Pasta & the Theory of Everything

Mama was an Italian lapsed Catholic who sang while she cooked. It felt so much like a ritual I sometimes wondered whether her from-scratch meals and the songs that accompanied them weren’t a substitute for Sunday Mass. The noodles, though—they always came from a box. Perhaps she bought them because it was the modern thing to do. A time-saving convenience. I only realized this after I bought a pasta machine last December, a whirring, purring dream that efficiently pushes out 200 grams of everything, from capellini to linguine, pappardelle and lasagna, in under fifteen minutes. It seemed my desire to experience something like traditional pasta had made me regress.

The machine would have competed rather than harmonized with my mother’s sonorous mezzo-contralto. But its near-scientific precision? It would have won her over. She was a trained biochemist who transformed our kitchen into the culinary laboratory that was also her refuge. I think of this now, whenever I watch my machine work. Seeing the noodles wriggle from the tiny holes of my machine’s extruder, now, it sometimes seems I’m witnessing the birth of worms. Or maybe even the threads that, according to one branch of theoretical physics, make up all matter.

I think of string theory now because my mother was a scientist. But it didn’t become a recognized area of research until the 1970s, nearly twenty years after she fled biochemistry and disavowed her connection to the laboratory.  On-the-fringe but not quite discredited, string theory suggests that vibrating “strings” create everything from single-celled amoebae to entire galaxies. Proponents further argue that it could unify space and time and everything in it with coextensive physical forces that keep large objects like planets and moons from flying apart. For believers, it’s the concept that explains the entire universe.

Just about the time homemade pasta became a menu staple, this strange theory became my personal food for thought. Like my meals, it’s one of the few things that links me to my mother. And—I like to imagine—to the aunts and grandmothers and grand aunts and great-grands who cooked from scratch,  perhaps setting the noodles they made out to dry in the bright Italian sun. The women against whose way of life my mother rebelled through science; but to which she reluctantly returned as an unhappy housewife. Those strings of egg, water and semolina flour—they’re more than a meal. They are the invisible and complicated strands that remind me of the nurturing my mother could not offer except in the food she prepared.

String theory, of course, is not nearly as linear as the pasta I imagine connects me to my foremothers. Beyond the three dimensions our senses know and the invisible fourth dimension of time, there are as many as 25 separate dimensions. They exist as tiny balls of curled strings  associated with every point in the three-dimensional world we live in and affect all different aspects of that world including time.  Depending on how these cosmic strands move, they can create an infinite variety of effects in all dimensions. These can take the form of everything from invisible “collisions” (as between atomic particles) to large body connections (as between planets and their moons).

The possibilities string theory suggests have inspired others—especially science fiction writers—to play with the related idea that strings can create universes that parallel our own and exist with different versions of ourselves and the lives we know. No wonder the strangeness of string theory appeals. This space of what ifs and alternatives—this is a space I can understand. And yet…it’s not the science that draws me, or even the squirming strands of homemade pasta. It’s the strings themselves. The idea that behind the strings that they are vibrations, expression of pure creativity. The creativity of the universe.

Which takes me back to my mother. To what I now see as creativity. She sang along with Spanish-language songs broadcast from radio stations in Los Angeles; they were the closest thing to her native Italian she had. And they were sad, so full of regret. Those songs, those expressions of the artist my mother also was, reveal more about her than she would ever say or admit. Fearful of looking too far into the future, she lived in the past, in memories of what could have been…had she not come to the States, not met my father, not had children, not left the lab, not obeyed the twists and turns of her own rebel heart.

 So now, when I stand in my kitchen, watching my machine spin the flour and water it will turn to strings of pasta, I picture my mother. Not in our old kitchen, but singing on a stage, her body swaying rhythmically, a rapt audience before her. In another universe, maybe that woman exists; and maybe, she is joyful.

I’d like to think so, anyway.

 

Eying Winter

My optometrist told me I needed bifocals just as I turned forty. Right on schedule, he said. Your eyes will keep changing for a while, but by fifty, they’ll settle down. I winced. The prospect of new glasses didn’t bother me. At age three, I’d been diagnosed with astigmatism and juvenile farsightedness and bore the nickname “four-eyes” well into my teens. What did was the welcome into middle age implied in the optometrist’s words. My lips twisted; I would deal. I had no choice.

TThe prescription changed by small degrees but frequently enough that I needed new bifocals every few years. Fifty came and then fifty-one. And still my eyes continued to change. Then, around my fifty-sixth birthday this past October, I noticed something else besides the routine re-blurring of my world: small rogue particles that flitted across my field of vision. Worried that my eyes had entered an unforeseen phase of decay, I turned to Google and self-diagnosed the problem as floaters.

The vitreous in my eyes had begun to liquefy. Tiny collagen fiber bits were now floating free and clumping together, casting shadows on my retina. And that meant seeing the optometrist again to make sure I didn’t also have a matching set of detached retinas to start 2022. Then I remembered something my father had told me about a cataract diagnosis he received the not long before he died. It’s like looking through a veil. I laughed. Papa had seen his world through gauze. I was seeing mine through fine gray snow.

Perched on his rolling stool, the optometrist tested my eyes. They were healthy, except for the fact I was now in the early stages of cataract disease. Can I stop it? He shook his head. One day, perhaps in the next decade, I would need surgery to stop the white moons of full blown cataract disease from eclipsing my vision. Until then, I could only slow their development by wearing anti-glare lenses, maintaining a healthy lifestyle and wearing sunglasses outdoors. He didn’t need to school me on the benefits of shades. I wore them all the time already, mostly for the pleasure of feeling hip and young and only incidentally for the way they softened sunlight.

Though cataracts can develop at any age, they are one of the more predictable ills of those fifty and older. Live into your eighties and the chance of developing them becomes one in two. But when the disease runs in families, the risk of developing them is higher. My father never knew his birth parents nor did he know the predispositions of the genes he inherited from them. Even if it wasn’t in his DNA, I was convinced he had set himself up for cataracts. He loved the sun as much as I did. But he rarely protected his blue-white eyes from its damaging rays.

Papa didn’t live long enough to tell me what else to expect—blurry vision, decreased ability to focus and see color brightness, increased sensitivity to light—as the disease progressed. But I never forgot that veil. For years, there had been so much in his life he had refused to see. That his second marriage could not be saved. That his body and heart were failing him. That he needed a will to tell his family what to do with his belongings. That veil was his metaphor, the thing that revealed his denial. Snow was mine.

Like my father, I dislike the thought of my own finitude. But I have no veil to shield me from that fact. Instead I have snow—and my still-immature cataracts—to remind me that I am mortal. They clarify rather than obscure, reminding me how much I loved my youth, my former ability to withstand the changes and shocks of life with ease. While also forcing me to look at the truth. The snow is starting to fall; winter is coming. Though not old, I am nearing the precincts of age.

Psychology teaches that bodies often offer clues—physical metaphors—that hold the key to understanding the causes of emotional ailments. Alternative health practitioners take this idea and go one step further, claiming that all illnesses—not just psychological ones—are produced by negative emotions. Louise Hay, for example, famously claimed that everything from colds to cancer had precise metaphysical causes, which she listed in Heal Your Body. Curious, I looked up an online version of Hay’s book. Cataracts, she claims, are the product of an “inability to see ahead with joy,” the belief in a “dark future.”

Papa never tried to look beyond his veil. I think he wanted it that way, just as I believe he died willingly, no longer wanting to fight the weak heart that had nearly failed him so many times before. So yes, he had been unhappy. But would I say that this unhappiness caused his cataracts? Probably not. Or not entirely, anyway. Just as I cannot say that my own too-frequent pessimism did the same to me. I had no empirical proof, only the ambiguity of bodily metaphors.

What I can say is this. The January day I was diagnosed, I did not feel upset. I could not; outside, the day was sunny as a promise. Whatever the cause of my disease I had a chance my father did not. One day my lenses would be replaced and I would once again be able to see with crystalline clarity. All I had to do was embrace the snowfall and my cataracts. And walk into the light.

 

Queer but Not Quite

My elementary schoolmates, boys mostly, used to play a recess game called Smear the Queer. Teachers banned it because it was rough and had no rules. The kids still did it anyway, mobbing up on the small triangular playing field on the southeast corner of my school, elbowing each other as they chattered and giggled. Someone would toss a ball in the air then the free-for-all started. If the ball landed near you, you became the “queer,” the one who picked up the ball and bolted, trying to avoid the hard-boned tackle that would eventually take you down like hunter’s prey.

The name taunted as it warned. Be “queer"“—different or odd, as I understood it then—and other children, the ones with sun-tanned faces and limbs, long hair and surf shop t-shirts, would never let you forget it.  I never played the game; tall and rangy, I was still a girl. More than that, I was the kid with the mother who insisted she had to walk me to and from a school just two blocks down the street. I had no wish to call even more unwanted attention to myself.

Like most childhood games, Smear the Queer taught lessons. Not the best ones, but ones that assured survival. Being part of the group, not sticking out in any way, meant security. Conform and you got by. But the conformity demanded went beyond having the right clothes and being the right level of cool. To conform—especially if you were male—meant being tough. No sissies or gay boys allowed. And if you were that rare tough girl who dared play, the message carried an extra homophobic warning. Play with the boys but don’t risk being taken for one because in life after puberty, girls are for boys and boys for girls.

If I remember that game now, that game I did not play, it is not just because I’ve spent the last ten years excavating my past for a book. Gender and sexuality, the struggle of being a woman who loved a charming, selfish runaway of a father but not the patriarchy that twisted his life and my mother’s, infuse the story I tell. A scholar of women’s literature, I probed stories for how female characters, straight and gay, cisgendered and not, navigated living among the men in whose image their worlds were made. My narrative was no different from the ones I studied and loved.

Some people may read the memoir as the story of a woman with a raging Electra complex…until they see Electra’s queer patina. As an adolescent, I gender-switched with abandon, slipping  into dresses one day and clothes made for boys the next. It mystified my schoolmates but after a while they accepted it as an extension of what they saw as my general strangeness. The too-tall girl with the overprotective mother and foreigner parents who never mingled with their neighbors. All through junior high I crushed on boys and men, mostly my teachers; but in high school, I stumbled into platonic love with another girl who broke my heart with a devastation more pure and complete than any I’d know from almost every boy or man I who would ever enter—then exit—my life.

There was a boyfriend after that beautiful girl, but one who despite the intimacy and the love, sometimes turned my stomach for the way he felt like a brother. Other relationships followed. Yet the compelling connection that would make me want to stay was never there. Even when the emotional component existed, a connection of mind or spirit lacked. Once there was even a lover I did not want who came to me during a time of profound personal crisis. That was by far the worst of all my relationships for the role of victim he needed me to play and that I knowingly accepted because I had nowhere else to turn.

A beta reader told me he’d pegged me as a gender-bent demi-sapio sexual who could desire only when emotional and mental bonds existed. I hate labels but realized he was right. Though cisgendered, I have always been most comfortable presenting as a short-haired, hoodied androgyne in jeans. And when I  desire, it is only when emotional and mental bonds are also present. In other words: I’m fringe straight. A gray-ace living between asexual and sexual, queer and not queer.

Personal traumas, many of them prolonged and co-extensive, have likely played a role in the “graying” of my sexuality, the remaking of Electra. Pain and loss pushed me at different times towards gay male friends and mentors. They were safe, they did not judge, they could laugh at themselves and were just plain fun to be around. And when a twist of fate sent Electra reeling, she remembered those friends and mentors and fled straight into heart of their community where she learned to embrace the maligned rainbow of difference she had carried with her since childhood.

Living in a post-climateric female body has no doubt contributed to my grayness. Simone de Beauvoir openly lamented the loss of desire in her Memoirs of a Dutiful Daughter; other women I admire like Gloria Steinem and Germaine Greer have looked at it with some regret, but always with the idea that, as Steinem has famously said, “what we keep is what we need to support ourselves.” I feel no need as perhaps I did in my youth for the connection that would make me magically whole. To use a term Emma Watson once employed to describe her singleness, I am “self-partnered.”

What gives me hope these days is what I and others, like queer feminist scholar Llliian Faderman in her newest book, Woman: The American History of an Idea, have observed among members of Generation Z. They have been coming of age at a time when the “rules” to gender/sexuality naming (and shaming) longer apply. Like the transmen and women who took American by storm in the 2010s—Janet Mock, Chaz Bono, Caitlyn Jenner and Laverne Cox to name a few—even if they are straight, they don’t like labels either. Instead they prefer to life off the gender/sex grid or by calling themselves genderfluid and/or non-binary. Some identify as LGBTIA +, some do not. Neither male or female, masculine nor feminine, they are simply humans who, in living their truths, smear straight with queer and queer with straight, obliterating boundaries.

 

Starting Over, Starting Out

It wasn’t supposed to be like this at 50. Maybe I'd be single, yes. But not on the verge of starting over while friends were counting the years until retirement.

The professional life I had worked so hard to build in my 20s and 30s ground to a dead halt when I was 39. Poised to finally move into full-time academic respectability, I stumbled. Badly. A pulmonary embolism, followed in quick succession by a nervous breakdown blew everything apart. Forced onto a regimen of meds that fogged my brain and transformed grief into bonafide crazy, I struggled to pick up the pieces and keep teaching. People told me to write and I did. But it made no difference. I didn’t know who I was anymore.

Wheels spinning, I tried different things. I had an affair. I took up photography. I left Tucson for the Eastern Europe to teach English, vowing never to return. When I did it was with everything I owned packed into two suitcases, the rest left out in an alley for the trash man to collect. A friend in Dallas who’d just left his own job took me in. His more practical wife threw me out less than three weeks after I arrived. She couldn’t bear to have me watch as they fought each other to keep the big suburban house and perfect life they couldn’t afford.

An organization dedicated to helping the homeless found me an apartment just east of Oak Lawn, the Dallas gay district. Meanwhile I survived on unemployment until I could get surgery to fix the wrecked body that had traveled back with me from Europe. After that, I found work scratching out a living as a part-time community college English teacher and kept regular appointments with a therapist. I hated every anguished minute.

Fearing another another rendezvous with the street, I started writing. Then I noticed it. The more I wrote, the more I wanted to write. Not just copy for local newspapers, magazines and marketing firms that might earn some bus fare and grocery store money. But personal essays about a life that had taken a series of spectacularly wrong turns. Looking back now, I can see what I didn’t see then: that Dallas was also also the place I finally began to heal.

In late 2012, I approached poet and memoirist Lucy Lang Day, a writer I knew from my work as a Kirkus book reviewer. Calling on boldness I didn't have, I asked her to read sections from a jumble of papers I was daring to call a book. To my surprise, Lucy didn't turn me away. After reading the essays, she said,“You can get these into journals. Good ones even.” I listened to her and did.

That was four years ago. Now I'm in Austin with published essays and a book on hold, watching my profession—and the place I have in it—erode. Full-time jobs are scarce, people say, and the academic market is in crisis. But I'm done with crazy; all I want to do is leave the university like a worthless lover.

So here I am on yet another precipice, writing. Again.