OPINIONS & NOTESbetween the th<strong>in</strong>g itself and the artisticapproximation to it becomes a problem... . All this will sound dryly academic,and I know you will f<strong>in</strong>d yourself resist<strong>in</strong>git vigorously, but I write out <strong>of</strong> a convictionthat I can th<strong>in</strong>k <strong>of</strong> no extended work<strong>of</strong> art that has survived to become a permanentpart <strong>of</strong> the world's literature thatdoes not have a challeng<strong>in</strong>g appeal to them<strong>in</strong>d. Of course, this has to be meldedwith feel<strong>in</strong>g and emotion ; a creative writerdoes not th<strong>in</strong>k like a philosopher, butthe m<strong>in</strong>d is always conspicuously <strong>in</strong>volved.What I'm impressed by <strong>in</strong> your lettersare your h<strong>in</strong>ts concern<strong>in</strong>g the "fairly mysticalnotion that 'thought' is physical."My po<strong>in</strong>t is that, if genu<strong>in</strong>e, it rema<strong>in</strong>srecognizable as thought, and provokesfurther thought. Another <strong>of</strong> the shibboleths<strong>of</strong> our age that makes it a difficultage for major art is the simple-m<strong>in</strong>dednotion that art is "self-expression" — theopen<strong>in</strong>g <strong>of</strong> the floodgates and all thatcrap — that there is a democracy <strong>of</strong> feel<strong>in</strong>gby which everyone's reactions are asvalid and <strong>in</strong>terest<strong>in</strong>g as everyone else's.And I know <strong>in</strong> my bowels (as D. H. Lawrencesuggested, <strong>in</strong> "<strong>in</strong>ner-light" Puritanfashion, on another occasion) that it isfalse. To challenge it is to be called anelitist, but I no longer care. Art is an elitistactivity, so why should we be embarrassedabout the label? . . .PAYERLE то KEITH, 6 & 7 November 1989. . . You say I seem defensive regard<strong>in</strong>g"the academic," and I am. It is not mymétier, and yet I feel subject to it as awriter <strong>in</strong> a way similar to my subjugationto the vagaries <strong>of</strong> publish<strong>in</strong>g. Publish<strong>in</strong>gsuffers from a cynicism which you havenever betrayed, and which I strongly believeyou are <strong>in</strong>capable <strong>of</strong> harbour<strong>in</strong>g.But. Your letter I feel gives me unlookedforjustification <strong>in</strong> my defensiveness.. . . Sam is a real man made <strong>of</strong> realwords. That is an <strong>in</strong>spir<strong>in</strong>g paradox. Thelion <strong>in</strong> the lute, not the lion locked <strong>in</strong>stone, to paraphrase Stevens. "As if a lionknelt to kiss a rose, / Astonished <strong>in</strong>to passionaterepose," to quote that good manTed Roethke.... I can say that I "hope" that theversion published is the best version possibleat a given time because I've earnedthe right to do so. Unknown Soldier tookn<strong>in</strong>e years from <strong>in</strong>ception to publication,and the f<strong>in</strong>al revisions were done with<strong>in</strong>four months <strong>of</strong> publication (the publisher'shard deadl<strong>in</strong>e). The first five years<strong>of</strong> that time were, essentially, first draft.Dur<strong>in</strong>g the follow<strong>in</strong>g four years therewere about five more drafts, although Ican't recall accurately without recourseto files that are now obscure. . . .You say it's impossible to prove a negative.Well, I feel as though I've been astunn<strong>in</strong>g failure at demonstrat<strong>in</strong>g or prov<strong>in</strong>ga positive — for <strong>in</strong>stance, the possibility<strong>of</strong> us<strong>in</strong>g relatively "mean<strong>in</strong>gless" words<strong>in</strong> a mean<strong>in</strong>gful and reveal<strong>in</strong>g way. ...The fact that this rema<strong>in</strong>s impenetrably<strong>in</strong>visible to you troubles me greatly. I f<strong>in</strong>dmyself most uncomfortable cast <strong>in</strong> the role<strong>of</strong> critic <strong>of</strong> my own work say<strong>in</strong>g "Lookwhat I've done, huh? A<strong>in</strong>'t it good?" Iwant someone else to do that. Critics,namely.I don't ga<strong>in</strong>say your abilities and wisdom.Quite the contrary. But we seem tobe <strong>in</strong> a... stand<strong>of</strong>f. I had hoped youwould be able to say, "Ah, that's what hemeans by four levels <strong>of</strong> voice, or a developmental/variationaltechnique". ... Asit stands, you seem to have subsided <strong>in</strong>toagree<strong>in</strong>g with yourself. And together weseem to be a pair <strong>of</strong> conjurers with analarm<strong>in</strong>g lack <strong>of</strong> rabbits.Do you really th<strong>in</strong>k I would agree that"this is bor<strong>in</strong>g, but it's art"? I am notAndy Warhol."Identified with," as I used it <strong>in</strong> context,means "by others," not by your self.I know and respect your reluctance to"identify with" combat veterans, as I ex-224
OPINIONS & NOTESpla<strong>in</strong>ed at some length earlier. But I didnot mean "empathize with"! Goddamlanguage. I meant what the Catholicsused to call "human respect," mean<strong>in</strong>g, bybizarre <strong>in</strong>version, the fear <strong>of</strong> social disapprobation.I am somewhat <strong>of</strong>fended by the "age <strong>of</strong>permissiveness" argument, ... as I was bythe orig<strong>in</strong>al "1980s fashion." Likewise"the simple-m<strong>in</strong>ded notion that art is 'selfexpression.'" Is that what you th<strong>in</strong>k I did<strong>in</strong> Unknown Soldier? Is that what youth<strong>in</strong>k I'm argu<strong>in</strong>g for? . . .KEITH то PAYERLE, 3 December 1989. . . After the exchange <strong>of</strong> several letters,<strong>in</strong> which the genu<strong>in</strong>e George Payerlecame across <strong>in</strong> a way that he couldn'tpossibly <strong>in</strong> the novel (I'll spare you anacademic lecture on the difference betweenthe implied author and the nameon the title page), I reread the novel andcame to the conclusion that, whateveryour <strong>in</strong>tentions and whatever the wholehistory <strong>of</strong> writ<strong>in</strong>g the book, and whateverblood and guts went <strong>in</strong>to it (and I do recognizethat), my op<strong>in</strong>ion as a reader, andso as a reviewer, hadn't changed. I canonly express an op<strong>in</strong>ion on what is there— or rather what I can recognize as there.You ask for "an appreciation <strong>of</strong> UnknownSoldier based on the terms <strong>in</strong> which it iswritten" — but I honestly don't see howI can do that.AMONG RECENT publications on photography,Robert M. Lev<strong>in</strong>e, Images <strong>of</strong> History: N<strong>in</strong>eteenthand Early Twentieth Century Lat<strong>in</strong>American Photographs as Documents (Duke,US$72.50) presents remarkable deconstructions<strong>of</strong> colonial tropes. Lev<strong>in</strong>e analyzes formalportraits <strong>of</strong> masters and slaves, family pictures,snapshots <strong>of</strong> visit<strong>in</strong>g anthropologists with their"objects," and so on. He probes manifestations<strong>of</strong> overt and covert culture, comments on perspectivalchoices <strong>in</strong> landscapes and cityscapesand analyzes the conventions <strong>of</strong> "posed decorum."After Images <strong>of</strong> History, Stefan Richter,The Art <strong>of</strong> the Daguerreotype (Vik<strong>in</strong>g,$29.95), i s difficult to tolerate. The reproductionsare very good, but too many <strong>of</strong> them arepornographic and too many are merely describedas "charm<strong>in</strong>g," "playful," or "amus<strong>in</strong>g."The author seems to be little disturbed bythe <strong>in</strong>formation that the models for thesepictures were "washerwomen, needlewomen,housemaids, messenger-girls and prostitutes."After stat<strong>in</strong>g that their "names are not known,"he comes to the startl<strong>in</strong>g conclusion that <strong>in</strong>"the daguerreotype, as <strong>in</strong> the brothel, class barrierswere transcended." By contrast to Lev<strong>in</strong>eand Richter, Mike Weaver, ed., Photography<strong>in</strong> the N<strong>in</strong>eteenth Century: The F<strong>in</strong>e Art Tradition(Cambridge, £25.00), pursues neithersocial nor prevalent concerns. The book presentsa series <strong>of</strong> scholarly essays on pictorialismand other Victorian photographic styles andthemes. The book is good on the naturalisttradition (there are three essays on the work<strong>of</strong> P. H. Emerson), but there are also noteworthycontributions on topographical and architecturalphotography. Of related <strong>in</strong>terest toLev<strong>in</strong>e's book is John F. Bauman and ThomasH. Coode, In the Eye <strong>of</strong> the Great Depression:New Deal Reporters and the Agony <strong>of</strong> theAmerican People (Northern Ill<strong>in</strong>ois, $25.00/9-5°)·THE FOLLOWING NCL EDITIONS have been received:Hetty Dorval by Ethel Wilson, afterwordby Northrop Frye; The Innocent Travellerby Ethel Wilson, afterword by P. K. Page;The Equations <strong>of</strong> Love by Ethel Wilson, afterwordby Alice Munro; Swamp Angel by EthelWilson, afterword by George Bower<strong>in</strong>g; MadShadows by Marie-Claire Biais, afterword byDaphne Marlatt.225
- Page 1 and 2:
I mks in YeviewPOSSIBLE STORMSJAMAI
- Page 3 and 4:
BOOKS IN REVIEWfor simple-minded re
- Page 5 and 6:
BOOKS IN REVIEWGannel, and desperat
- Page 7 and 8:
BOOKS IN REVIEWsaisie du réel quas
- Page 9 and 10:
BOOKS IN REVIEWability (unknown to
- Page 11 and 12:
BOOKS IN REVIEWstates that ideology
- Page 13 and 14:
BOOKS IN REVIEWa face she wishes to
- Page 15 and 16:
BOOKS IN REVIEWmerges in the birth
- Page 17 and 18:
BOOKS IN REVIEWquality which is alw
- Page 19 and 20:
BOOKS IN REVIEWhave to do with such
- Page 21 and 22:
BOOKS IN REVIEWhound is leading us,
- Page 23 and 24:
BOOKS IN REVIEWtion anglaise, le pe
- Page 25 and 26:
BOOKS IN REVIEWWallace Wilson may b
- Page 27 and 28:
BOOKS IN REVIEWin Shiva. His main c
- Page 29 and 30:
BOOKS IN REVIEWto amuse, to enterta
- Page 31 and 32:
BOOKS IN REVIEWNothing can be taken
- Page 33 and 34: BOOKS IN REVIEWLess convincing is h
- Page 35 and 36: BOOKS IN REVIEWof life close to the
- Page 37 and 38: BOOKS IN REVIEWvera, comme dans Le
- Page 39 and 40: BOOKS IN REVIEWPOSTMODERNPARADOXESL
- Page 41 and 42: BOOKS IN REVIEWof sloppy diction, o
- Page 43 and 44: BOOKS IN REVIEWstory genre shows it
- Page 45 and 46: BOOKS IN REVIEWALTERNATIVETHEATREDa
- Page 47 and 48: BOOKS IN REVIEWary world, and at fi
- Page 49 and 50: BOOKS IN REVIEWonly by implied para
- Page 51 and 52: BOOKS IN REVIEWful, but that its de
- Page 53 and 54: BOOKS IN REVIEWLecker's discussion
- Page 55 and 56: BOOKS IN REVIEWLOYALISTCYNTHIA DUBi
- Page 57 and 58: BOOKS IN REVIEWcarefully evokes bot
- Page 59 and 60: BOOKS IN REVIEWslurs against Blacks
- Page 61 and 62: BOOKS IN REVIEWANTITHESESCARY FAGAN
- Page 63 and 64: BOOKS IN REVIEWOne of the most succ
- Page 65 and 66: making all manner of mistakes in th
- Page 67 and 68: BOOKS IN REVIEWber of songs. They w
- Page 69 and 70: BOOKS IN REVIEWself through her att
- Page 71 and 72: BOOKS IN REVIEWgroupe social partic
- Page 73 and 74: BOOKS IN REVIEWAnd yes, there were
- Page 75 and 76: BOOKS IN REVIEWDeep redBoth roundBu
- Page 77 and 78: cjximns Ahh ndesAUTHOR AND CRITICA
- Page 79 and 80: OPINIONS & NOTESand convincingly, w
- Page 81 and 82: OPINIONS & NOTESof varying size, sh
- Page 83: OPINIONS & NOTESbore, but is he bor
- Page 87 and 88: OPINIONS & NOTEStained, an unconsci
- Page 89 and 90: NOTESLove, and Work in the Lives of
- Page 91 and 92: NOTESAMONG THE MANY publications sp
- Page 93 and 94: NOTESof reality as well as of our c
- Page 95: NOTESworld) "can change a human bei