“Happy-Go-Lucky”

“I loved this one, and oof, it’s going to be divisive.

What I liked about the last few books David Sedaris has written is that he’s leaned fully into being an odd person. I think it was his last book of essays where he wrote the one about feeding his tumor to a turtle.

When I talked to my mom about it, she wasn’t into it. It was just too bizarre for her.

For me, it was some of his best stuff.

One of the essays in Happy-Go-Lucky starts out with Sedaris saying something about how at one time he might’ve started an essay with something innocuous like, “I woke up and washed my face.” And now he feels like even something like that will result in, “Oh, must be nice to HAVE A FACE!”

There will be a lot of reactions like that to Happy-Go-Lucky. Readers who feel like Sedaris is privileged and mocking various causes and flaunting COVID restrictions. And, yes, all of those things are true.

I was about to write that I don’t want to make excuses for David Sedaris, but I guess I do.

I’ve been a COVID-safe person to a pretty high degree. But honestly, I wasn’t offended by Sedaris’ refusal to go along with some of the rules, for example, having small gatherings in his home. I was listening to the book and thinking, “I should be mad about this,” but I just…wasn’t. If someone close to me was doing this, I would probably ask what the fuck they were doing. But Sedaris talking about doing it in 2020 feels a little like reading an essay where the writer recounts a tale of drunk driving from 20 years ago. I don’t like the behavior, but it just doesn’t arouse offense in me. Besides, just about everyone I know has been incredibly unsafe in one way or another at this point, so there’s no unblackened pots to yell at those kettles anymore.

When Sedaris writes about his sister’s accusations against his father, I think that essay is pretty complicated. I don’t think it’s anything like a takedown of the MeToo movement, I think it’s someone who is saying that in a specific situation in which they will never really know for sure, there are complications. I guess that one just doesn’t arouse bad feelings in me, either. I can see how some people would be upset, but frankly I feel like working through the feelings coming from Sedaris in the form of an essay is a completely appropriate thing to do.

When Sedaris compares the number and scope of BLM marches in New York to trains passing through and catching the westbound protest to head home…I understand on an intellectual level how some people will find that insulting, but I did not.

All of these were things that I could see people being insulted or offended by, and I’m not questioning that offense. I heard some of the lines and thought, “Oh boy, here comes trouble.” But I wasn’t offended. It was just something that I didn’t feel.

I read David Sedaris as someone who considers himself, in some ways, a ridiculous figure. A lot of times in an essay, he’ll describe himself as others must see him, and this is never, ever positive.

It’s almost like David Sedaris is existing in this weird space between the real world and some other world, and those things most people are really passionate about, he can observe them dispassionately and dissect them. He can see the absurdity in things that most people wouldn’t dare associate with absurdity.

There’s a big comedy lesson we can all take from Sedaris: Comedy should be an absurd character in a normal situation, a normal character in an absurd situation, but probably shouldn’t be an absurd character in an absurd situation.

You’ve seen movies like this. When you have an absurd situation, and then all the characters are wacky, it doesn’t work. It’s just not that funny.

When you make the movie Step Brothers, the two wacky characters are in the real world. Or Dumb and Dumber: absurd characters, real world.

You can also have real characters in absurd world. Who Framed Roger Rabbit? works like that. Shaun of the Dead / Hot Fuzz work that way.

But the special, Sedaris Secret Sauce is, to me, that he doesn’t feel the need to explain which way he’s going in a particular piece. Sometimes the situation is absurd. Sometimes Sedaris is absurd. But either way, he doesn’t seem to be as concerned with what people think of him as he seems concerned with getting a laugh and entertaining people.

So when I read a David Sedaris book, the question isn’t whether I’ve read an essay that completely changes my worldview. The questions are: Was I entertained? Did I get a laugh?

The answer to both, in Happy-Go-Lucky, is a Yes. “