Why am I reading
Wyndham Lewis?, you ask. Well, he represents a major hole in my knowledge of
modernism. (Or perhaps, more fairly, one of the many major holes...) I think I
admire his paintings and drawings more than those of any other English artist
of the first half of the twentieth century, but I haven't ever really gotten a
grip on his vast written corpus. I've read The Apes of God, Blasting & Bombardiering, Tarr, and quite a number of stray shorter
things, but I've never systematically tackled his works and his career. So I'm
starting that, and a fortuitous copy of Paul O'Keeffe's big biography—hailed
by Laurence Rainey on the jacket—was one entrée.
I've finished the
six-hundred-odd pages of O'Keeffe now, and feel a bit more warmly toward it
then I did in my last post. It sent me back to Tarr (which I'm in the middle of) and oddly
enough, it sent me back to Jeffrey Meyers's 1980 The Enemy, the first full-length biography of
Lewis, and until O'Keeffe, the biography of record. O'Keeffe clearly despises
Meyers's book; as I work my way through Meyers's account of events O'Keeffe
also describes, I recognize how much energy in Some Sort of Genius has been devoted to setting the record
straight, to making clear that Meyers has gotten this or that sequence of events
or exchange of letters wrong.
It's a perfectly
understandable impulse, even pardonable, but someone who comes to O'Keeffe
first, with no knowledge of Meyers, is apt to wonder why so many pages are
devoted to excruciatingly detailed sorting out of dates and meetings and so
forth. The reason—occasionally revealed in an endnote, less
often in an outright textual reference—is that O'Keeffe is striving to write a definitive biography, to basically blow his only
competitor out of the water so far as the facts of the matter go. Sometimes O'Keeffe is
fascinating and richly detailed on very interesting matters indeed; at other
times, he goes on at spectacular length on quite trivial matters.
I haven't read all
the way through Meyers's The Enemy
yet, so comparisons must be provisional. But here's a few anyway:
•O'Keeffe is a more graceful and subtle
writer than Meyers by far; sometimes his style rises to real pitches of
musicality that I enjoy very much. But Meyers is far more forceful and
straightforward, and cuts to the chase when he needs to: there's a lot to be
said for that.
•Which leads to the very obvious fact that
O'Keeffe could have used some grim and relentless editing. Some Sort of
Genius is a biography
that is weighed down, at times almost sunk, by the accumulation of detail. It's
good to know that Lewis was expelled from The Slade—a fact which O'Keeffe has feretted out,
but Meyers is completely innocent of. It's less fascinating to be given the
term-by-term numbers of how many times Lewis signed in for his classes, and how
many times he had a friend forge his signature. (That, I'm afraid, is the biographer showing
off his research.)
•The paper trail of Lewis's early life is
distressingly scanty. Meyers passes breezily over everything until his public
emergence in his mid-twenties in London; O'Keeffe shows us every scrap he has
accumulated, alas not particularly to any illuminating effect. When the paper
trail gets better established, then both biographers begin expanding. But
Meyers has the edge here, for his attention is more firmly fixed on the
writing, the painting, the work
in short. Neither biographer provides the kind of rich examination of the works
that one gets in Edgar Johnson's life of Sir Walter Scott, for instance, or A.
David Moody's recently completed (and triumphant) life of Pound, but Meyers
provides a somewhat better sense of what's going on in each book, and why each
new canvas is important. (On the other hand, O'Keeffe will let you know what
sort of advance Lewis received for each book, and how long he kept the
publisher waiting, and so forth—even if sometimes it's not quite clear
whether the book is a novel or a set of essays or whatever.)
•Meyers is frankly a lot better at setting
Lewis in the context of modernism as a movement and as a congeries of disparate
talents. He's better at managing his cast of characters, showing them as
important writers/painters/artists in their own right, rather than as walk-ons
in the drama of Wyndham Lewis's life (as they appear in O'Keeffe).
2 comments:
I always mean to read Lewis's novels...one day. I remember reading one of Martin Seymour-Smith's books as an undergrad in which, if I remember correctly, he says Lewis is the greatest prose writer of the twentieth century or something like that (don't worry, I knew MSS was nuts even at the time).
Michael Hofmann's bad review of Mariani's Stevens bio:
http://www.lrb.co.uk/v38/n18/michael-hofmann/snap-among-the-witherlings
I like your blog and thank you for sharing this well done.
krympeplast
Post a Comment