BACK TO
BLOOD
By
Tom Wolfe
704
pp. Little, Brown And Company
$30
By
David Beilstein
TO
disagree with literary maestro Martin Amis is unwise. The British novelist, recently
adopted by America by way of Brooklyn, NY, is one of the great prose stylists
of satirical elegance. Mr Amis’ campaign
against cliché continues - burning brighter the more he is proven right by
the turbulence of culture and of Western decline.
The
strength of the modernist, as Amis is a nervous member, is - there are standards. The weakness of the
modernist, conversely, is those standards hang unattached - no stronger than mere human opinions.
That disengaged nature, the perch upon which the modernist hangs mid-air, was
the opening the post-modernist entered. Once the post-modernist entered the
dance, jars of urine, poo-on-a-stick - would become competitive with the work of
Dickens, Shakespeare, etc. This of course, is nonsense, but many
post-modernists will argue the point. Interestingly enough, Wolfe’s Back To Blood depicts quite a bit of
this parade; with interesting and conflicting success.
Still, one can elaborate
upon the master’s review of the Wolfeian oeuvre without defaulting into total
error. In Mr Amis’ 2001 collection of literary criticism, The War Against Cliché, he wrote of Wolfe’s 1998 novel, A Man In Full,
Tom Wolfe, with his bright architectural eye, writes so well about institutions that he forces you to compare him to his beloved Dickens. Dickens was a great visitor of institutions and no doubt he ‘researched’ his Marshalsea Prison, his Chancery, and so on. But he [Dickens] also dreamt them up, and reshaped them in the image of his own psyche, his own comic logic. That is perhaps why they have lasted and why Wolfe’s edifices look more trapped in time. — Martin Amis, The War Against Cliche
Mr
Amis appears amiss how much the Wolfeian, Faustian universe is marked by the octogenarian’s southern-gothic imagination.
There is no institution in existence - or that Wolfe has attempted to use as literary
setting - naked of Mr Wolfe’s own persona. The teeming Gotham represented in his
break out novel, The Bonfire of The
Vanities, is of Wolfeian nocturnal dreams - the description reeking of the
pioneering New Journalists’ observations and studious attention to detail. But
these creations are universe’s approximating true localities and custom -
created to fulfil a larger dramatic canvas in which to show off Wolfe’s own
configurations of dramatic complexity.
Whether
it is the peek-a-booing of Atlanta in A
Man In Full and now Miami’s hot white sun licentiousness in Back To Blood - Wolfe’s psyche is
engaged. Mr Wolfe has baffled the literary gatekeepers for a career. He has
written essays on that sump; My Three
Stooges attacked the grumpiness of John Updike, Norman Mailer, and John
Irving - all possessed of literary dudgeon that what Wolfe did was not really
literature. It was journalism. Before that kerfuffle, the man with the white
suit’s essay, Stalking The Billion-Footed
Beast was a literary manifesto, a pious attempt at gathering a movement and
propelling a semblance of literary pulchritude.
There
was no movement, it seems. Mr Wolfe, 20 odd years later, is the sole member - a
dashing one at that. But it was excuse enough to establish Mr Wolfe and set him
apart, exciting fans and creating large book sales. Enough sales, it seems -
goes the rumor - to snatch up a $7 million advance for Back To Blood.
I
can’t keep the math straight mind you, but that rounds off to a little more
than $10,000 smacks a page. You
can, therefore, hear it!
:::::::::Lookit ‘em move!
Count it! Cash! Look it roll in, - smell it, feel it; bathe in it! It’s
actually green!:::::::::
I
cannot help but think Mr Wolfe’s beastly
manifesto, written for Harpers, has been as misunderstood as Ernest Hemingway’s old adage, “Write what you know” - as if the writer
is not to educate his or her self in things unnatural to their environs. Old
man Hemingway, I’m confident - never meant this; neither did Wolfe argue
reporting techniques are the sum of fictional composition. This is an
inaccurate depiction. Contrary to the tepid airs of literary snobs, Mr Wolfe
seems to be quite clear: reporting techniques are never to be without the dross
of literary royalty (imagination); of human norms and moods.
Wolfe's Back To Blood has taken a drubbing by
critics, perhaps deserved, perhaps not. What is interesting is Wolfe’s
sightseeing journey into 21st century Miami depicts a country
unmoored from Orthodox religion, from custom and place; the characters gyrating
through Back To Blood, detached, and
as Shakespeare said, like “beasts.” Wavering from one extreme to the other.
Some critics have pointed out whatever Wolfe saw in his reportage of Miami, he
did not like it. At all. And Back To Blood is, says some, a judgment
of sorts by a conservative novelist on a society eating itself. For this
author, Back To Blood is better, more
visually entertaining, than A Man In Full
- miles better composed than I Am
Charlotte Simmons - yet underperforms the shear humanity of Bonfire of The Vanities. It is true,
there is much Thackeray in Wolfe, and this tends to create a certain dramatic
panacea - one where, well, few noble characters arrive on scene to give break
to the hedonism and vanity of the atmosphere.
Tom
Wolfe isn’t for the weak-hearted - he’s not for everyone.
But
this is Wolfe’s imagination at work. I have always seen Wolfe’s winnowing
everything down to status as somewhat impersonal; a missing of the bull’s-eye
if you will. Sure, it does reflect the self-interest and duplicity starring in
the human heart, but a surer way, it would seem, depicting the bane of human
conflict finds sounder soil in Saint Paul’s summation in the Epistle to the
Romans, chapters 1-3. This theological insight explains the mercurial
motivation behind Wolfe’s status seeking galaxy of individuals - saints and
sinners, alike. Or, maybe just sinners. But if Mr Amis is correct in his
assessment Wolfe’s work is time-locked, it could be that status seeking alone,
is not the best way to peel the human onion as it were.
No comments:
Post a Comment