The three novels
of John Dos Passos’ U.S.A. Trilogy on my shelves had not been opened in
decades, but I was not the only reader neglecting their author. As far back as 1961 critic John Wrenn opened
his biography of Dos Passos by asking “What’s happened to John Dos Passos?” [1] Many are now unfamiliar with the writer whom
Sartre lauded as “the greatest writer of our time” and the work that Edmund
Wilson said “may well turn out to be the most important that has yet been
produced by any American of Dos Passos’ generation” [2]. A novel which was named to
the Modern Library’s list of the one hundred most important novels of the
twentieth century has for many little more than historical interest.
Whatever his own merits, Dos Passos’
reputation may have suffered from a double-edged extra-literary handicap. He was most certainly a leftist writer of the
‘thirties, though some critics strive to play down his political engagement [3]. Oddly, though vulgar Marxist criticism
abounds today under a variety of methodological names and artists are held to a
politically defined standard of behavior even in their personal lives, the
proletarian novels of the Depression are at a discount in the literary
marketplace, due in part to the tendency toward reductive simplistic portrayals
by some leftist fiction writers. Today’s
taste is likely to reflect a counterbalancing preference for experimental
avant-garde techniques such as those very different strategies employed by,
say, Gertrude Stein, Vladimir Nabokov, and James Merrill. A reader with a taste for elegant obscurity is unlikely to tolerate tales of put-upon workers.
Furthermore, Dos
Passos’ innovations which so impressed early readers of the U. S. A.
trilogy strike the twenty-first century reader as shallow. To Alfred Kazin, who wrote the
introduction to my 1969 Signet classic
edition, he was alone among his cohort in his exploitation of “radical
technique, the language of Joyce, and ‘the religion of the word’” [3]. According to Kazin Dos Passos confronted the
nastiness of modern capitalism not with social protest but with art. His energy arises not from social protest and
the hopes for a better world but from an aesthete’s Lost Generation “disenchantment”
and a resulting retreat into aestheticism.
Similarly, he was primarily to Wrenn the creator of “brilliant technical
innovations” [4].
A contemporary
reader may find it strange to see Dos Passos classed with Joyce as an
experimenter. It is true that The 42nd
Parallel is not a linear narration; it is, rather five people’s stories provided
a chapter at a time, interspersed with brief biographies of culturally
significant figures such as Debs, Big Bill Haywood, and Thomas Edison, and two
other sorts of passages. The first of
these, “The Camera’s Eye,” probably the
basis for Kazin’s mentioning Joyce, contains autobiographical sketches done in
a very loose stream-of-consciousness (all in lower case to emphasize the self-consciously
experimental character of the writing).
The second, “Newsreel,” contains fragments from the Chicago Tribune
interspersed with popular song lyrics and other materials, reminiscent of
techniques in Eliot’s “The Wasteland” or Pound’s Cantos.
The principal
characters are defined in terms reflecting economic class. Thus Mac is a lumpenproletarian Wobbly
with the interests of the entire working class in mind while J. Ward Moorehouse
is a public relations consultant seeking only his own enrichment. Likewise, most of the featured historical
figures are politically significant: on the one hand there are two socialists (Eugene
Debs under the title “The Lover of Mankind” and Big Bill Haywood) and two representatives
of Progressive formations (William Jennings Bryan and Robert LaFollette). Balancing these Americans who sought to
benefit the masses are profiteers like the notoriously anti-union Andrew
Carnegie and pioneer imperialist in Mesoamerica Minor Keith [5].
While this
arrangement of the text into four kinds of writing would ideally coalesce into
a unified vision by the novel’s end, the memoirs (“The Camera’s Eye”) have very
little relation to the main narratives and the “Newsreel” sections often seem
even more tenuously linked to any governing pattern that would lend each fragment
significance. They sometimes approach
incoherence in themselves. Following the
headlines “PLUMBER HAS HUNDRED LOVES” and “BRINGS MONKEYS HOME,” for instance,
one reads “missing rector located losses in U. S. crop report let baby go naked
if you want it to be healthy if this mystery is ever solved you will find a
woman at the bottom of it said Patrolman E. B. Garfinkle events leading up to
the present war run continuously back to the French Revolution.” The verbal sequence scarcely seems to hang
together.
The most
consistent themes are clearly the injustice of capitalism and the appeal of the
socialist alternative. The reader might
well regard Dos Passos as engagé. He
supported Sacco and Vanzetti and was active in the First American
Writers Congress of 1935 which had been organized by the Communist
Party-dominated League of American Writers. His visits to first the Soviet Union and then later
to Spain did sour him on Stalin’s Comintern, and though he then lived long enough to
support Joseph McCarthy, Nixon, and Goldwater, there can be doubt
about his active support for a revolutionary alternative in his youth.
Critics had, at
least since Hauptmann’s The Weavers, questioned whether an entire class
or nation can be a satisfactory narrative subject. Balzac had sought to present an encyclopedic panorama
of French society in his Comédie humaine, but his canvas was
sufficiently large to allow an accumulation of complex and individualized
portraits, while Dos Passos’ characters remain shallow, with neither any single
portrait nor the group substantial enough to support novelistic length. There is little structural patterning in the design
of The 42nd Parallel and indeed in the trilogy as a whole,
little in the way of governing image systems or productive ambiguities. Once Dos Passos’ formula is determined, its
completion is largely a matter of filling in the blanks. Such matters of aesthetic evaluation are not
subject to positive proof; at best they accurately convey subjective
impressions, but they are quite real in the reading experience and can be
decisive in determining a book’s worth.
The widespread
opinion among critics that the quality of Dos Passos’ fiction declined after
the U. S. A. trilogy is surely justified, but perhaps the author’s chef
d’oeuvre itself may have been overvalued due to its once-fashionable
combination of progressive politics and avant-garde literary technique
(particularly when the technique is considerably more digestible than, say, Finnegan’s
Wake). Dos Passos deserves, without
a doubt, a place among those writers of his era who took to depicting the lives
of ordinary Americans. Following the nineteenth
century local color writers like Bret Harte and Sarah Orne Jewett and the next
generation such as Sherwood Anderson and Edgar Lee Masters, an efflorescence of
leftwing authors, many with Midwestern associations, succeeded. Nelson Algren is quite correct when he said in
1951 “there has hardly been an American
writer of stature who has not come up through the Chicago Palatinate.” [6] Among the authors he may have had in mind are Frank Norris 1870-1902, Upton
Sinclair, Theodore Dreiser, Floyd Dell, Jack Conroy, James Farrell, and Richard
Wright. While Dos Passos may no longer
be considered an artistic genius, as some had thought when U. S. A. was
first published, he has a secure place in an important lineage. The 42nd Parallel remains
worth reading, though I am not motivated to reread its two companion volumes which
seem to provide only more quantity of the same content.
1. John Dos Passos,
p. 2.
2. See Sartre’s "John
Dos Passos and 1919," reprinted in Literary and Philosophical Essays
(1955), translated by Annette Michelson, p. 103 and Wilson’s “Dahlberg, Dos
Passos and Wilson,” The Shores of Light, p. 449.
3. Alfred Kazin, for
instance, in his introduction to the Mentor paperback goes to lengths to defend
Dos Passos against the charge of social conscience, saying that he is
erroneously assumed to be a “left-wing novelist,” whereas he has in fact always
been “detached from all group thinking.”
4. The 42nd
Parallel, vi.
5. John Dos Passos,
p. 8.
6. Three innovators
are also included: Thomas Edison, August Steinmetz, and Luther Burbank who
might be taken to simply signify technical progress.
7. In Chicago:
City on the Make, p. 11. “There has
hardly been an American writer of stature who has not come up through the
Chicago Palatinate.” Surely thinking of
Frank Norris 1870-1902, Upton Sinclair 1878-1968, Theodore Dreiser 1879-1945,
Floyd Dell 1887-1968, Jack Conroy 1899-1990, James Farrell 1904-1979, Richard
Wright 1908-1960. At the same time a
cohort of leftist writers, mostly Jewish, such Michael Gold, Max Eastman, and Josephine
Herbst, were active in New York City.
No comments:
Post a Comment