Letters (89 page)
Authors: Saul Bellow
In Memory of Ralph Ellison
(Delivered in Bellow’s absence by Joseph Mitchell at the dinner meeting of the American Academy of Arts and Letters on April 4, 1995)
Ralph Ellison, who died last year at the age of eighty, published only one novel in his lifetime. At a Bard College symposium attended by foreign celebrities, Georges Simenon who was at our table asked Ellison how many novels he had written. Hearing that there was only one, he said, “To be a novelist you must produce many novels. You are not a novelist.” The author of hundreds of books, writing and speaking at high speed, could not stop to weigh his words. Einstein, a much deeper thinker, had said in reply to a sociable lady’s question about quantum theory, “But isn’t one a lot, Madame?”
In Ralph’s case it certainly was a lot. Simenon remains readable, enjoyable, but Inspector Maigret belongs to a very large family of cops or private eyes or geniuses of detection like Sherlock Holmes or the heroes of Dashiell Hammett, Raymond Chandler
et al
. These honorable and gifted men worked at the writer’s trade. Ellison did no such thing. What we witness when we read
Invisible Man
is the discovery by an artist of his true subject matter, and some fifty years after it was published this book holds its own among the best novels of the century. Toward the end of the Fifties, the Ellisons and the Bellows lived together in a spooky Dutchess County house with the Catskills on the western horizon and the Hudson River in between. As writers are natural solitaries, Ralph and I did not seek each other out during the day. A nod in passing was enough. But late in the afternoon Ralph mixed the martinis and we did not always drink in silence. During our long conversations I came to know his views, some of which I shall now transmit in his own words:
et al
. These honorable and gifted men worked at the writer’s trade. Ellison did no such thing. What we witness when we read
Invisible Man
is the discovery by an artist of his true subject matter, and some fifty years after it was published this book holds its own among the best novels of the century. Toward the end of the Fifties, the Ellisons and the Bellows lived together in a spooky Dutchess County house with the Catskills on the western horizon and the Hudson River in between. As writers are natural solitaries, Ralph and I did not seek each other out during the day. A nod in passing was enough. But late in the afternoon Ralph mixed the martinis and we did not always drink in silence. During our long conversations I came to know his views, some of which I shall now transmit in his own words:
“We did not develop as a people in isolation,” he told James McPherson in an interview. “We developed within a context of white people. Yes, we have a special awareness, because our experience has in certain ways been different from that of white people; but it was not absolutely different.” And, again: “I tell white kids that instead of talking about black men in a white world or black men in a white society they should ask themselves how black they are because black men have been influencing the values of the society and the art forms of the society . . . We did not develop as a people in isolation.”
“For me,” he said, “some effort was necessary . . . before I could identify the areas of life and personality which claimed my mind beyond any limitations
apparently
imposed by my racial identity.” And, again: “This was no matter of sudden insight but of slow and blundering discovery, of a struggle to stare down the deadly and hypnotic temptation to interpret the world and all its devices in terms of race.” It took great courage, in a time when racial solidarity was demanded, or exacted, from people in public life, to insist as Ralph did on the priority of art and the independence of the artist. “Fiction,” he says, “became the agency of my efforts to answer the questions: Who am I, what am I, how did I come to be? What should I make of the life around me? . . . What does American society mean when regarded out of my
own
eyes, when informed by my
own
sense of the past and viewed by my
own
complex sense of the present? . . . It is quite possible,” he adds, “that much potential fiction by Negro Americans fails precisely at this point: through the writer’s refusal (often through provincialism or lack of courage or opportunism) to achieve a vision of life and a resourcefulness of craft commensurate with the complexity of their actual situation. Too often they fear to leave the uneasy sanctuary of race to take their chances in the world of art.” Ralph did no such thing.
apparently
imposed by my racial identity.” And, again: “This was no matter of sudden insight but of slow and blundering discovery, of a struggle to stare down the deadly and hypnotic temptation to interpret the world and all its devices in terms of race.” It took great courage, in a time when racial solidarity was demanded, or exacted, from people in public life, to insist as Ralph did on the priority of art and the independence of the artist. “Fiction,” he says, “became the agency of my efforts to answer the questions: Who am I, what am I, how did I come to be? What should I make of the life around me? . . . What does American society mean when regarded out of my
own
eyes, when informed by my
own
sense of the past and viewed by my
own
complex sense of the present? . . . It is quite possible,” he adds, “that much potential fiction by Negro Americans fails precisely at this point: through the writer’s refusal (often through provincialism or lack of courage or opportunism) to achieve a vision of life and a resourcefulness of craft commensurate with the complexity of their actual situation. Too often they fear to leave the uneasy sanctuary of race to take their chances in the world of art.” Ralph did no such thing.
I have let him speak for himself. But there is one thing more, of a personal nature, that I should like to add in closing. Often, when I think of Ralph, a line from E. E. Cummings comes to me: “Jesus, he was a handsome man,” Cummings wrote—he was referring to Buffalo Bill. Ralph did not ride a watersmooth stallion, nor was he a famous marksman. But he did have the look of a man from an earlier epoch, one more sane, more serious and more courageous than our own.
To John Hunt
June 18, 1995 Boston
Dear John,
Sorry to have been so very, very long. The reason lies partly in my illness, of which Keith [Botsford] may have told you. I was down, down, down for months. I don’t always know what’s going on—I’ve always had a serious focus problem—but this time all reality was pulled away, stored like a carpet. I may or may not have thought that I was in another world—my relations to this one have never been anything but relatively steady. Wherever I may have been, there was no “time” there. I wasn’t certifiably unconscious but neither was I in any ordinary sense conscious. After six weeks I was transferred out of intensive care to “recovery.” “Recovery” was a euphemism for infantile weakness. I had to learn to walk again, to go to the toilet like an adult, to tell time, etc.
How I (we!) would have loved to be with you in France. But for the time being, I have to stick around the Boston U. Hospital. Life is far from normal. I take huge doses of blood-thinners, and I am warned that to swallow two aspirins may be fatal. I
do
now and then write something, and I can read again, indulge my lifelong vice for books—far too many of them.
do
now and then write something, and I can read again, indulge my lifelong vice for books—far too many of them.
To move to the South of France would be infinitely desirable 1.) if we could find someone to buy the Vermont house and 2.) if I hadn’t been undermined by pulmonary and cardiac—puzzlingly threatening (and unreal)—disorders. All the granite I depended on has turned into loose sand and gravel. This is the
déreglement de tous les sens
[
118
] Rimbaud was sold on. Poor Rimbaud, he didn’t live very long whereas I, a week ago, “celebrated” my eightieth birthday. People tell me that I look perfectly well.
Sans blague!
[
119
]
déreglement de tous les sens
[
118
] Rimbaud was sold on. Poor Rimbaud, he didn’t live very long whereas I, a week ago, “celebrated” my eightieth birthday. People tell me that I look perfectly well.
Sans blague!
[
119
]
I was
so
grateful for your generous letter. All best to you and to Chantal,
so
grateful for your generous letter. All best to you and to Chantal,
John Hunt (born 1925) is a writer and scientist who during the Fifties and Sixties worked at the Congress for Cultural Freedom in Paris and subsequently at the Salk Institute for Biological Studies in La Jolla, California, the Aspen Institute, and the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton, New Jersey.
To Herbert Gold
June [?], 1995 Boston
Dear Herb—
Did you ever think we’d live to see the century end? I used to play out the mental arithmetic but never thought I’d finish off the millennium. Maybe I won’t. It’s not over till it’s over, as the great baseball philosopher said.
Your letter dated May 24th reached me about a week ago. I was sorry to read that your brother had died. I know what these deaths are. I had two older brothers. They died ten years ago, within the same week. I find myself thinking of them daily, at odd moments—in an ongoing manner.
I have no case to make against them. I no longer blame them, as I used to do. I am now their senior and one of my responsibilities is to protect them affectionately. For that matter, I am much older than my parents too. I suppose the good do die young.
We
are given more time to re-cobble our virtues and fit ourselves to die.
We
are given more time to re-cobble our virtues and fit ourselves to die.
There does seem to have been a certain estrangement [between you and me], and perhaps the reason is mainly spatial. Separated by an entire continent we’ve been unable to attend to our friendship. But I’ve always had warm feelings toward you. There are, perhaps, a few incompatibilities but they aren’t, and never were, serious. I value your judgment and your good opinion, and I wish you well.
Herbert Gold (born 1924) is the author of many books including
The Man Who Was Not with It
(1956) and
Still Alive! A Temporary Condition
(2008).
The Man Who Was Not with It
(1956) and
Still Alive! A Temporary Condition
(2008).
To Saul Steinberg
July 28, 1995 W. Brattleboro
Dear Saul—
When your picture arrived I was again caught in an undertow—one of the drugs I was taking had swollen my tongue and my palate to such an extent that I was unable to swallow.
I was, in short, choking to death. And once more, rallying, I pulled through. I did however have a thoroughly disagreeable week and was unable to call you to say that your picture had been delivered. So it was no
manque de politesse
[
120
]. Having yet again fought off the forces of assassination I can now look at your harmonious composition with enjoyment. I keep it on the kitchen mantelpiece and study it over my teacup. I badly need the balancing measure and proportion I am enjoying, and feel at certain moments that I am camped in your mind, the source of equilibrium.
manque de politesse
[
120
]. Having yet again fought off the forces of assassination I can now look at your harmonious composition with enjoyment. I keep it on the kitchen mantelpiece and study it over my teacup. I badly need the balancing measure and proportion I am enjoying, and feel at certain moments that I am camped in your mind, the source of equilibrium.
Yours gratefully and affectionately,
Janis and I are expecting you one day soon.
To John Hunt
September 13, 1995 W. Brattleboro
Dear John,
I might, if I were a more gifted writer, tell you what this year has
really
been like—but I can’t transmit the neural creepings and the wing-beating of the spirit, and all the thoughts etc. that use me as a thoroughfare.
really
been like—but I can’t transmit the neural creepings and the wing-beating of the spirit, and all the thoughts etc. that use me as a thoroughfare.
It hasn’t, all in all, been a sick summer. The strange difficulty is that I have stamina enough to see me through the morning’s work, and after that I am
useless
. I take a walk, I lie down at siesta-time, the afternoon expires. I’ve lost the habit of writing letters. After dark, I can’t go back to the desk.
useless
. I take a walk, I lie down at siesta-time, the afternoon expires. I’ve lost the habit of writing letters. After dark, I can’t go back to the desk.
I spent many evenings looking at Faulkner photos in the book you so generously sent me. I should have written to thank you but this morning is the first full one in months. [ . . . ] For the book,
merci mille fois
[
121
].
merci mille fois
[
121
].
As ever (whatever that is),
To Julian Behrstock
September 13, 1995 W. Brattleboro
Dear Julian—
I hate to think of your chemotherapy, and I do think about it daily. Medicine seems to have made great progress in that department, as in others. More than one doctor has told me that I wouldn’t have made it five years ago. And I have the distinct feeling, or intuition, that you and I are meant to go on, for a bit. Actuarial commonsense tells us that a bit is all we can fairly expect. I surround the statistics with prayers and ask the Lord whether he can see his way clear to granting us yet one more breather.
The enclosed story [“By the Saint Lawrence”] is one I wrote when I got out of the hospital in January. Magazines have all become so serious (or seriously pornographic) that they seldom have space for fiction.
The New Yorker
was willing to print me but I was told that the word-rate was lower than for non-fiction—i.e. libelous “exposés” and the trashing of quite inoffensive people. So I accepted
Esquire
’s higher offer. Their fiction editor, Rust Hills, has a sentimental soft spot for me.
The New Yorker
was willing to print me but I was told that the word-rate was lower than for non-fiction—i.e. libelous “exposés” and the trashing of quite inoffensive people. So I accepted
Esquire
’s higher offer. Their fiction editor, Rust Hills, has a sentimental soft spot for me.
With me it’s still as it was for Gibbon. When George III met him he said, “Always scribble scribble scribble, eh, Mr. Gibbon?”
Your old and constant pal,
To Martin Amis
September 30, 1995 W. Brattleboro
Dear Martin—
How to explain how it is that I haven’t written: I see at once that such a project can only be a dud.
To say that I’ve been “out of sorts,” hung up, convalescent for the better part of a year conveys nothing much. I’ve been unable to pull myself together. I seem normal enough in the morning—at least until I touch certain tender places, and then I feel nature’s spite against the aging when these tender places begin to ail. Then I suspect that I never shall recover—I’m too old to do it. I have cardiac troubles (“atrial fibrillations”) and beneath this agitation of the heart muscles there is an unbearable sluggishness, the original sloth of the deadly sin. I have just enough stamina to write for an hour or two, and then I go back to bed for a siesta! At three o’clock I realize that the day has somehow been swallowed up. I take a good many drugs—“beta-blockers”—and these affect the brain weirdly. I am easily depressed. The days fly away, the weeks are uncontrollable, the months and the seasons are like the merry-go-round.
So my only serious effort is to think, or try to think, how to chuck this derangement and drift, and get onto some firm ground.
There are plenty of books around but I don’t really
read
them—they go
past
my mind, not into it.
read
them—they go
past
my mind, not into it.
Well, all this is true enough. But it’s far from the whole truth. I do take pleasure in Janis’s company, and in the weather, the summer blues and greens. I’ve been too weak to tend the tomato plants, or to dig or prune, but I haven’t been completely
hors d’usage
[
122
]. And I haven’t been well enough to see the shoulderless [———].
That’s
an unmixed benefit, a very considerable plus.
hors d’usage
[
122
]. And I haven’t been well enough to see the shoulderless [———].
That’s
an unmixed benefit, a very considerable plus.
Reading your
Augie March
essay was gratifying. You were far too generous, however. I can’t read a page of the book without flinching. It seems to me now one of those stormy, formless American phenomena—like Action Painting. It
was
necessary to invent a way to cope with the curious realities of American life, and I did obviously
invent
something. But the book I now find disconcertingly amorphous, sound and fury signifying not too much.
Augie March
essay was gratifying. You were far too generous, however. I can’t read a page of the book without flinching. It seems to me now one of those stormy, formless American phenomena—like Action Painting. It
was
necessary to invent a way to cope with the curious realities of American life, and I did obviously
invent
something. But the book I now find disconcertingly amorphous, sound and fury signifying not too much.
Other books
The Way to Wealth by Steve Shipside
Dragonmark by Sherrilyn Kenyon
A Different Lifetime: Stepping Back in Time in the Former Yugoslavia by Martin Radford
Never Loved (Crescent View Academy) by Lucille Wiekel
The Mistress of Hanover Square by Anne Herries
Boys Rock! by Phyllis Reynolds Naylor
The Girl Who Never Was by Skylar Dorset
Back to You by Bates, Natalie-Nicole
Truthseekers by Mike Handcock
Four Degrees Celsius by Kerry Karram
