1923 :A FICTIONAL HISTORY
His lips were turning bluer as the Winter of 1923 got closer.
My party boss was not yet aware of it but my experience told me that Lenin was being poisoned slowly with cyanide by his long time doctor Zelinspeski.
Of course, it was a conspiracy inspired or directed by Bronski, that busybody of a first general of the Red Army, who controlled the commissars in their murderous overnight trials of disaffected army officers or holdovers from the Czarist times.
But, if I go ahead with this accusation and Trotsky becomes the successor of Lenin, I and my boss will be flushed to Siberia.
As of now, we control all hiring of worthy party members by the central government in Moscow. Our three hundred thousand bureaucrats against Trotsky's people's army. My guess is we will win as we did against the misguided White Russians. I calculated the risk of telling my friend Lavrenti about my surmising. After all, he was indebted to Stalin but too young to respond rationally in a political crisis in which both Stalin and Trotsky will pull every painful stop to win the leadership of the party.
Well, my decision to speak was better than no action at all ; and it could result in a more prominent position for me and for Lavrenti. He will urge the boss to announced his intentions to the people on all-Russian radio as soon as the good doctor finishes the job that I suspected he was doing on Lenin, the indisputable, god-like figure of the October Revolution.
I have read comrade Lenin's unpublished articles on the Dictatorship of the so-called Proletariat, just another word for impoverished peoples. Good philosophical stuff but in my measured opinion impractical and dangerous. Lavrenti surely would agree. He will use the secret police against the intellectuals first; that means control of all media of public communication, both intraparty as well as extra-party. None will know what happened here. History will be rewritten to show only our absolute success.
As I had thought, Lavrenti accepted the risk of talking to Stalin. He chose the propitious occasion of Stalin's daughter birthday, a happy moment for all concerned. Lavrenti told me: "let it be". Was that Stalin's answer? Perhaps, but I then knew my head was on a noose and my feet were on a gallows at worse and at the door of leadership in a worker's paradise, at best. I have told Lavrenti of my plans to marry his sister Pollyanna in the Spring. He consented on the condition that I supported his bid for Lieutenant or deputy director of the political arm of the Checka. He hated violence but loved the intrigues of party politics. He always knew who was for or against Stalin from the very beginning. Even at the level of the International Communist Party congress, Lavrenti could ferret out the lukewarm, pro neutrality socialist delegates by memory. He disliked keeping written records, dossiers on top party leaders that could be used for good or for evil. His wisdom proved right in light of the events that history will record with extreme partiality by Winter's end. About two thirds of those delegates were eliminated before the following Congress by Stalinist agents.
I never worry about what people may think when a "fait accompli" is about to become public knowledge under our management of the news. The truth telling will always be favorable to our cause as long as the boss controls the "politburo", a kind of modern archetype of Pontius Pilate, always washing its hands before the mob.
I was in love with Pollyanna. An aristocrat in a plebeian environment, she was as gracious as she was attractive. Above all she was a good judge of character. I needed her beside me at this life changing point. She could dance in this tragic moment. She could laugh just as easily as she could draw at will a tear. But, it was her smile as she turned away that fascinated me. She knew when she was lording over anyone, anything; when her time had come to stay; when her every step would have a loyal follower;when she was my freedom, my Juno in the clouds, all powerful, relentless.
Marriage, a social status in rapid evolution, disappeared after the revolution. But, she was free to turn to bourgeois traditions whenever she thought the circumstances merited it, and our union was one of those.
Lenin, the demigod, died and was embalmed for immortality. I kept his books though as a reminder that the dangers of new philosophies may be as great as the perils of embracing new theories.
j.a.canto, MBA
domingo, 5 de octubre de 2008
miércoles, 1 de octubre de 2008
CRITICAL ESSAY
FAULKNER REVISITED
Recently, I had the opportunity to see on television portions of central Oxford, Mississippi. It reminded me that it was time to finish an essay on an aspect of Faulkner's literary life that's little written about: the voice of critics of his works during the 20 years prior to him getting the Nobel of literature, I mean 1949. The years of his Pulitzers came later, in 1955 and posthumously in 1963, after the major newspapers realized they were late in recognizing the new literary colossus.
The literary critics,some of whom I quote at the end, were undecided about whether Faulkner's fiction belonged to the tragic or the realistic traditions of writing, whether his subjects contain morbidity or dwelled on trashy, worthless characters to spice his plots. Some even cast aspersions on his moral standing. Being a Southern gentleman, he should have written in a different, more palatable style with a greater respect for the mores of the people of Jefferson county, or should we say Yornapatawpha county, his mythical place of histrionic action.
Morbosity.Humbug.Every reader wants to know the real, true grit facts of the case in point, the dramatic condition, the iridescent shining moments of willful sinning, the poetic spaces that fill the dreary lives of the castaways, the black murderess who killed for a good cause, the corrupt young man living in a brothel, the older matron inventing a new euphemism for the craziness of her situation, the timeless bumbling fool who reacts hilariously to anything because of his cretinism, the rambling judge judging without knowledge of real causes, the resigned dying lady that gives dignity to her son's job. Those are instances of geniality at the level of a Joyce or a Dostoievski. Hemingway could never write a novel like "The sound and the fury" but, nonetheless, he did write "The sun also rises". To each his own. Morbidity humbug.
Let us allow the realists their place in the literary tradition. Tolstoi, Proust, and the naturalists like Balzac, created a world that touched us all. There in their world all was predetermined, the linear movement of time dominated the dramatic denouement, the epilogue was never prologue. Not for Faulkner or, later in Latin American literature, Cortazar. There is a fantastic bend in the Faulknerian imagination. No American writer surpasses him in the magnitude of his opus: over 20 world class novels and over 100 short stories, a contribution to modern literature not yet equaled with the possible exception of Norman Mailer.
The following are excerpts from critical comments on Faulkner's "The sound and the fury".
All quotations are from Fargnoli's "William Faulkner, a literary companion". They show clearly that the major newspapers that determine who is nominated for a Pulitzer prize were not paying attention to emerging writers, particularly those without a formal college education like Faulkner and Hemingway.
"THE SOUND AND THE FURY"
"From another universal standpoint, the traditional definition of tragedy, Faulkner's achievement is also remarkable." H. N. Smith, "Southern Review"1929.
"Mr.Faulkner adapts James Joyce." "They" -experimenters- "are merely tiresome."Yust,Walter. "Philadelphia Public Ledger". 1929
"Many, I am sure,will call the author mad." Saxon, Lyle, "New York Herald Tribune", 1929.
"The sound and the fury" is a novel of power and terrible sincerity. We do, however, find that the theme,..loses force .. through subjective analysis."Robbins, Frances L. "Outlook and Independent", 1929.
"Flaubert would be amazed. ..Baudelaire alone might be frankly envious. ..Mr. Faulkner excels Baudelaire in his treatment of sin and humanity. Martin, Abbott"Nashville Tennessian" 1929.
"This is an original and impressive book." Davenport, basil "The Saturday review of Literature" 1929."The story seems somehow hidden in itself."The sound and the fury" seems a little far away. In the face of the inevitable relevance of "Farewell to arms"..(Hemingway).. Trilling, Lionel "The Symposium", 1930.
"The sound and the fury" is one of the finest works in the tragic mood yet to appear in America." Baker, julia K.W. "Times Picayune" 1930.
"The dialogue in this book is racy and overwhelmingly convincing." Swinnerton, F. "The evening news", London, 1931.
Comments on "As I Lay Dying"
"The fecundity of an imagination like this is amazing and the ingenuity, too, with which it skips from one sphere of action to another." Dawson, Margaret Cheney, "New York Herald Tribune", Oct. 1930.
"Ernest Hemingway has not advanced from the powerful sketches of "In our time", though "A Farewell to arms" was an admirable novel. ..William Faulkner is a noteworthy exception. He has developed steadily and has become in a very few years an important figure in contemporary fiction." Baker, Julia K.W., "The New Orleans Times Picayune" 1930.
Of all his books,"As I Lay Dying" must be numbered among the foggiest". Quennenell, Peter. "The new statesman and nation" 1935.
Comments on "Sanctuary"
"In the powerful and distressing "Sanctuary" of WF. anti-romance reaches its limit." Canby, Henry Seidel."The Saturday Review of Literature" 1031.
"In "Sanctuary" Faulkner has used a variation of the technique that made "The sound and the fury" and "As I Lay Dying" such brilliant monstrosities." Wheelwright, P. E. "The symposium" 1931.
"Mr. Faulkner is a misanthrope." Scott, R. MC. "T English Review".1931.
Comments on "Requiem for a nun"
"..is in the main a sequel to Sanctuary and is concerned with the further misadventures of Temple Drake.." West, Anthony. "The New Yorker", Sept.22,1931.
"WF in this new novel..writes one sentence that consumes 49 pages, which seems to be almost a life sentence, but who am I to criticize the Old Master..." Little, Carl V. "San Francisco News" 1951.
"It was fashion among the reviewers of the late Thirties to deny his -WF- talent, to accuse him of being scatological, diffuse and violent. Smith, H."The Saturday Review of Literature". 1951.
It is perfectly clear that the "Establishment" in the Eastern United States missed the opportunity to honor the greatest talent that this country had produced in the area of fiction in decades. William Faulkner was vindicated by European readers. Only after he received the Nobel of literature was he accepted for who he was a true genius.
J.A.Canto, MBA
Recently, I had the opportunity to see on television portions of central Oxford, Mississippi. It reminded me that it was time to finish an essay on an aspect of Faulkner's literary life that's little written about: the voice of critics of his works during the 20 years prior to him getting the Nobel of literature, I mean 1949. The years of his Pulitzers came later, in 1955 and posthumously in 1963, after the major newspapers realized they were late in recognizing the new literary colossus.
The literary critics,some of whom I quote at the end, were undecided about whether Faulkner's fiction belonged to the tragic or the realistic traditions of writing, whether his subjects contain morbidity or dwelled on trashy, worthless characters to spice his plots. Some even cast aspersions on his moral standing. Being a Southern gentleman, he should have written in a different, more palatable style with a greater respect for the mores of the people of Jefferson county, or should we say Yornapatawpha county, his mythical place of histrionic action.
Morbosity.Humbug.Every reader wants to know the real, true grit facts of the case in point, the dramatic condition, the iridescent shining moments of willful sinning, the poetic spaces that fill the dreary lives of the castaways, the black murderess who killed for a good cause, the corrupt young man living in a brothel, the older matron inventing a new euphemism for the craziness of her situation, the timeless bumbling fool who reacts hilariously to anything because of his cretinism, the rambling judge judging without knowledge of real causes, the resigned dying lady that gives dignity to her son's job. Those are instances of geniality at the level of a Joyce or a Dostoievski. Hemingway could never write a novel like "The sound and the fury" but, nonetheless, he did write "The sun also rises". To each his own. Morbidity humbug.
Let us allow the realists their place in the literary tradition. Tolstoi, Proust, and the naturalists like Balzac, created a world that touched us all. There in their world all was predetermined, the linear movement of time dominated the dramatic denouement, the epilogue was never prologue. Not for Faulkner or, later in Latin American literature, Cortazar. There is a fantastic bend in the Faulknerian imagination. No American writer surpasses him in the magnitude of his opus: over 20 world class novels and over 100 short stories, a contribution to modern literature not yet equaled with the possible exception of Norman Mailer.
The following are excerpts from critical comments on Faulkner's "The sound and the fury".
All quotations are from Fargnoli's "William Faulkner, a literary companion". They show clearly that the major newspapers that determine who is nominated for a Pulitzer prize were not paying attention to emerging writers, particularly those without a formal college education like Faulkner and Hemingway.
"THE SOUND AND THE FURY"
"From another universal standpoint, the traditional definition of tragedy, Faulkner's achievement is also remarkable." H. N. Smith, "Southern Review"1929.
"Mr.Faulkner adapts James Joyce." "They" -experimenters- "are merely tiresome."Yust,Walter. "Philadelphia Public Ledger". 1929
"Many, I am sure,will call the author mad." Saxon, Lyle, "New York Herald Tribune", 1929.
"The sound and the fury" is a novel of power and terrible sincerity. We do, however, find that the theme,..loses force .. through subjective analysis."Robbins, Frances L. "Outlook and Independent", 1929.
"Flaubert would be amazed. ..Baudelaire alone might be frankly envious. ..Mr. Faulkner excels Baudelaire in his treatment of sin and humanity. Martin, Abbott"Nashville Tennessian" 1929.
"This is an original and impressive book." Davenport, basil "The Saturday review of Literature" 1929."The story seems somehow hidden in itself."The sound and the fury" seems a little far away. In the face of the inevitable relevance of "Farewell to arms"..(Hemingway).. Trilling, Lionel "The Symposium", 1930.
"The sound and the fury" is one of the finest works in the tragic mood yet to appear in America." Baker, julia K.W. "Times Picayune" 1930.
"The dialogue in this book is racy and overwhelmingly convincing." Swinnerton, F. "The evening news", London, 1931.
Comments on "As I Lay Dying"
"The fecundity of an imagination like this is amazing and the ingenuity, too, with which it skips from one sphere of action to another." Dawson, Margaret Cheney, "New York Herald Tribune", Oct. 1930.
"Ernest Hemingway has not advanced from the powerful sketches of "In our time", though "A Farewell to arms" was an admirable novel. ..William Faulkner is a noteworthy exception. He has developed steadily and has become in a very few years an important figure in contemporary fiction." Baker, Julia K.W., "The New Orleans Times Picayune" 1930.
Of all his books,"As I Lay Dying" must be numbered among the foggiest". Quennenell, Peter. "The new statesman and nation" 1935.
Comments on "Sanctuary"
"In the powerful and distressing "Sanctuary" of WF. anti-romance reaches its limit." Canby, Henry Seidel."The Saturday Review of Literature" 1031.
"In "Sanctuary" Faulkner has used a variation of the technique that made "The sound and the fury" and "As I Lay Dying" such brilliant monstrosities." Wheelwright, P. E. "The symposium" 1931.
"Mr. Faulkner is a misanthrope." Scott, R. MC. "T English Review".1931.
Comments on "Requiem for a nun"
"..is in the main a sequel to Sanctuary and is concerned with the further misadventures of Temple Drake.." West, Anthony. "The New Yorker", Sept.22,1931.
"WF in this new novel..writes one sentence that consumes 49 pages, which seems to be almost a life sentence, but who am I to criticize the Old Master..." Little, Carl V. "San Francisco News" 1951.
"It was fashion among the reviewers of the late Thirties to deny his -WF- talent, to accuse him of being scatological, diffuse and violent. Smith, H."The Saturday Review of Literature". 1951.
It is perfectly clear that the "Establishment" in the Eastern United States missed the opportunity to honor the greatest talent that this country had produced in the area of fiction in decades. William Faulkner was vindicated by European readers. Only after he received the Nobel of literature was he accepted for who he was a true genius.
J.A.Canto, MBA
Suscribirse a:
Entradas (Atom)
