Boon, The Mind of the Race, The Wild Asses of the Devil, and The Last Trump;: Being a First Selection from the Literary Remains of George Boon, Appropriate to the TimesWells, H. G. (Herbert George)
Philosophy
Boon, The Mind of the Race, The Wild Asses of the Devil, and The Last Trump;: Being a First Selection from the Literary Remains of George Boon, Appropriate to the Times
Wells, H. G. (Herbert George)
English fiction -- 20th century; Satire
"But James _begins_ by taking it for granted that a novel is a work of
art that must be judged by its oneness. Judged first by its oneness.
Some one gave him that idea in the beginning of things and he has
never found it out. He doesn't find things out. He doesn't even seem
to want to find things out. You can see that in him; he is eager to
accept things--elaborately. You can see from his books that he accepts
etiquettes, precedences, associations, claims. That is his
peculiarity. He accepts very readily and then--elaborates. He has, I
am convinced, one of the strongest, most abundant minds alive in the
whole world, and he has the smallest penetration. Indeed, he has no
penetration. He is the culmination of the Superficial type. Or else he
would have gone into philosophy and been greater even than his
wonderful brother.... But here he is, spinning about, like the most
tremendous of water-boatmen--you know those insects?--kept up by
surface tension. As if, when once he pierced the surface, he would
drown. It's incredible. A water-boatman as big as an elephant. I was
reading him only yesterday 'The Golden Bowl'; it's dazzling how never
for a moment does he go through."
"Recently he's been explaining himself," said Dodd.
"His 'Notes on Novelists.' It's one sustained demand for the picture
effect. Which is the denial of the sweet complexity of life, of the
pointing this way and that, of the spider on the throne. Philosophy
aims at a unity and never gets there.... That true unity which we all
suspect, and which no one attains, if it is to be got at all it is to
be got by penetrating, penetrating down and through. The picture, on
the other hand, is forced to a unity because it can see only one
aspect at a time. I am doubtful even about that. Think of Hogarth or
Carpaccio. But if the novel is to follow life it must be various and
discursive. Life is diversity and entertainment, not completeness and
satisfaction. All actions are half-hearted, shot delightfully with
wandering thoughts--about something else. All true stories are a felt
of irrelevances. But James sets out to make his novels with the
presupposition that they can be made continuously relevant. And
perceiving the discordant things, he tries to get rid of them. He sets
himself to pick the straws out of the hair of Life before he paints
her. But without the straws she is no longer the mad woman we love. He
talks of 'selection,' and of making all of a novel definitely _about_
a theme. He objects to a 'saturation' that isn't oriented. And he
objects, if you go into it, for no clear reason at all. Following up
his conception of selection, see what in his own practice he omits. In
practice James's selection becomes just omission and nothing more. He
omits everything that demands digressive treatment or collateral
statement. For example, he omits opinions. In all his novels you will
find no people with defined political opinions, no people with
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account