Rachel Lyon on art and ambition in her debut novel, āSelf-Portrait With Boyā
Rachel Lyonās debut novel, āSelf-Portrait With Boy,ā takes place in the Brooklyn of her youth; she grew up in a building not unlike the one where her protagonist, Lu, a young photographer living in a warehouse in 1990s DUMBO, happens to capture a photograph of a small boy falling to his death outside her window.
Lyon studied creative writing at Indiana University; back in her native Brooklyn, she teaches at the Sackett Street Writersā Workshop and Catapult and sends out writing prompts through a weekly newsletter. Her book begins with a kind of prompt: āa simple, tragic accidentā¦ and a photograph.ā Itās what Lu will ā or will not do ā with the serendipitous photo that matters.
āSelf-Portrait With Boy,ā published by Scribner, is a book about a woman faced with an impossible choice. Should she honor her ambition and show the photograph ā the best work sheās ever done ā and potentially launch her career? Or should she keep it hidden, most pressingly from the boyās mother, Kate? The conflict is rich and thorny, raising questions about art and morality, love and betrayal, sacrifice and opportunism and the chance moments that can define a life. The novel wrestles with the nature of art but moves with the speed of a page-turner.
Lyon will read from and discuss āSelf-Portrait With Boyā with Julia Fierro at 7 p.m. Feb. 12 at Book Soup. I spoke with Lyon over the phone about the origin of imagery, Woody Allen and Louis C.K., and whatās worth sacrificing in the name of art. Our conversation has been edited.
Where did the image of the boy falling past the window come from?
In the building where I grew up between the ages of 4 and 10, there was a similar tragedy. I didnāt really know about it at the time because I was so young; I found out about it later. I was thinking about how we freeze moments like that in memory, and in the book, I wanted to freeze it physically. Photography was the natural next step.
What was it like teasing the action of a novel out of a single photograph?
It was a process of stretching a story out of that still-frozen moment. In a way, itās a one-gesture novel; I was worried at points that I wasnāt succeeding at keeping up the suspense, because itās such a simple plot. But I think it did end up being the natural progression of that moment. She takes the picture, and then the question remains, until itās answered: Is she going to tell Kate about it or not?
So much turns on that question. When another character, quoting Aristotle, asks Lu about the relationship between art and morality, she says she doesnāt believe in one. Where do you stand?
I really want the reader to ask that question of themselves. Personally, I feel like itās not my question to answer. Iām not a philosopher, I donāt feel equipped to agree or disagree with Aristotle. I do think that to the extent that Lu is behaving in a morally questionable way, itās more about her relationships than it is about the work itself. Sheās being cowardly ā and ambitious. Itās not a morality tale.
We donāt always see the ambition of female characters in this context, where the conflict lies in whether Lu should advance her career at the expense of a friendship.
I think thatās true. Did you read Claire Dedererās piece āWhat Do We Do With the Art of Monstrous Men?ā? She asks that question, and then she sort of flips it around and discusses the double standard that women are held to. While a male artist is called monstrous when he commits acts of sexual violence, a female artist is called monstrous when she spends more time working than with her children.
I think Lu feels that really strongly, really acutely. She does not want to be silenced. The moments when she overcomes it ā like when sheās harassing the gallery to see her work ā they can feel very uncomfortable to the reader. A friend of mine told me he had to put the book down in that scene because he was so uncomfortable, but it wouldnāt feel as uncomfortable if she was a male artist. Because women are expected to behave a certain way. I think if weāre going to be freer artists and freer people, we have to separate art from the person across the board ā art by men and by women.
We should separate art from the artist?
We have to look at it critically, of course. The movie āManhattanā takes on a whole new meaning if you know about Woody Allen the person, but it doesnāt stop existing. Louis C.K.ās projects got canceled ā I think thatās appropriate ā and although I think we should look at his work in a different light, I donāt think we should erase it. And I donāt think it changes the quality of it, honestly. I think it should change our conversation about him as a person.
Have you had to make sacrifices for your work?
Iāve had to sacrifice a certain amount of ego. It takes a lot fearlessness to put your work out there, and what I mean by fearlessness is that you have to be willing to be a bit of a fool. The worst fear of all, at least for me, is the fear of seeming foolish, and when I was younger, that got in my way. I silenced myself and tried to write perfect work instead of writing the work that was messier and more myself. Iāve also sacrificed money. I canāt necessarily work full time and devote as much time to my work as Iād like to, so thereās that.
Photography is a technical art. What kind of research did you do in order to write about it credibly?
There are a couple photographers that I spoke to, and I got on the phone with somebody who works at the printing lab Duggal, where Lu actually goes in the novel. I asked a lot of annoying questions ā really physical questions ā like, āWhat kind of chemicals would she use? What kind of camera would it be reasonable to expect her to have, given the poverty she comes from, the age she is, the number of years sheās been practicing?ā The guy at Duggal compared the enlarger they had back then with a cannon, which ended up in the book. It was a great image, and it came straight from him.
I took photography classes in college, but Iām a little too impatient for it. Lu is this dogged, focused artist, but I never enjoyed waiting around for something to develop.
I think most people tend to think of photography as a more immediate art than the slow food of writing. It sounds like you feel the opposite?
The novel is a long-term project, but itās mutable and flexible over time. You spend so many days and weeks and months and years wrestling with the manuscript that it really feels like an ongoing experience. A photo, once you take it, thatās it; if you didnāt get a great shot, itās not a great photo.
Lu creates a quilt out of photographs, which inspired the cover of the book. As a writer, what was it like coming up with ideas for other mediums?
It was really fun coming up with all of these different art projects that Iām never going to do. (Laughs.) Iād love to devote time and energy to them, but Iām just not going to.
Thereās a passage in which Lu compares herself to Francesca Woodman and Robert Mapplethorpe. In your best writing moments, who do you secretly compare yourself to?
Oh, my God, I donāt know. I donāt know if I do that.
Never?
Itās whatever I happen to be reading at the moment. Iād love to write with the humor and empathy of George Saunders, the sentences of Cormac McCarthy, the brevity and wit of Lydia Davis, the intellectual capacity of Zadie Smith and the harsh intelligence of Roxane Gay. I just feel really privileged to have a seat at the table right now.
Sign up for our Book Club newsletter
Get the latest news, events and more from the Los Angeles Times Book Club, and help us get L.A. reading and talking.
You may occasionally receive promotional content from the Los Angeles Times.