapes, architecture, clothing, personalities, and a steady, sly, Austenian dissection of various social specimens. ''I hate [my husband],'' one bored dinner guest tells Joan. ''He's awfully cheap.' A pear-shaped diamond gleamed from her left ring finger. Her right hand featured a blue sapphire the size of a gumball, which mirrored her necklace and earrings.'
The more we read the more we crave. Wang flawlessly enters the minds and orbits of other principals: Joan's children; even her lawyer. All of them age together — time's movement seamless yet swift. Best, Wang compassionately explores the morphing mind-sets of aging. In late life, Joan reflects on a former lover (now a kind friend) who's become an old man: 'Sometimes there were people ... who [might have been a bigger] part of your life ... but it wasn't meant to be, and you had only that limited share. [When Joan thought of] all the things she would never experience because she was past that stage ... she would have to go and sit by herself for a while.'
Toward the novel's close, Joan recalls a period of driving around, 'through extended stretches of dusty roads, little towns, and lone farmhouses, and [finding] herself overcome by all these worlds she'd never know. She'd had the urge many times to pull over and knock on a door. Who are you inside? She wanted to ask. We'd never meet otherwise, isn't that a shame? … [B]y building the cafe, she had knocked on the door of the universe.'
Advertisement
For my money, that passage alone may be worth the candle. But every single one of the novel's pages pay that quality of sparkling attention, affording readers effortless pleasure — like that of a long, delicious meal alongside a roster of eccentric, seductive, incorrigible guests. Bon appetit.
THE SATISFACTION CAFÉ
By Kathy Wang
Scribner, 352 pages, $27.99
Joan Frank's latest books are '
' and '
.' Her recent novella, 'Troldhaugen,' appears in the online literary journal 'Failbetter.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Los Angeles Times
44 minutes ago
- Los Angeles Times
In-N-Out sues YouTuber over fake employee prank video
In-N-Out Burger has filed a lawsuit against a YouTube personality for allegedly impersonating a company employee, filming customers without their consent and posting videos sharing false and misleading information about the popular California burger chain. The federal lawsuit, filed in Santa Ana on June 20, stems from a video Bryan Arnett posted to his YouTube channel on April 25. In the now-private video, Arnett posed as an In-N-Out employee at multiple Southern California locations while the chain's restaurants were closed for Easter Sunday. Wearing the restaurant's signature uniform — a white T-shirt, red apron and paper hat — Arnett pretended to take drive-thru orders from unsuspecting customers. The video showed him offering fake menus, making inappropriate comments and asking uncomfortable personal questions. In one clip of the video posted to TikTok, Arnett and an accomplice staged a scene where they pretended that a cockroach was found in a meal, with Arnett claiming the location was experiencing 'a pretty bad cockroach problem' that week. Another clip captured him asking a customer if they would be interested in sleeping with his wife while he watched. According to the lawsuit, Arnett also made false statements suggesting the chain served food 'doggy style' and that a 'manager' had put his 'feet in the lettuce' served to customers. This isn't Arnett's first run-in with In-N-Out management. He was previously removed from locations for trying to pay for strangers' orders with pennies and for posting fake 'employee of the month' plaques featuring his own photo in dining areas. The content creator, who has built a following on YouTube and Instagram through videos of himself breaking social norms, recently posted a vlog showing him living inside a Planet Fitness gym to see how long he could stay before being ejected. In-N-Out, which operates 421 locations across the United States — 283 of them in California — has consistently defended its family-oriented brand reputation. The Irvine-based (as of now) company pursued legal action against another YouTuber for similar pranks in 2018. The chain is also known for hosting international pop-ups as a strategy to maintain its global trademarks and protect its brand identity worldwide. It has previously sued copycat restaurants in Utah, Mexico and Australia for trademark infringement. 'In-N-Out cares deeply about its customers, the goodwill those customers have for its brand, and the Associates who work tirelessly to uphold that brand by their commitment to ensuring every customer has a positive experience,' the lawsuit states. In a YouTube video posted Monday, Arnett responded to the legal action with apparent indifference. 'It'll probably be annoying or whatever, but whatever's gonna happen is gonna happen,' he said. The video has since been made private. Arnett did not immediately respond to requests for comment about the lawsuit.
Los Angeles Times
an hour ago
- Los Angeles Times
‘Queer Lens' is the provocative photography show only the Getty would be brave enough to stage
'Queer Lens: A History of Photography' is a sprawling survey of more than 270 works from the last two centuries that looks at the ways cameras transformed the expression of gender and sexuality. Scores of artists as well-known as Berenice Abbott, Anthony Friedkin, Robert Mapplethorpe, Man Ray and Edmund Teske hang with more than a dozen unknowns. The Getty Museum's groundbreaking Pride Month show is provocative and important, and the timing packs a wallop. The exhibition has been in the works for years (since 2020), but coincidentally, it opens during a state of national emergency. The ACLU is tracking 597 anti-LGBTQ+ bills in state legislatures across the U.S., including six in California. (Texas leads the hate-pack, with 88.) Most won't pass. All, however, mean to intimidate just by being introduced. The show conjures an oppressive frame of social reference again and again. Often it is subtle. Take the simple black-and-white photo booth snapshot in which a kissing couple of twentysomething young men was memorialized around 1953 by Canadian-born American artist Joseph John Bertrund Belanger. Their mouths smashed together, one man looks with a heavy-lidded gaze at the other, his eyes shut but his open hand raised, fingers brushing his beloved's throat. Tight framing in the contained privacy of a photo booth underlines an image of passionate intimacy. However, imagine if they were to step outside the curtain and into Vancouver's Playland Amusement Park, where the picture was made, for the very same kiss. They would face possible arrest and imprisonment for 'gross indecency' under the country's antigay criminal code. (That law wasn't lifted until 1969.) Belanger was a World War II veteran who fought with ordinary distinction against a fascist German regime rampaging across Europe — one that launched its reign of terror with the 1933 burning of a homosexual's library on a Berlin public square. In 1944, the fellow pilot with whom Belanger had a private wartime romance was killed in combat. This modest postwar photograph resounds because it pictures the photo booth as a closet. Was that the artist's intention in making it? We don't know, but the result is compelling because it is at once profoundly personal, which is obvious from the deep kiss, while extremely exotic, since queer images like this are rarely seen, never mind celebrated. That bracing fusion recurs in gallery after gallery. The vivifying dichotomy is even announced in advance. Climb the stairs in front of the museum, its risers smartly painted as a cheerful rainbow flag that visually sets the art museum atop a queer pedestal, and you'll encounter the inviting billboard for 'Queer Lens.' Reproduced is a publicity image by Frederick Spalding, a self-taught British portrait photographer. Fanny and Stella, middle-class lovelies in hoop skirts, engage in a warm embrace. The couple, otherwise known as Thomas Ernest Boulton and Frederick William Park, appeared on the London stage — and often out and about in public — in snazzy women's attire. The photograph dates from about 1870. Today, when drag queens and trans people, especially women, are innocent targets of hysterical conservative attacks as some new liberal phenomenon signaling imminent social collapse, a 155-year-old photograph casts a witty and jaundiced eye on the stubbornness of irrational anti-queer hate. Good on the Getty for not mincing visual words. Getty curator Paul Martineau has organized 'Queer Lens' in nine chronological sections. (His catalog, compiled with historian Ryan Linkof, is very good.) Each one is pegged to social conditions around LGBTQ+ life, principally in the United States and Europe. 'The Pansy Craze,' for example, takes note of pre-Prohibition-era underground clubs, often gay, where drag and other performers gained local fame, in addition to bohemian European establishments, some with a vibrant public face. Show business is prominent in Baron Adolph de Meyer's atmospheric portraits of entertainer (and later spy) Josephine Baker and Carl Van Vechten's Bessie Smith, empress of the blues, resplendent behind a huge, feathered fan. Buoyant members of a Harlem social club of drag kings and queens posed for James Van Der Zee, while Brassaï cast his quietly voyeuristic eye on a relaxed and tender lesbian couple enjoying a Paris nightclub. Artist and designer Cecil Beaton performed a coy fashion magazine pose in full drag, his slender form crowned by an enormous picture hat that transforms him into something approaching a human flower, photographed by the duo David James Scott and Edgar Wilkinson. Such portraits create a surprisingly revealing context for Surrealist Man Ray's 'Rrose Sélavy,' the famous photographs of Dada artist Marcel Duchamp in drag, bundled up in a cloche hat and fur-collared coat, eyeliner carefully smudged and lip gloss crisp. Two straight male artists are scrambling establishment gender, but here it's less a singular statement than part of a larger cultural phenomenon. Art and science are analytical tools in some photographs, especially those of nudes. (The show includes considerable nudity, mostly male.) Two images from about 1860 are early textbook cases. In one, photography pioneer Félix Nadar pictured an intersex person from the neck down. Careful cropping maintains privacy for clinical study. In the other, Gaudenzio Marconi helped to launch what would become a standard trope over a century's time for using an artistic pedigree to legitimize homoerotic images. With a flesh-and-blood male model, his picture replicates the famous, much-admired Hellenistic marble sculpture known as the 'Barberini Faun,' a muscled god with splayed legs, dredged up during the Renaissance from a moat below Rome's Castel Sant'Angelo. Strict gender separation common to early 19th century social structures underwent unexpected transformation after the binaries of heterosexual and homosexual were invented in 1869. Karl Maria Kertbeny, an apparently closeted Hungarian journalist, who was living in Berlin, coined the two terms barely a generation after the camera's 1839 invention. The show's first image is even earlier. A small cut paper silhouette from 1810 shows Sylvia Drake and Charity Bryant gazing into each other's eyes, their profiles framed in entwined strands of their hair. The artist is unknown. But silhouettes like this are evoked by the phrase 'the art of fixing a shadow,' which is how William Henry Fox Talbot described his earthshaking invention of the negative-positive process that made photographs possible. The lesbian silhouette's inclusion reminds that same-sex love predates cameras and the modern era, while implying that things were about to change. And change they have, for good and ill. These days, the Getty is probably the only major art museum in America that could open an exhibition like 'Queer Lens.' Others wouldn't dare. Some smaller institutions would, like the young Chicago exhibition space Wrightwood 659, where the large international loan exhibition 'The First Homosexuals: The Birth of a New Identity, 1869-1939' is currently on view. (Curator Jonathan D. Katz, a respected scholar, has said that four out of five of his requests to museums and private collectors for loans to the show were denied, and no American museum would accept the show for a tour, even when offered for free.) Meanwhile across town, the mainstream Art Institute of Chicago is about to unveil 'Gustave Caillebotte: Painting His World,' a traveling exhibition virtually identical to the one already seen in Paris and Los Angeles, where it was notably titled 'Gustave Caillebotte: Painting Men.' The show explores the late-19th century artist's homosocial themes, distinctive for Impressionism, whose common human subjects were typically women and girls. A spokesperson at the Art Institute of Chicago says the name change, made long before the show's Paris debut, is simply meant to reflect 'Caillebotte's full lived experience and daily life.' Maybe, but all three prior Caillebotte retrospectives at American museums since 1976 have already done that. In the current repressive climate, the explanation is frankly unconvincing. The Getty has the prestige and immense financial resources to ignore thuggish political attacks on queer people — and on the arts — which now gush from various statehouses and, most dangerously, Washington's halls of government. An absurd, now notorious New York Times front-page story in 2016 claiming presidential candidate Donald J. Trump would be 'the most gay-friendly Republican nominee for president ever' has been disproved by what is widely considered to be the most vicious such administration in American history. It surpasses even the 1980s Reagan Administration, recalled in '$3 Bill,' a companion Getty Research Institute show also on view. A furious 1987 Donald Moffett poster, dedicated to Gay Men's Health Crisis Director Diego Lopez, juxtaposes the AIDS-indifferent Hollywood president, smirking vapidly above the phrase, 'He kills me,' next to a screaming orange bullseye. '$3 Bill' is a rather jumbled amalgam of minor artworks, documents (books, fliers, pamphlets, magazines, etc.) and ephemera assembled by GRI curator Pietro Rigolo, meant to compile evidence of contemporary queer lives. Its most affecting moments reference the AIDS epidemic's abject cruelty. Powerful forces of oppression are of course still at play. The day after 'Queer Lens' opened, the Supreme Court ruled that individual states may ban healthcare for minors based on the identity of the patient asking for it: cisgender, yes; transgender, no — parents and doctors be damned. The blatantly bigoted decision will someday be overturned, but not without inflicting enormous pain in the interim. A few features of 'Queer Lens' are surprising. A lone film projection — Andy Warhol's short movie 'Blow Job,' in which an actor's face performs the role of fellatio recipient — seems out of place, when many other queer films could as easily be included. In fact, like Marconi using the classical Barberini faun sculpture as a high-art pretense to legitimize ogling male nudity in a photograph, Warhol used ink and acrylic paint as 'makeup' to legitimize the mass media photographs he appropriated for paintings. Since almost all of Warhol's classic 1960s silkscreen works are best described as photographs in painting drag, including one would have been splendid. Omissions are inevitable. (The show makes no claim to being encyclopedic.) Luis Medina, who chronicled Chicago's queer scene in the 1970s, and Jeff Burton, who photographed the almost surreal margins of the huge 1990s pornography industry in the suburban San Fernando Valley, are especially missed. Through no fault of its own, 'Queer Lens' peters out a bit at the end, when the final section declares 'The Future is Queer' in 18 works from the last decade. (Happily, two-thirds are from Getty's own collection.) The world got along for thousands of years without the enforced binaries of heterosexual and homosexual, and in recent decades the fences erected around that century-old split have been coming down. The simultaneous 21st century digital revolution is dramatically changing the contextual terms of the image game, as surely as the analog camera did after 1839. Given that a digital camera is now in most every pocket, queer photography's bracing fusion of the personal and the exotic is pretty threadbare, since exoticism no longer applies to being queer in American life. It simply is what it is. We can be grateful for the shift. And we can also be grateful pictures will continue to shape and affirm queer existence, as pictures always have the capacity to do.
Los Angeles Times
3 hours ago
- Los Angeles Times
Meghan McCain spins interview with Usha Vance into pregnancy reveal: She knows it was ‘weird' too
Meghan McCain knew it would be odd to unveil her latest pregnancy during a sit-down interview with a White House figure. She went for it anyway. The 40-year-old TV personality, formerly of 'The View' and daughter of late Republican Sen. John McCain, turned the spotlight on herself during a conversation with Second Lady Usha Vance, revealing on Tuesday that she is expecting a baby boy as her third child. 'I wanted to let you in on something that is private that I haven't talked about publicly yet,' McCain tells Vance in a social media clip promoting their conversation, which is set to publish in full on Wednesday. McCain praises Vance and husband Vice President JD Vance for 'how you incorporate your children in your life in so many ways' before dropping her news: 'I am just entering my second trimester. I am pregnant with my third.' The Second Lady offers a quick congratulations to the provocative conservative panelist. McCain continues: 'I know this is a weird way to announce it but ... I'm very nervous about — it's a boy. I'm very nervous about having a boy. And I'm very nervous about having three children. Very.' The media personality, after voicing her concerns and referencing supposed 'horrible data' about raising three children, finally offers Vance a prompt, though it's self-serving. 'I wanted to know if you could share with me and women in American why having three kids is good,' McCain says, 'how you manage three kids, and any advice for boy moms.' The Second Lady and Vice President Vance share three young children: sons Ewan and Vivek, and daughter Mirabel. McCain, in addition to her incoming son, shares two young daughters, Liberty and Clover, with her husband, TV commentator Ben Domenech. In short, Vance told McCain that her experience raising three kids includes the children forming their own 'pack' and the eldest child taking on responsibility. Vance also informed McCain that she thinks the development timeline between boys and girls is 'really different.' Before McCain broke the news of her pregnancy, she spoke on Instagram about having the 'distinct privilege' of conducting the Second Lady's 'first ever long form interview on camera.' McCain said in her caption, 'we get into it all,' and dubbed Usha Vance an 'iconic American figure.'
