The Stochastic Man

32

Mardikian found me a lawyer. He was Jason Komurjian — another Armenian, of course, one of the partners in Mardikian’s own firm, the divorce specialist, a great fullback of a man with oddly sad little eyes set close together within a massive swarthy slab of a face. He was a college classmate of Haig’s, and therefore must have been about my own age, but he seemed older, much older, ageless, a patriarch who had taken upon himself the traumas of thousands of contumacious spouses. His features were youthful, his aura was ancient.

We conferred in his office on the ninety-fifth floor of the Martin Luther King Building, a dark incense-ridden office almost rivaling Bob Lombroso’s for pomp and circumstance, a place as rich and heavy in ornamentation as the imperial chapel of a Byzantine cathedral. “Divorce,” Komurjian said dreamily, “you wish to obtain a divorce, yes, to terminate, yes, a final parting,” rotating the concept in the vast vaulted arenas of his consciousness as though it were some fine point of theology, as though we were talking about the consubstantiality of the Father and Son or the doctrine of the apostolic succession. “Yes, it should be possible to obtain that for you. You live separately now?”

“Not yet.”

He looked displeased. His heavy lips sagged, his beefy face took on a deeper hue. “This must be done,” he said. “Continued cohabitation endangers the plausibility of any suit for termination of matrimony. Even today, even today. Establish separate lodgings. Establish separate financial conduits. Demonstrate your purposes, my friend. Eh?” He reached for an ornate jeweled crucifix on his desk, a thing of rubies and emeralds, and played with it, running thick fingers over its sleek well-worn surface, and for a time he was lost in his own ruminations. I imagined the tones of an unseen organ, I saw a procession of bedecked and bearded priests strolling through the choirs of his mind. I could almost hear him muttering to himself in Latin, not church Latin but a lawyer Latin, a litany of platitudes. Magna est vis consuetudinis, falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus, eadem sed aliter, res ipsa loquiter. Huius huius huius, hunc haec hoc. He looked up, spearing me with an unexpectedly intent stare. “Grounds?”

“No, not that kind of divorce. We just want to break it up, to go our individual ways, a simple termination.”

“Of course you’ve discussed this with Mrs. Nichols and come to a preliminary understanding.”

I reddened. “Ah — not yet,” I said, uneasy.

Komurjian plainly disapproved. “You must introduce the subject at some point, you realize. Presumably her reaction will be tranquil. Then her lawyer and I will meet and the thing will be done.” He reached for a memo belt. “As for division of property—”

“She can have whatever she wants.”

“ Whatever?” He sounded amazed.

“I don’t want a hassle with her over anything.”

Komurjian spread his hands before me on the desk. He wore more rings even than Lombroso. These Levantines, these luxurious Levantines! “What if she demands everything?” he asked. “All the assets in common? You yield without contest?”

“She won’t do that.”

“Is she not of allegiance to the Transit Creed?”

Startled, I said, “How do you know that?”

“Haig and I have discussed the case, you must realize.”

“I see.”

“And Transit people are unpredictable.”

I managed a choked laugh. “Yes. Very.”

“She might whimsically ask for all the assets,” Komurjian said.

“Or whimsically ask for none.”

“Or none, true. One never knows. Are you instructing me to accept whatever position she takes?”

“Let’s wait and see,” I said. “She’s basically a reasonable person, I think. It’s my feeling that she won’t make any unusual demand about division of property.”

“And settlement of income?” the lawyer asked. “She will want no continuing payments from you?” You have a standard two-group contract, yes?”

“Yes. Termination ends all financial responsibility.”

Komurjian began to hum, very quietly, almost beneath my threshold of hearing. Almost. How routine all this must seem to him, this severing of sacramental unions! “Then there should be no problems, yes? But you must announce your intentions to your wife, Mr. Nichols, before we go further.”

Which I did. Sundara was now so busy with her manifold Transit activities — her process sessions, her volatility circles, her ego-decay exercises, her missionary duties, and all the rest — that close to a week passed before I was able to have a quiet word with her at home. By then I had rehearsed the whole thing in my head a thousand times, so that the lines were worn like tracks; if ever there was an instance of following the script, this would be it. But would she give me the right cues?

Almost apologetically, as though it were an intrusion on her privacy for me to request the privilege of a conversation with her, I said early one evening that I wanted to talk to her about something important, and then I told her, as I had so often heard myself telling her, that I was going to get a divorce. Saying it, I understood something of what it must be like, for Carvajal to see, because I had lived this scene so often in imagination that it already felt like an event of the past to me.

Sundara regarded me thoughtfully, saying nothing, displaying neither surprise nor annoyance nor hostility nor enthusiasm nor dismay nor despair.

Her silence baffled me.

I said, eventually, “I’ve hired Jason Komurjian as my lawyer. One of Mardikian’s partners. He’ll sit down with your lawyer, when you’ve got one, and they’ll work everything out. I want this to be a civilized parting of the ways, Sundara.”

She smiled. Mona Lisa of Bombay.

“You don’t have anything to say?” I asked.

“Not really.”

“Is divorce such a trifle to you?”

“Divorce and marriage are aspects of the same illusion, my love.”

“This world seems more real to me than it does to you, I think. That’s one reason why it doesn’t appear to be a good idea for us to go on living together.”

She said, “Will there be a messy fight about dividing the things we own?”

“I told you I want this to be a civilized parting of the ways.”

“Good. So do I.”

The ease with which she was accepting all this dumb-founded me. We had been so badly out of touch with each other recently that we had never even discussed the growing failures of communication between us; but there are many marriages that go on like that for centuries, placidly drifting, no one caring to rock the boat. Now I was preparing to sink the boat, and she had no comment. Eight years of living together; suddenly I call in the lawyers; Sundara has no comment. Her imperturbability was a measure of the change Transit had worked in her, I decided.

“Do all Transit people accept great upheavals in their lives so casually?” I asked.

“Is this a great upheaval?”

“It seems like one to me.”

“To me it seems only the ratifying of a decision made a long time ago.”

“It’s been a bad time,” I admitted. “But even at the worst of it I always kept telling myself it’s just a phase, it’s a passing thing, every marriage goes through it, we’ll get back together eventually.”

As I spoke, I found myself convincing myself that all that was still true, that Sundara and I could still work out a continuing relationship like the basically reasonable human beings we were. And yet here I was asking her to hire a lawyer. I remembered Carvajal telling me, You’ve lost her, with inexorable finality in his voice. But he had been speaking of the future, not the past.

She said, “Now you think it’s hopeless, is that it? What made you change your mind?”

“Well?”

“ Didyou change your mind?”

I said nothing.

“I don’t think you really want a divorce, Lew.”

“I do,” I said hoarsely.

“So you say.”

“I’m not asking you to read my mind, Sundara. Just to go along with the legal rigmarole we have to follow in order to be free to live our separate lives.”

“You don’t want a divorce, but yet you do. How strange, Lew. An attitude like that is a perfect Transit situation, you know, what we call a keying point, a situation where you hold opposing positions simultaneously and try to reconcile them. There are three possible outcomes of that. Are you interested in hearing this? One possibility is schizophrenia. One is self-deception, as when you pretend to embrace both alternatives but really don’t. And the third is the condition of illumination known in Transit as—”

“Please, Sundara.”

“I thought you were interested.”

“I guess I’m not.”

She studied me for a long moment. Then she smiled. “This divorce business is connected somehow with your gift of precognition, isn’t it? You don’t really want a divorce now, even though we aren’t getting along very well, but you nevertheless think you ought to start arranging a divorce, because you’ve had a hunch that sometime in the near future you’re going to have one, and — Isn’t that right, Lew? Come on: tell me the truth. I won’t be angry.”

“You aren’t far off the mark,” I said.

“I thought not. Well, what shall we do?”

“Work out terms of a separation,” I replied grimly. “Hire a lawyer, Sundara.”

“And if I don’t?”

“You mean you’ll contest it?”

“I never said that. I simply don’t want to deal through a lawyer. Let’s handle it ourselves, Lew. Like civilized human beings.”

“I’ll have to check with Komurjian about that. That way may be civilized, but it may not be smart.”

“Do you think I’ll cheat you?”

“I don’t think anything any more.”

She walked up to me. Her eyes glowed; her body radiated a throbbing sensuality. I was helpless before her. She could have had anything from me. Leaning forward, Sundara kissed the tip of my nose and said huskily, stagily, “If you want a divorce, darling, you can have your divorce. Whatever you want. I won’t stand in the way. I want you to be happy. I love you, you know.” She smiled wickedly. Oh, that Transit mischief! “Whatever you want,” she said.