This 1295 page omnibus has sat on the ledge beside the bed at Grace’s apartment for, probably, more than a year. I didn’t bring it there because I planned to read it imminently; rather, I brought it over “just in case.” In case there was some occasion when I wished to read it. In case I forgot to bring over some other book I was actively reading.
As unlikely as “some occasion when I wished to read it” must have seemed, it presented recently. Funny, when I reached for the book I found that it was not there. Grace relocated it.
Maybe she sensed in order for me to desire (to read) that book, it needed to be less available. (Or, and more likely, its state of disuse bothered her and she wanted it out of sight.)
In any case, a couple weeks have passed and I am one hundred or so pages into it. Admittedly, I am not the biggest fan. Often my sense is that Gore Vidal wrote exclusively for himself. He is his audience. As such, I often feel more like I am eavesdropping on a man’s private thoughts, less like I am reading an editorial prepared for a magazine (the original sources of many of these essays).
How can I better describe that impression?
For example, he states opinions as if they were facts, and often does not provide much rationale. As a result, the opinions seem empty; he doesn’t seem creditable. Like so many of the “smart talkers” I work with, whose ethos can go up in smoke if required to think much extemporaneously.
That quality didn’t come as a complete surprise to me, although it is a disappointment. Gore Vidal was known to have a Walt Whitman sort of admiration for himself. My most recent reminder of the fact was a great documentary called Best of Enemies, about Vidal relationship’s with William F. Buckley (more about that here – very worthwhile!).
I have read a few of Gore Vidal’s fiction books. I recall liking Burr some, really liking Duluth (really weird) and Kalki, not liking The City and The Pillar at all, and not liking Live From Golgotha much. No previous experience reading his non-fiction.
I find that there are 2 “modes” of Vidal I like: (1) his biting critiques that are substantiated and (2) his thoughtful expositions. (Unfortunately, I have encountered many biting critiques that are not substantiated and many expositions that do not seem thoughtful.)
Here are a couple examples of “mode 1”:
The Theory of The Novel: New Essays, edited by John Halperin. The two articles arouse suspicion. The theory? The novel? Since there is no such thing as the novel, how can there be a single theory? Or is the editor some sort of monist? Blinkered hedgehog in wild fox country.
This is just the beginning (literally – this is how The Hacks of Academe begins). Halperin, and “Halperin types” more generally (i.e. “hacks”), are skewered in the essay.
Another amusing instance where Gore Vidal uses [some other hack]’s own words to make them sound foolish:
our guide sums up: “As my definition of it clearly implies, exposition is a time problem par excellence.” (Instructor’s note: Transpose “it” and “exposition.”)
(In the aforementioned Vidal v. Buckley documentary, some of Vidal’s best moments were quick ripostes based on quick dissections of Buckley’s own words.)
(Thinking back to that documentary – I think it was last Decemember when I watched it, so pardon fuzzy recollection – I was struck by narrator’s mention that Gore Vidal prepared ad libs for use against Buckley. Like freestyle rappers who prepared many many verses independently and invoke them when appropriate, Vidal would prepare utterances he could pass off as impromptu. So fascinating.)
Anyway, I am writing from my home now, thus I do not have the book at my disposal (still keeping it at Grace’s just in case). So I cannot dig into the source much more. (I took pictures of the quotes passages with my phone, hence the limited direct quotation.) I’ll just briefly mention two essays I particularly enjoyed. The first is French Letters: Theories of The New Novel, a thoughtful exposition on the theories of Robbe-Grillet, Sarraute and others, and the second is American Plastic: The Matter of Fiction, specifically the passages on Barthes and Barthelme.
Vidal left me especially fascinated with Barthelme – Perhaps a future post after I have read his primary sources.