Levi Stahl
in “Dr. Johnson’s Dream” attempts to solve a less disturbing mystery: Why did Dr.
Johnson write in his diary on January 23, 1759, the day after his mother was buried:
“The dream of my Brother I shall remember.” This simple sentence appears at the
end of a prayer. Johnson’s brother, Nathaniel, had died in 1737, aged
twenty-four, and we know little about him. Tons of primary sources document
Johnson and his era, but as Levi notes, “Even so, in trying to learn more about
Johnson’s dream, we face our perpetual enemies: silence, time, and the burning
barrel.” Nevertheless, Levi weighs the evidence and offers plausible explanations,
though in the end he acknowledges that the mystery is unlikely to be solved.
What’s most
impressive about Levi’s detective story is his sympathetic understanding of
Johnson. He was a most un-modern man. Contemporary readers, learning of his
conflicted, hypersensitive nature, would send him to the shrink. Levi takes
Johnson on his own terms, not ours:
“Johnson
feared damnation. Today, fewer of us than in Johnson’s time are likely to dwell
on that risk in our final hours. Many, perhaps most, of us remain frightened of
oblivion, however. Have we left anything that will last? How quickly will the
memory of our steps on this earth fade? For all his doubt, Samuel Johnson knew
from at least midlife, with the publication of his dictionary, that he had made
a mark. His name, at minimum, would carry through the years.”
I stalked Levi
in some of his research and consulted Boswell, Hawkins, Wain, Bate, Nokes,
Martin and Meyers. Only Bate mentions the dream, and it’s apparent Levi was
familiar with Bate’s version of the incident. I offer only one suggestion. We
know Johnson wrote Rasselas in a
single week in order to pay for his mother’s funeral. Might it contain a clue
to help unlock the mystery of the dream? It’s a story I reread fairly often,
though not lately. Levi, in a very Johnsonian manner, generalizes from Nathaniel’s
obscure death and Johnson’s enigmatic dream:
“[Nathaniel’s]
fate is the one unfairly meted out to the everyday people caught up in the
train of the famous, their lives reaching us only to the extent that they
intersected theirs. Nathaniel must have had his fears of death, damnation, and
oblivion, too. But he had no assurances about his memory. Would he have wanted
them, on terms he played so little part in setting? His life could hardly have
been more ordinary; even its early close was less uncommon then than it would
be now. It is the very model of an unremarked life in the era of
record-keeping: were it not for his brother, there would be but a handful of
notices of his existence and passing buried in parish registers, unread.”
Levi’s words
echo the great resounding, memorable conclusion to Middlemarch:
“But the
effect of her being on those around her was incalculably diffusive: for the
growing good of the world is partly dependent on unhistoric acts; and that
things are not so ill with you and me as they might have been is half owing to
the number who lived faithfully a hidden life, and rest in unvisited tombs.”
No comments:
Post a Comment