TheImportanceof BeingEarnest'

http://www.utpjournals.press/doi/pdf/10.3138/CRAS-017-01-08 - Friday, June 03, 2016 6:16:41 PM - IP Address:5.8.47.233

LiteraryCriticsin America
StanleyFogel

George
H. Douglas.
EdmundWilson • America.Lexington:
TheUmversity
Pressof Kentucky,1983.254+ ix pp.
Leslie
Fishbein.
RebelshzBohemia:The Radicalsof
'TheMasses,"1 ql l-I ql 7. ChapelHill: The University
ofNorthCarolinaPress,1982.270 + xv pp.
GregoryS.Jay.T.S.EliotandthePoetics
ofLitera•y
ttisto•y.
BatonRouge:Louisiana StateUniversity
Press,
1983.256 + xii pp.
Edward Said.The World,the Textand the Critic.
Cambridge, Mass.:HarvardUniversityPress,1983.327+ vi pp.
FrederickC. Stern.E O. Matthiessen:Christian
Soctahst
asCritic.ChapelHill: The University
ofNorthCarolinaPress,1981.281 + xv pp.
by a poet I do not mean
onewhowritespoems,but
a terrorist or provocateur
who never writes ....
Arrabal
I

Everysooftena literarycritic,livingashedoesin a culturethatregardshis

pursuit asa frippery,
assomething remote
fromtheso-called realworld,gets
thejitters.
Eithertohimself,
hisstudents orhisreadershelaunchesanapologia
provitasua.Although drawnto whatProust calledthemajestic
beauty of
something wonderfully
unnecessary,
an idealthe criticusually
savors, he
finds
himselfatsomepointonthedefensive,hisvocationappearingaselitist,
arcaneorjadedbeside
theheftydoings
ofhisseeminglymoreengag•colleagues
andnon-university
professional
neighbors.
TheWorld,theTextandtheCritic
isEdwardSaid'scridecoeur,butit isonlyoneof manyrecentconfrontations
of critics with their roles.
The enunciationof one'scredooccursmostfrequentlyin a periodof
upheaval,
oneinwhichunestablishedtheoriesappeartobesupplanting more
traditional
ones.Onehasonlyto think,forinstance,of theapocalyptic
titles
ofGeoffreyHartman'srecent
work--The FateofReading, Criticism
inthe
Wilderness
andSaving theText--torealizethatcriticsdonotfeelthattheir
operations
aresolely
hermetic
orscholastic enterprises.Augmented bysuch
collections
asthe YaleFrenchStudies
issuecalledThePedagogical
Imperative
andIhabandSallyHassan'sInnovationRenovation,
which push
literary
theory
towardaredefinition
oftheuniversity,
andbybookssuchasFrankLentricchia's
Criticism
andSocialChange, JohnFekete's
TheCriticalTwilight
aswellas
portions
ofVincent B.Leitch's
Deconstructive
Criticism,
whichbroadenthe
Canadian
ReviewofAmerican
Studies,
Volume
17,Number
1,Spring
1986,10%118
 110 Stanley
Fogel
http://www.utpjournals.press/doi/pdf/10.3138/CRAS-017-01-08 - Friday, June 03, 2016 6:16:41 PM - IP Address:5.8.47.233

arenato includesocietyat large,literarycriticismclaimsfor itselfa rolefar

fromthefecklesspastimewithwhichthediscipline has,in common parlance,
been saddled.
Suchan upheavalis surelyoneof the moresalutarycontributions of
deconstruction.Withthedisplacement of NorthropFrye,NewCriticismand
T.S.Eliot(finally)fromtheinnersanctum hascomea criticalmodethathas
alteredtheorderingof world,textandcritic.Especiallysincecriticismhas
flourishedin the academy,therehasbeenno shortageof justificationsfor
thecritic'smediating rolebetweentextandworld;however, theperplexing
statusoftextasa partof,yetapartfrom,theworldhasnotheretofore hadthe
usurpation proffered byHartman,amongothers:"literarycommentary may
crossthe line andbecomeasdemandingasliterature:it is an unpredictable
or unstablegenrethatcannotbesubordinated, a priori,to itsreferential
or
commentating function?Criticismhasrarelybeenthoughtofasunpredictable
or unstable;onthecontrary,thescientificframeworkofferedbyFryeorthe
close,disinterested
reading
offeredbytheNewCriticsstressed justtheopposite.
Criticismhasalwaysbeenregardedasa conservative entity,onewhichhas
formedandarticulatedthe genre"literature,"that is, until deconstruction
hasput"literature,"
"author,""oeuvre,""masterpiece"
and"tradition,"among
manyothers,sousrature,undererasure. As Hartmanmaintains, "Onlyone
thingiscertain.Thereisno puttingthedjinnbackintothe bottle.TM
Sucherosionof criticaland,concomitantly,
culturalstaplesshould,it should
benoted,perhaps berecognized
assomething differentfromsomeofthe
late1960s
andearly1970s
Americanformulations
whichhad,astheirbulwark,
the reductionof the critic'sstatusand putativepowerto form and dictate
taste.As refreshingaswasLouisKampf'sdiatribeagainstthe profession, in
hisyear-endPresidentialaddressto the ModernLanguageAssociation
memorably entitled"'It'sAlrightMa (I'm OnlyBleeding)':Literatureand
Language in theAcademy," deconstruction'schallengeto the pre-existing
arrangement
ofworld,textandcriticisdifferentin thatit doesnotadvocate
unmediated
intercourse
betweenworldandtext.Althoughthecriticas"expert"
isdiminished bydeconstruction, nothingquiteasuncomplex asJerryFarber's
dictumaboutprofessors andliterarycriticsbeingjail-keepersandslavemasters
(gathered in Farber's collectionentitledThe StudentasNiggerwhich,of
course, contains mostmemorably theessayof thesamename)ispresented.
Certainly,deconstruction is (or can be) just as unsettlingand anti-
authoritarianasthe pronouncements of Farber,Kampf and othercounter-
culturalantagonists oftheVietnamera;however, theroleof thecritic,though
it no longerhasitshegemonic statusintact,doesnot altogetherdisappear.
Nor isit regarded asan unmitigatedly upliftingpursuit.Kampf,blesshim,
yearns directlyandholistically
for"unityofideological purpose andeconomic
necesssity, of leisureandthewayI earnedmydailybread.... I feltconfident
thatperforming
mytaskasa literarymanwouldimprove
myownlife,thatof
 LiteraryCritics 111
http://www.utpjournals.press/doi/pdf/10.3138/CRAS-017-01-08 - Friday, June 03, 2016 6:16:41 PM - IP Address:5.8.47.233

mystudents,
andhumanityin general?To effectsucha utopianmilieu,
narrowness
andprofessionalism
wouldbeproscribed;moreover,
extrapolating
fromKampf'sremarks,the hierarchiesof the institutionwouldhaveto be
dismantled.
Selective
hiringpractices
andtenurewouldhaveto givewayto
collegialityand the clericalmodel.Anyonewhoachievesa Ph.D. wouldbe
entitledto sharein themoniesavailableto humanists.
Accordingto Michel
Foucault,the creationof disciplineswith their attendantattendantsinstitutes
subjugation;
expertsadministera closedfield of knowledge to hoipolloi,
allowing
a selectedfewintotheenclave.The deconstructivesensibility
istoo
skepticaland ironic to partake wholly of Kampf's utopianrhapsodies;
nonetheless, its enemy,too, is the statusquo with its inviolablesenseof
literatureand its inflated and reveredparaphernalia.In any case,the
contemporary critic cannotaffordto be complacentabouteitherhisstatus
or the statusof hisforaysinto texts.His relationshipto worldandtextis an
ideologicalone laden with implicationsfor the practiceof literatureand
criticismas well as for the shapeof the universityand other seemingly
monolithic institutions.
Although Edward Said, John Reed, Edmund Wilson, F.O. Matthiessen
andGregoryJay are a salmagundiof critics,noneis complacentabouthis
rolein or out of the library,in or out of the academy.Said is an esteemed,
thoughdissident,middle-agedprofessorat ColumbiaUniversity;JohnReed
participated
in thepublishing
of TheMasses,a journalextantin thesecond
decadeof the twentieth century, and died scurryingafter the Russian
Revolution;Edmund Wilsonwasan iconoclasticcritic and belle-lettristwhose
life spannedmostof thiscentury;F.O. Matthiessen committedsuicidein
1950at the age of forty-eightafter havingwrittenAmericanRenaissance,
thatseminalworkof AmericanStudies; GregoryJayisa youngscholar
whose
workon T.S. Eliot is a revisionof hisdissertation.Suchan eclecticgroupis
yokedperhapsonlyby the editorialpolicyof thisjournal,whichprefers
omnibusreviewsto examinations
of singleworks.A lesscynicalperspective,
though,allowsthateachof the criticsmentioned
spendsa gooddealof his
criticalenergyfocusing
onthesocialimplications
ofhiscriticism
specifically
aswellason theactof criticismgenerally.
Asmuchastheostensible contents
of Matthiessen's
AmericanRenaissance, Wilson's
Axel • CastleandJay'sT.S.
EliotandthePoeticsof Litera•:•,
Histotyareconcerned with,respectively,
mid-nineteenth-centuryAmericanwriters,symbolism in early-twentieth-
centuryliterature
andT.S.Eliot,theworksaresaturated
withmethodologies,
implicationsandaccountability.Testingepistemological
boundariesis as
importantasdefininganauthoror period.
SaidbeginsThe World,the Textandthe Criticwithan account of a
conversation with"anoldcollegefriendwhoworkedin theDepartment of
Defense foraperiodoftimeduring theVietnamwar"(p.2).Thatfriendtold
approbatively
of theSecretary
of Defense's
having
Lawrence
Durrell's
 112 Stanley
Fogel
http://www.utpjournals.press/doi/pdf/10.3138/CRAS-017-01-08 - Friday, June 03, 2016 6:16:41 PM - IP Address:5.8.47.233

Alexandria Quarteton his desk.From this anecdoteSaid drawsthe lesson

that"youcanreadclassyfictionaswellaskill andmaimbecausethecultural
worldisavailable
forthatparticularsortof camouflaging,andbecause cultural
typesarenotsupposed to interferein mattersforwhichthesocialsystem has
notcertifiedthem"(p.3). Saidvigorously
denounces theevaluation
of criticism
aseffete,a labelwhichallowsit to be dispatchedto the periphery.Criticism
forhimisan"insurrectionary"activitywhichengages textsthatarethemselves
"worldly,"thatarethemselves"events." The domestication of radicalthinkers
andtheirassimilation
intoa"professionalism,"
hereusedaspejoratively
asis
possible,
infuriatehim.Sotoodoesthenotionof aninviolable,genteeltradition
in whichliteratureisregardedasa handfulof masterpieces sharedandrevered
bythecognoscenti whoradiategoodtasteandArnoldianintelligence. Matthew
Arnold'sframeof referencewith itsoppositionof cultureandanarchy,the
formerembodiedin the Arnoldiantouchstones, supposedly pithypassages
culledfrom Shakespeare, Dante andthe like, the latter representedbya lack
of awareness of so-calledgreatmomentsin literature,is regardedby Saidas
especially pernicious. Of that tradition(a clearlydemarcatedline running
from Arnold to Eliot to Lionel Trilling to Northrop Frye) Said is scornful,
findingin it a narrownessof monumentalproportions.He alsofindsin it a
growingirrelevancebecauseof "thediminishingacquiescence anddeference
accordedto what hasbeen calledthe Natopolitanworld long dominating
peripheralregionslike Africa, AsiaandLatin America"(p. 21).
The pithiestmaxim one can offer from Said'snotionsof literature and
criticism can be found in his "Introduction" to The World, the Text and the
Critic,wherehe writes:"The momentanythingacquiresthestatusof a cultural
idol or a commodity,it ceasesto be interesting"(p. 30). Suchan assertion
contradicts most of what traditional criticism sets out to do: create and confirm
masterpieces, authorsand nationalliteraturesas well as enshrinecultural
icons.For Said, criticismis radically other than an Arnoldian, holistic,
hagiographical pursuit."In itssuspicionof totalizingconcepts,
in itsdiscontent
with reifiedobjects,in itsimpatiencewith guilds,specialinterests,imperial
fiefdoms, andorthodoxhabitsof mind,criticismismostitselfand,if theparadox
canbetolerated,mostunlikeitselfat themomentit startsturningintoorganized
dogma"(p. 29). Said'sstanceherevergeson Arrabal'sanarchisticstatement
whichisthisreview's epigraph.It alsocallsto mindFoucault'struculentdefini-
tion of hisownrole ascritic: "Writingonly interestsme to the extentthatit
unitesitselfto the realityof a combat,functioningasan instrument,a tactic....
I wouldlike mybooksto be sortsof scalpels,Molotovcocktails,or minefields
and have them carbonize after me in the manner of fireworks. TM
Somuchcriticismhasinvolvedthehusbanding of textsandauthorsnot,of
course,for theirintrinsicvaluebutsothat theycreatefieldsthatthenrequire
expertsas interpretersand curators.What Pounddid to Eliot's The Waste
Land,criticismshoulddo to thecanon.Findingthepatternsof imagery,say,
 LiteraryCritics 113
http://www.utpjournals.press/doi/pdf/10.3138/CRAS-017-01-08 - Friday, June 03, 2016 6:16:41 PM - IP Address:5.8.47.233

inAnthony
Trollope's
TheLastChronicle
ofBarset--and
conventional
literary
criticism's
predispositionto revereworksthat "havestoodthe testof time"is
nowhere
rendered
morefeckless--leads
to theinstallation
ofTrollopein the
literary
firmamentthatitselfisa stylized
place.The chronologically
structured,
British-oriented
modelbuilt with suchseemingly neutralexegeticalcom-
ponents
isregarded
bySaidasaturgid,
conservative
enterprise
thatneeds
to
berevamped.
Suchisa summationandextrapolationof Said'sattitudein The World,the
Textand the Critic. His attacks on "monocentrism"and "ethnocentrism"are
givena moremilitantlypoliticalcastin Orientalism
in whichhe inveighs
against
theWestforitsconstruction of,aswellasrelegation
of,orientalism.
TheWorld,the Textandthe Critic,though,containsa seriesof discontinuous
essays
whichchieflygiveJacques
DerridaandMichelFoucault
leading
roles
in the dissemination of the kind of destabilizingcriticismdelineatedabove.
Thereare someforaysinto the work of JonathanSwiftandJosephConrad
andtwo essayswhich concludethe volumethat reiteratemotifsexploredin
Orientalism; the book'spowerasa criticalcredo,though,isgainedfromthe
"Introduction"aswell asfrom the fifth throughtenthessays, oneof which,
"CriticismBetweenCultureandSystem,"presentsanextendedexamination
ofFoucault'sandDerrida'svalueasdissidentanddecenteringliterarycritics.
BothDen-idaandFoucaulthave,of course,becomede rigueurin American
academic circleslargelythroughacolytes suchasGeoffreyHartman,J.Hillis
MillerandSaidhimself.By no meansdoesthisportendtheradicalization of
juniorfacultyin university English departments (thisdespite thepaucityof
jobsandabysmal conditions andsalariesfornewrecruits); ratherit affords
a
newcriticalentreeinto a gluttedfield. Said,however, is the mostincisive
criticin articulatingthedisruptive dimensionsof Foucault's andDerrida's
thinking. Although hedoesnotaccepttheirideasuncritically, Saidfindsin
theirwritings a confrontationalengagement withtheorderbrought aboutby
andtoWestern cultureprimarilythroughuniversities,
theirvariousdisciplines
andthecustodians of theirknowledge. Derridamainlychallenges Western
metaphysics withitstotalizing, teleological
andpositivistic methods and
systems, whereas Foucault for themostpartattacks institutions andtheir
attendant congeries of professionals.Bothfindthatsystems of inclusion
andexclusion aswellasproprietyandimpropriety acttolegitimize content
andpower.
Saidwritesexplicitly
thathewasdrawn tothese
critics
becausethey"propose
notonlytodescribebuttoproduce knowledge ofthesortthatwillfallneither
intothepreparedmolds provided
bythedominant culturenorintothewholly
predictive
formsmanufactured byaquasi-scientific
method" (p.182).Neither
FoucaultnorDerridaisa literarycriticperse--that,though,isa boundary
which eachtrespasses
blithely
andpurposefully--butbothintheirabhorrence
ofthepositivist
ethosthatsaturatedtraditional
criticism
have been catalysts
 Stanley
Fogel
http://www.utpjournals.press/doi/pdf/10.3138/CRAS-017-01-08 - Friday, June 03, 2016 6:16:41 PM - IP Address:5.8.47.233

for thecurrentcriticalmodeknownasdeconstruction. Althoughtheywrite

withstrikinglydifferenttones,techniques andfocuses, whichSaidin part
enumerates, theyproducea "contentious" criticismthat violatesorthodox
parameters of knowledge. The disruption theyproduceis scholarly while
undermining scholarship;it is also,especiallyin Derrida'scase,unserious
whileproviding a seriousthreatto profundity.Theseattributesareextolled
by Saidwho appropriates themin The World,the Textand the Criticand
elsewhereto confrontseeminglysolidedificesof learning.
Theimplications forrevamping notionsof world,textandcriticarepursued
notonlybySaid,butalsobytheeditorsof TheMasses,EdmundWilson,F.O.
Matthiessen andGregoryJay,all of whomareunderscrutinyhere.Polemical
statmentssuchas the followingone are not infrequentin Said'sbook ashe
oftenurgestheconsiderable consequences of a realignmentof criticism:"In
themainAmericanliterarycriticismcanaffordto sheditspartlyself-imposed
andsociallylegislatedisolation,at leastwith referenceto historyandsociety.
There isa wholeworldmanipulatednot onlybyso-calledreasonsof statebut
by every variety of ahistorical consumerism,whose ethnocentrismand
mendacitypromisetheimpoverishment andoppression of mostof the globe"
(p. 177).Kampf, Farberand evenArrabal are preciouslyclosehere-the
criticseemsto be onestepfrom the barricades.
The founders,publishers andwritersof TheMassesagitatedfor a similar
precipitousmovement fromtexttoworld.They--JohnReed,inflatedin Warren
Beatty'sReds, as well as Max Eastman,Emma Goldman and Floyd Dell,
amongothers--arethe subjectof LeslieFishbein'sRebelsin Bohemia:The
Radicals of "The Masses," 1911-1917.Although Fishbein explores the
bohemianand socialistcharactersand contextof The Masses'publication,
an interestingbecauseturbulenttopic, the book itself containstoo many
compartmentalized andpottedbiographiesandsections. "Radicals,"
weare
told, "longedfor a vacationfrom responsibility..."(p. 179);the impactof
NietzscheandEuropeanthoughtis allottedthreepages;the consequences
of "thesexualrevolution"are summarizedrather cursorily.Nonetheless,the
materialthatFishbeinexamines isvoluminous--thebibliography
isespecially
rich and extensive.Also, sheenunciatesThe Masses'direction succinctly.
The magazinewas"the productof a revolt againstthe genteeltradition..."
(p. 15).Itscredowasto turnouta revolutionary journal,one"directedagainst
rigidityanddogmawhereverit is [siclfound"(p. 18).
The magazine's editorialcrises,especiallyconcerningthe efficacyof art
asanaidin theshapingof a politicalconsciousness, are interestinginsofaras
thescopeof thisreviewisconcerned. Fishbeinunderstands theeditors'debates
aboutart as eddyingaroundtwo polarities:commitmentto socialrecon-
struction("politically
conscious art")andindulgence in bohemianstyles("free
expression"). For the mostpart, the editorsof The Massesappearto have
regardedwritingdubiously, asan ersatzversionof actingor doing,despitethe
 LiteraryCritics 115
http://www.utpjournals.press/doi/pdf/10.3138/CRAS-017-01-08 - Friday, June 03, 2016 6:16:41 PM - IP Address:5.8.47.233

requirements
thattheyhavea mediumfortheirwork.Thereis,though,
the
recognition
of the inextricablerelationof the worldandtext: "Changesin
theeconomicand political realm wouldhaveto be accompanied by a
transformationof culture..." (p. 184). Sucha situationappearsto have
frustrated
manyof TheMasses'staffandwriterswholongedfor a simpler,
moredirectimplantation of theirideals.Theychampioned wholeheartedly
"thecauseof anarchists,Industrial Workers of the World, advocatesof birth
control,andexponents
of freelove"(p. 18);yettheintegration
of theoryand
practice,criticismand commitment,theyfoundto be a difficulttask.
Speculatingon the brevityof The Masses'run andits inabilityto leavea
stronglegacy,Fishbeinacknowledges thecontribution of theU.S.government
whichhassled theradicalmagazineandfora timedeniedit mailingprivileges.
Shealsosuggests that disillusionment
setin whenthe easypassage between
textand world wasseento be illusory.Criticism,as the deconstructionist
wouldaver,doesnot lead directlyto socialreformation.Fishbein,though,
writessupportivelyandnostalgicallyaboutan early-twentieth-century group
which had a more innocent senseof the activity: "They attempted a
revolutionarytransformationof consciousness that wouldpreparethemfor
the cooperativecommonwealthto come. To live as one did beforethe
revolutionafter the revolutionhascometruly is to be blessed"(p. 208).
Althoughit appearedfor a time asif EdmundWilsonwouldsuccumbto
grandiosesimplifications,his"oeuvre"revealsa trenchantly iconoclastic turn
ofmindwhichmightfulfill Said'snotionof therestive,unaccepting critic.To
the Finland Station and Travels in Two Democracies, both written in the
thirties,are redolentof what GeorgeH. DouglascallsWilson'sfaithin some
kindof humanitarian socialism.Douglas has,to besure,readsympathetically
andcarefullythe sizableoutputof Wilson.Fromtime to time in Edmund
Wilson• America,indeed,it isdifficulttodiscernwhenDouglasisparaphrasing
Wilsonandwhenhe is articulatinghisownposition.For example,Douglas
writes:"thereasonwhywe are stymiedby bureaucrats, whyourmindsare
befuddledwith ideaslike 'democracy'that reallydo not meanmuch,is that
wehavelostthesuperiorvaluesandwaysof livingthatonceheldouthopeof
adecentcivilization"
(p.218).Forthemostpart,Douglas' intellectual
biography
proceeds in sucha mannerwith a solid,closereadingof Wilson's shifting
interests,
bothcerebralandvisceral.The writinginEdmundWilson • America
isunexceptional
andunexceptionable.
Wegleanmatter-of-factly
andchron-
ologically
Wilson'selitistupbringing
andeducation,
hisattractiontowomen
(which,fortunately,
bringsintothebookDorothyParkerandheracutewit
andone-liners),
hisutopianvisionsandhisgrowing disgust
withcapitalist
precepts,
andhisarticulation
especially
inPatriotic
Goreofthemiasmathat
America had become.Wilson'sscornfor academiaspecificallyand for
bureaucracies
andinstitutions
generallyisalsotraced.
Onceagain,though,
onegetsthesense
ofa literary
criticwhorefuses
the
attenuated
precinctofesthetics.
AsDouglas
relates,Wilson "didnotregard
 Stanley
Fogel
http://www.utpjournals.press/doi/pdf/10.3138/CRAS-017-01-08 - Friday, June 03, 2016 6:16:41 PM - IP Address:5.8.47.233

literatureanddailysociallife asbeinglockedintoseparatecompartments
withtheliterary
criticbeing
theonewhokepthisnose
cleanofthings
political,
hiseyesshutto whatwasgoingonrightdownthestreet"(pp.82-83).Wilson's
disgustwith the academicprofession stemsin part from his sensethatthe
university
literarycriticisconsigned
to a ghetto,anapoliticalcircumscribed
place.His bestknownwork of literarycriticism,writesDouglas,offersa
rebuke
toearly-twentieth-century
writings
whichWilson
feltweretoohermetic,
too dandyish.Wilson'sbellicosityabout the stateof American life aswellas
Americanletterscannotbe attributedmerely to his maturationin an era
thoughtto be a highlypoliticizedone. Like Said after him, Wilsonis too
impassionedaboutthe interactionof world andtext to settlefor an isolated
studyofthelatter.EdmundWilson
• Americapresents
Wilson'slifeandworks
inasomewhat
formulaic
manner;
nonetheless
Douglas'
subject
isinteresting
enoughto carry the readerthroughthe book.
The same could be said of E O. Matthiessen: Christian Socialist as Critic.
FrederickC. Stern'ssubjectwasa Christian,socialistand homosexualwho
wrote one of the most influential works in American Studies,American
Renaissance,beforecommittingsuicidein 1950.Stern offersan extended
reading(perhaps overlyso)of Matthiessen's majorworksandalsodelineates
hismajorcultural
concerns
in a moreor lessorthodox
format.Occasionally
Sternprovides
a morepersonalpointof viewbyacknowledging
Matthiessen's
influence
onhimandotherslikehim,"thoseof uswhothoughtof ourselves
asradicalsin thelatefortiesandveryearlyfifties,andasradicalswhocareda
greatdealaboutliteraturebut couldfind veryfewcriticsamongour elders
whoseworkwe foundinspiring..."(p. ix). Despitewritingwitha narrower
andmorepurelyliteraryfocusthanWilson,whoseworkMatthiessencitedas
aninfluenceonhim,Matthiessen
revealsa concernfor language
andform,
as well as a methodologyakin to New Criticismthat, nonetheless,is not
merelydisinterested.
Matthiessen writes,"An artist'suseof languageisthe
mostsensitive
indextoculturalhistory,
sincea mancanarticulateonlywhat
heis,andwhathehasbeenmadebythe societyof whichhe is a willingor
unwilling
part"(p. 128).AlthoughhisfocusistheAmericanwritersof literature
ofthenineteenth
andearlytwentieth
centuries,
Matthiessen
always
hasbroader
socialconcernsashisultimate focus.Stern, indeed, celebratesMatthiessen
asa modelbecauseofhisbeliefinthesymbioticrelationship
of goodliterature
andgoodsociety.Sternalsorefurbishes Matthiessenasan exemplarona
moreimmediate level."Scholasticisms"
werehisenemyastheywereWilson's,
andSternseesin hisrejectionof thema wayof mitigatingsomestillcurrent
pedagogical
problems:
"If nothingelse,thedistinctionbetweenmassciviliza-
tionandminorityculturecontinuesto be a problemthatfacesusdaily,as
everyteacherconfronting
a newfreshman classrealizesanew"(p.244).
Theproblemofhowtobea scholar andactivist,tobea bibliophile
andan
au courantfigureis the major one that each of the critics examinedabove
 LiteraryCritics 117
http://www.utpjournals.press/doi/pdf/10.3138/CRAS-017-01-08 - Friday, June 03, 2016 6:16:41 PM - IP Address:5.8.47.233

hasaddressed.
Lawyers,
forinstance,
confront nosuch division,partlybecause
theytranslate
themselvesintothepublic(i.e.,legislative)
arenasofrequently.
Somehow, though,theactof careful,criticalreadingof literaturehasbeen
pushedto the peripheryof socialissues;consequently, the critic has,
throughoutthe twentiethcentury,it appears,felt himselfto be a kind of
schizophreniccharacterbalancingpersonalandcollectivefocuses thatcould
be, but are not, regarded as congruent.Marxist, New Critical and even
deconstructionist
criticalmodesthoughtbytheirearlyadherents tobeladen
withthe powerto transform life aswellasart sinkbackintotheuniversity's
milieuas epicenemethodologies, their vitality vitiatedin academicand
professionalcontexts.
An examination of GregoryS. Jay'sT.S.Eliot andthePoeticsofLiterary
Histo0, yieldssomeinteresting insightsinto the dilemmajustenunciated.
Jay'sbookissaturatedwiththelanguage of deconstruction. "Logocentrism"
and"aporia"are mixed with quotationsfrom Lacanand Derrida, all in the
serviceof a readingof Eliot that undoesa simplisticnotion of Eliot's
engagementwith tradition. T.S. Eliot and the Poeticsof LiteraryHistory
is,however,not only anotherbookin the prodigiouscanonof Eliot criticism.
Jaywrites,"an inquiry into Eliors theorizingmay suggesta reassessment
of recent issuesin American criticism"(p. 67). Thus, despitea concern
with ecriture,supplements and other lexicaltreatsfrom the arcanaof con-
temporaryliterary criticism,Jay'sshapingideologyis not very different
than Wilson's or Matthiessen's or Said's or even Reed's: he wishes to make
thecriticalact impingeon the readingof the worldasmuchasonthereading
of the text. Jay beginshis book by writing that "Literarycriticismis a kind
of naming"(p. 1).
"Canonization" and "dismissal" are names which have been attached to
EliorsworkandwhichJayattemptsto rebut.In thewakeof hispostmodernist
re-visionof Eliot'soeuw'ewe are left with the followingdefinitionof literary
criticism:"[I It inhabitsa postlapsarianworldwhereweresistanyfinalname,
thoughwe drawourselves on in the hopesthatour appellations mayhavea
lastingrolein shaping whatothersknowanddo"(p. 1).Thereisthatmessianic
zealagain,onlythistimewrittendeconstructively. Namingin ordertoun-name
or to make consciousthe arbitrariness of namingis the criticalact of the
eighties.
Despite
theurgings
ofDerridatoupset
notions
ofmargin
andcenter,
however,thecriticaldiscourseremains onthemargin.This,itssubversiveness
indeed,justmaybethesource ofitshealth.Or,thismaybetheonlyconsolation
for a marginalizeddiscourse. (In "thereal world"peoplereadfictionfor
diversionand do notreadcriticismat all.) Sinceno coupbyliterarycritics
appearsto be in the offing(theyare evenlosinggroundin the evermore
pragmatic universities
of recentyears),solacewillin alllikelihood
befound
onlyin heartfeltbooksaboutliteratureandliterarytheory.
 118 Stanley
Fogel
Notes
http://www.utpjournals.press/doi/pdf/10.3138/CRAS-017-01-08 - Friday, June 03, 2016 6:16:41 PM - IP Address:5.8.47.233

•Geoffrey
Hartman,
Criticism
intheWilderness
(NewHaven,1980),p. 201.
2Hartman,
SavingtheText(Baltimore,1981),p. 21.
3Louis
Kampf,ThePresidential
Address
delivered
atthe86thAnnualConvention
oftheMLAin
Chicago,27 Dec. 1971.
4Michel
Foucault
interview
withJean-
•Louis
Ezine.Excerpt
translated
byPamela
Major-Poetzl
in
MichelFoucaultg
Archaeology
of WesternCulture(ChapelHill, 1983).