contempt
the hate is still there, even uglier but the critic makes it appear that he personally is not angry like the new yorker quote (again): this novel challenges the reader to compare it with Joyce's "Ulys-(shem the penman: joyce, as selfparodied in finnegans wake) "chal- lenges" is part of the "ambitious" cliche the implication is that when an artist does highly organized work, his sole intention is to challenge you, to force you against your will to tell him how great he is its merely a cliche, a trick, because it can be used equally well against a phony or a real artist1 "obliged to say" testifies to the critic's coy reluctance to stab more contempt: old Gaddis is a whiz with the reference cards in the library (bass)"Salvation" is fremantles christian-conclusion boner again "angry, very angry" is like the "dim view" trick: By implication [Wyatt] represents the plight of all modern artists, inthe "dim view" trick is designed to smother feeling in cliche only 2draters use it it means "im afraid hes angry, he disapproves. maybe hes angry at me! im afraid but presto, its not so serious, he onlyha ha!takes a 'dim view' whew, back on familiar ground. i dont really care, you dont care, so he doesnt care saved!" he doesnt care, hes just "vastly disturbed": Mr. Gaddis is vastly disturbed by the obscene, the immoral, thewrong again, laycock! & dawn powell again, master of boners, master of contempt: a Genius, a Bore, or Botha typical snotty ny post headline & typical of that liberal news- paper's smoldering hate for anyone who excels Seven-fifty for a book without art, maps, recipes or even tele-powells just having goodnatured innocent fun her last innuendo is false analogy: in the recognitions, the man in the green wool shirt (who the question is asked to) does think not having a necktie makes him honest powell anyway likes to throw in dirty wisecracks at random, just for the hell of it or because she cant think of anything else to say
FIRE rochelle girson for rank presumption
selfimportance fills a Dark suspicions have been voiced in industry circles lately thatshes lying about the "industry circles," reputable publishers dont publish subsidy novels you can see its ridiculous if a 1st novel or a long novel is subsidized by the author & equally ridiculous if it isnt Mr. Gaddis, she said, works at nothing but his writing, and this isthe editor's remarks are wasted on miss poisonpen whose financial & educational report is all wet a rich writer is ridiculous, while a writer "starving in a garret" is ridiculous ridicule the universal solvent, appropriate for any art or any artist the only thing not ridiculous is Positionto be a hack journalist spinning out a column of zero "slyly" 1anger or sarcasm would be ok vs a bad book, but not tricks & masks (Back) |