Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Simon Fox-Mella's avatar

This short story is an accomplished and quietly devastating meditation on language, inheritance and the uneasy closeness between personal memory and geopolitical trauma. It moves with confidence between domestic, historical, sensuous and elegiac registers, without losing its emotional centre. It is literary fiction that understands restraint as both a moral and an aesthetic choice.

The story’s governing phrase, “Looks like Beirut in here,” arrives with clear self-awareness. At first, it is a throwaway idiom, a careless inheritance from family speech. The narrator does not excuse this language; the story patiently interrogates it. What begins as shorthand for mess and disorder is stripped of easy metaphor and returned to lived reality. This change is one of the piece’s great achievements. The phrase becomes a refrain whose meaning deepens each time it returns, until it is no longer casual or flippant, but almost unbearable in its layered resonance.

Structurally, the story is elegant. It unfolds along three interwoven timelines, childhood ignorance mediated by television, adult intimacy with Beirut through scholarly labour, and present grief after the father’s death. These movements are fluid and well judged, never clumsily signposted and never confusing. The voice carries us across decades, anchored by sensorial detail rather than strict chronology. This is the mark of a writer who trusts the reader.

Beirut is rendered with exceptional care. It is not romanticised, and it is not turned into spectacle. It is experienced through temperature, colour, fatigue, danger, taste and labour. The passages on Hamra’s streets, the museum basement, ERWs and the rapid return of daily life after explosions are precise without being voyeuristic. The narrator’s professional role is particularly striking, tending Phoenician sarcophagi while the modern city repeatedly fractures above ground. The metaphor is subtle and powerful, history preserved below while the present destroys and rebuilds itself.

The father is drawn sparingly and effectively. He exists mainly through voice and habit, which feels exactly right. His absence is felt not through sentimentality, but through the material ordeal of clearing a hoarded home. Grief described as “dust or ash” is quietly devastating, and the refusal to utter his old phrase in the Portsmouth maisonette is one of the story’s most honest moments. Language, here, is both inheritance and taboo.

The final scene at the airport is superbly handled. The chaos of toppled luggage mirrors the earlier imagery of rubble without heavy symbolism. When the brother finally speaks the phrase aloud, it lands as release rather than irony. The laughter that follows, messy, public and inappropriate, is a true representation of grief. It accepts that mourning is not only solemnity, but rupture, hysteria and sudden, disorienting joy.

The story offers rich ground for discussion, metaphor and inherited language, the postcolonial gaze, and the personal costs of historical shorthand.

No posts

Ready for more?