In
Chapter 7 of Dead Souls, Gogol’s
playful narrator distinguishes two sorts of writers. Of the first he says: “Happy
the writer who, passing by characters that are boring, disgusting, shocking in
their mournful reality, approaches characters that manifest the lofty dignity
of man, who from the great pool of daily whirling images has chosen only the
rare exceptions,” and so on. Such a writer is assured of popularity and prizes.
He flatters readers and conceals unpleasant realities. Gogol doesn’t use the
word but we might think of such writers as Romantics. With “entrancing smoke” they
“cloud people’s eyes.” I use the Richard Pevear/Larissa Volokhonsky translation of Dead Souls (1996).
Gogol
published his great novel in 1842, and much has since changed among writers and
readers. Now we know that writers can achieve a following by documenting life’s
perversity and horror, and even simple sadness. Happy writers risk banishment
because they are happy, and thus lying purveyors of treacle. Here is the
narrator’s characterization of the second sort of writer, in contrast to the
one described above:
“[They
dare] to call forth all that is before our eyes every moment and which our
indifferent eyes do not see—all the terrible, stupendous mire of trivia in
which our life is entangled, the whole depth of cold, fragmented, everyday characters
that swarm over our often bitter and boring earthly path, and with the firm strength
of his implacable chisel dares to present them roundly and vividly before the eyes
of all people!”
Except
in his late proselytizing mode, Gogol is a slippery writer. Ernest critics from
the start judged him a “realist” and “social critic,” vaporous words more
appropriate to banal journalism. The novel’s best explicator for readers of English,
Nabokov, calls it “a tremendous dream” and, as you would expect, dismisses “the
utter stupidity of such terms as `bare facts’ and `realism.’ Gogol — a `realist’!”
A modern reader or writer is put in the position not of siding with one Gogolian
category or the other – Romantic or Realist – but of picking individual
qualities, buffet-style. “Characters that are boring, disgusting, shocking in
their mournful reality” can be quite amusing. As the narrator of Dead Souls puts it, “equally wondrous
are the glasses that observe the sun and those that look at the movements of
inconspicuous insects.”
Writers
who defy conventional categories are bothersome. Think of Stevie Smith and her exceedingly twee poems. She even wrote some
about cats, of all things. Larkin thought Smith’s poems “speak with the
authority of sadness.”
No comments:
Post a Comment