some things the 55 original critics said with moderate or better insight
& competence       (not all favorable nor do i agree with them all).
berger (see p72 above)       bloom: "the conflict between deception and
recognition" (& p60 above)       bradley: "his humor the kind that slaps
you full in the face half a dozen pages after you have passed it by".
cahoon: "manages, without mention of war or the atomic bomb, to
chronicle and dissect important aspects of contemporary society"; "A
vast panorama of interlocking plots and recurring phrases and symbols
has been carefully organized into a novel of dimension and power".
coldwell: "It is only recognition of deception that can make a man real".
conroy: "considerably more than a tour de force or an exercise in
scholastic, technical and rhetorical virtuosity. Its essentially earnest
examination of certain maladies of postwar society is both terrifying
and disturbing"       corrington: "A novel like William Gaddis' 'The Recog-
nitions' manages to separate the mature critical mind from that of the
opinionated amateur who would attempt to protect 'custom' or 'the
American way' or any similar fantasy from the uncompromising scrutiny
it deserves"; "we cannot deny the validity of what he has created from
the veiled shame of a world without faith or love" (& deflates the
"balancing" trick p60 above)      dawedeit: "Recognition of patterns
plays a major role in the book's design. Structurally, it combines the
classic, vertical form of organization with the horizontal 'slice of life,' in
alternating episodes. To this frame both long and wide, Gaddis adds a
third dimension through an intricate system of historical, literary,
artistic, musical and religious allusion. he has used many of these as
symbols, or leit motifs, threading them through the novel to splice the
horizontal and vertical beams" (& p9 above)      demarest: "a galactic
gallery of characters, some of whom it is hard to keep track of, but
which range from biting caricatures to studies in depth"; "the author's
zeal for unmasking fraud makes it hard to distinguish Stanley's genuine
faith from the account executive's 'smart' conversion"; "this is, like
Ulysses, a book which has emerged from other books, a product as
much of reading as living"; "But it is also in spite of its faults (which
are the only worthwhile ones of trying to say to much, achieve the
impossible) a genuine and personal book, sui generis (italics: bold-
face)      desbarats (p60 above)      mccarthy: "Wyatt, the son, a man
who can neither find nor lose himself"; knows its camilla whos
"canonized" (& p52 above)       powell: wyatt "oblivious to love and evil
and therefore used by both"       price: knows recktall brown a symbol
of mephistopheles (& p48 above)       rogers: "The novel pictures a
Bedlam, not a place of pure, clean madness, however, but mean and
petty. Indeed the novel itself is a Bedlam irresistibly fascinating; you
can't take your eyes off it, or your mind from it"      snyder (p68 above).
wharton: "Unlike that of 'Ulysses' the inspiration seems Roman rather
than Hellenic"; "some writers of our day who search the past for
nuggets of eloquence, as if to store them up against the Dark Ages
they subconsciously await"       yeiser: "The novel may have some
literary ancestors. If so, they are not easily recognizable. One thinks
first of 'Ulysses,' for several reasons, which are more apparent than
real"

17 critics, 29 quotes—pitiful!       & what the list lacks in quantity it
doesnt make up in quality      a mediocre crew

the 2 competent reviews were by cahoon¹ & rogers, both strongly
favorable—as were corrington & stevens (& wagner who didnt read the
book)       really minus reviews were by geismar (& nonreaders wagen-
knecht & the toronto globe & mail hack) & perhaps berger ²

1 of the most favorable reviews was one of the worst      don stevens'
insincere puff in the worcester telegram—a typical jargonized "rave"
review & not a response to the recognitions at all      his 1st para:

  Such a strikingly brilliant and major work as this necessitates a
reviewer's throwing his hat in the air—he has nowhere else to put it,
having lost his head in the intoxication of finding a book of such
magnitude and power.