Lola Scobey

Professor David Scott Arnold

The James Brothers INT 510A
arch 15! "011
At A Loss for #ords
A Reflection Paper on Potential Thesis Topics
$ri%inally! my intention for this &a&er 'as to reflect on the (loneliness) that
&resents itself &ec*liarly ram&ant in the James family+ ,Late in life -enry James 'rote.
( + + + the essential loneliness of my life + + + the &ort! also! in sooth! to 'hich my co*rse
a%ain finally directs itself+ This loneliness ,is/ dee&er than my 0%eni*s!1 dee&er than my
0disci&line!1 dee&er than my &ride! dee&er! above all! than the dee& co*nterminin%s of
art+) 2a3in "14/+ S*ch loneliness! e5&ressed by all five of the James children! often and
often 'ith 'renchin% vividness! a&&ears! in a li6e'ise &ec*liar 'ay! antithetical to their
father1s s&irit*al &hiloso&hy+ Ironically -enry Sr+1s theolo%y held that %en*ine %ood
emanated only from solidarity! brotherhood and comm*nity! as o&&osed to
individ*alism+ 7or the &erversely &ersistent individ*al! (the void did not vanish 'hen the
creation 'as com&leted!) Alfred 2a3in 'rites of -enry Sr+1s ethos! ('e feel it still in o*r
aloneness+) ,"18/
#hile acclimati3in% to this dar6ly com&ellin% b*t rather dan6 to&ic! I 'as
*&ended+ Pericles Le'is s'am into my 6en! soon follo'ed by enticement into the
realms of %old of 9ichard Poirier+ $ff I t*mbled into a state of 'ild s*rmise+ These t'o
scholars ,a6a DSA ('orthies)/ 'ere ma6in% &rovocative comments abo*t to&ics on the
table for my thesis+ Therefore! this &a&er redesi%ned itself to set forth : in broad s6etch
on a ;*ite lar%e board << several of these to&ics=;*estions as a &rel*de selectin% an
"
act*al thesis s*b>ect! 'hile s6etchin% aro*nd the borders of o*r class (The James
Brothers+)
At essence << if ?iles ?*nn in his Introd*ction to Pragmatism and Other Writings
describes it ri%ht : then I m*st be a modernist at heart+ $r! at least! my heart is 'ith the
modernists! rather than %iven to the &ostmodernists or even s*rrendered to my m*ch<
adored e5istentialists and their thrillin% e5acto 6nife res&onses to a reality *tterly 'itho*t
&*r&ose+ ?*nn says the James brother1s era of modernism 'as one (in 'hich belief in
life1s f*ndamental *nity and coherence has been serio*sly eroded! or at least
f*ndamentally ;*estioned! 'itho*t a loss of a nostal%ic desire for its recovery) ,5ii/+ I
find this sort of nostal%ic desire alive in myself and believe it is a desire that remains
lar%e! c*lt*ral! and shared by many+
9ecently The Oregonian re&orted the death! in a do'nto'n Portland a&artment!
of #illiam -amilton! the theolo%ian 'ho declared ?od dead in TIME ma%a3ine in 1@AA+
$f the theolo%ical and meta&hysical tas6 that ens*ed! -amilton said! (#e needed to
redefine Bhristianity as a &ossibility 'itho*t the &resence of ?od+) ?rad*ally! I am
seein% this 'as ta6en on as a central tas6 by many of modernism1s leadin% 'riters+
?od1s res*rrection is &res*med ho&eless in most c*rrent intellect*al circles+
?*nn hi%hli%hts t'o res&onses to this ho&elessness : one from the &oet #allace
Stevens and one from 7rench &hiloso&her and literary critic Jean<7rancois Lyotard+
Stevens finds the (consolations) formerly &rovided by reli%io*s faith in sec*lar
forms s*ch as literat*re! &aintin%! dance and &hiloso&hy : even in s*btly aesthetic
moments li6e a 'oman combin% her hair+ These! ?*nn 'rites! have the &o'er to
mediate (a reality not their o'n! a 0somethin% 0'holly other!1 as Stevens refers to it in
C
Opus Posthumous! 1by 'hich the ine5&ressive loneliness of thin6in% ,and feelin%/ is
bro6en and enriched) ,?*nn 5ii/+ ,Stevens (loneliness) %ives &a*se in eval*atin% the
James family1s &ervasive &ersonal loneliness<es+/
Lyotard! ho'ever! vie's s*ch (s&irit*al s*bstit*tes) as (ineffective at best! self<
deceivin% at 'orst) ,5iii/+ Lyotard sees nothin% left to *s in the realm of metanarrative
e5ce&t the endless recirc*lation of o*tmoded ima%es from s*ch narratives in stories that
merely &ortray the o*tcome 'e 'o*ld li6e life to have+ This brin%s to mind the 2*lt*r
film on Dir%inia #oolfe reco*ntin% ho' she introd*ced %*ests at her home to other
%*ests 'ith totally fictitio*s introd*ctions beca*se she (li6ed to describe thin%s as she
tho*%ht they o*%ht to be rather than as they 'ere+) ,Thereby revealin% herself a
s&irit*al co*sin of both Strether and 7leda+/ B*t! to ma6e the desired &oint! in Lyotard1s
analysis 'e find an inte%ration of storytellin% 'ith c*lt*ral self<dece&tion+
-o&ef*lly! these initial comments set a sta%e for three &otential thesis to&ics of
&ersonal interest that the above 'riters and thin6ers delve into! or to*ch *&on+
,1/ Self Dece&tion
Self dece&tion en%a%es me as an intellect*al! &sycholo%ical and s&irit*al
concern+ -o' does one deceive oneselfE It seems a blatant contradiction in terms+
-o' does one loo6 into a mirror daily and envision there someone other than one1s
act*al selfE Fet self<dece&tion is *tterly &revalent in the h*man condition+ $nly the
rarest of saints can be deemed thoro*%hly (a*thentic+)
Self<dece&tion interests me alon% the s&ectr*m ran%in% bet'een the o*tri%ht and
obvio*s tellin% of lies to oneself ,obvio*s! most often! to others/! vers*s more or less
le%itimate &sycholo%ical &ro>ects 'hich reach beyond (the %iven) and into the realm of
8
&ossibilities << &ro>ects ty&ical of those %ifted 'ith bein% a (visionary+) #hen is (havin%
faith) an asset in leadin% others into a beneficial arena of &ossibility or ho&e rather than
a detrimental soli&sistic self<servin% faith in oneself! the 6ind of e%o<inflatin% self<
dece&tion often em&loyed to mani&*late othersE
(-omo d*&le5! homo d*&le5G) Pericles Le'is ;*otes 7rench novelist Al&honse
Da*der indictin% his o'n behavior at his brother1s death! 'hen he fo*nd one as&ect of
himself %rievin% his brother1s &assin% and one as&ect criti;*in% the events s*rro*ndin%
the death from a theatrical &ers&ective ,"5"/+ #hat sort of do*ble conscio*sness does
self<dece&tion re;*ireE
H5&lorin% this! I 'o*ld li6e to loo6 at the boo6 Self Deception by -erbert
7in%arette as 'ell as Sartre1s conce&t of (bad faith) and Hmerson1s reference to (the t'o
lives! of the *nderstandin% and of the so*l) ,Poirier 18I/! not to mention -enry James
vivid de&ictions of characters 'ho embrace a do*ble conscio*sness+
,"/ Storytellin% to the Self
Ali%nin% self dece&tion 'ith the notion of self<creatin% a theatrical or dramatic
self! as both Poirier and Le'is de&ict Jamesian characters often doin%! I 'o*ld li6e to
e5&lore the role a &ersonal story &lays in the formation of the self+ Li6e many others! I
contin*ally tell stories to myself abo*t myself+ -o' does that story : or those many
stories << f*nction in my lifeE #hat ha&&ens 'hen a critical story is *ndermined! as 'as
Strether1s self<conceived drama abo*t Bhad and adame Dionnett 'hich scri&ted a
leadin% heroic role for himselfE Altho*%h Strether 'as able to ac6no'led%e and
inte%rate the colla&se of his romantic story! are some stories 'oven so dee&ly into the
self! that the *nderminin% of them ca*ses the self itself to colla&seE
5
St*dyin% this co*ld loo6 at self<stories 'hose very fo*ndation is self dece&tion!
incl*din% the &sycholo%ical formation of a (false self) as described by &sycholo%ist
Donald #innicott! as 'ell as the milder creation of (a 'orld of theatrical &ossibility)
'hich Poirier de&icts ca*sin% Jane A*sten1s character Hmma (to for%et 'ho she is) and
to h*rt another 'oman in the thrill of self<dramati3ation ,14A/+ Across this s&ectr*m!
one a%ain enco*nters the visionary and the f*nction of narratives and metanarratives in
validatin% the visions of those 'ho have! as Poirier describes Strether! the ability to
conceive (of 'hat life might be) ,18"/+ Poirier here elevates Strether into ;*ite
si%nificant com&any : s*ch as the a*thors of the J+S+ constit*tion! 2arl ar5! #alt
Disney! and even self<&*blished *to&ians li6e -enry James! Sr+ : indeed all others 'ho
have a%%ressive! 'istf*l or idealistic ideas of 'hat life mi%ht be+
And ho' do these stories << fictions or visions << &lay o*t over timeE Does (tellin%
tales) to oneself abo*t the self and=or abo*t one1s 'orld &romote self<transcendence
,the ability to act for the benefit of others in addition to the self or in &reference to the
self/+ $r does it tend to end in self<im&risonment that tra&s the a*thentic self and its
ca&abilitiesE 7or both 7leda and Strether! the stories they told themselves abo*t
themselves clearly established limits and bo*ndaries on their behavior ,i+e+ set an
(atmos&here) or realm of otherness for their lives/ and! thereby! constrained their life
&ros&ects! as conventionally conceived+
Fet! as James1 novels ill*strate! convention itself can have an el*sive role in self
stories+ 7or the &erson e5ercisin% ima%ination on their o'n behalf! convention and
social s*ccess may not be the final arbiter of s*ccess+ #hat a&&ears to others as self<
defeatin% ri%id r*le<follo'in% of social or moral standards may act*ally be an actor
A
&layin% o*t their self<assi%ned role in their o'n ima%inative story : in 'hich they have
scri&ted themselves as a socially or morally heroic fi%*re+ So! to (do the ri%ht thin%) and
relin;*ish conventional f*lfillment ,marria%e! money! stat*s/ may! in fact! not be deemed
a de&rivation b*t a dee& f*lfillment : from livin% *& to one1s satisfyin% heroic self story+
-ence! richly re'ardin%+
B*t! to com&licate the self<dece&tion! this re'ardin% f*lfillment is often &ortrayed
in literat*re not as tr*e virt*e! b*t as a form of &ride+ The s*ccessf*l self<story teller
may e5*de that aroma of &ride ,arisin% from satisfaction 'ith the self! from dedication to
the &*rity of the self/ that ma6es self<ri%hteo*s or ri%idly moralistic &eo&le so va%*ely
na*seatin%+ Altho*%h Strether is not an *nsym&athetic fi%*re! his &om&o*s (there yo*
have it) 'itho*t re%ard to the evident feelin%s of aria ?ostrey is off&*ttin%+ And the
catch<"" of self dece&tion is that it is %enerally allied 'ith some form of inner or o*ter
bonda%e+ So! >*st 'hen o*r storyteller 'al6s for'ard to receive their standin% ovation!
they find their a*thentic self << the only self ca&able of livin% life (to the f*ll) << vanishin%
behind the c*rtain+
The thrill of these self sa%as can birth fi%*res li6e intri%*in% a*thor and notorio*s
liar<abo*t<himself! Br*ce Bhat'in! described by a friend as one 'ho (tells not a half
tr*th b*t a tr*th and a half) ,Se5ton/+ Self sa%as can be a com&le5 com&onent in a
hi%hly &rod*ctive life+ it 'as #illiam James 'ho! after attendin% a &lay! shared that (my
o'n real circ*mstances 'ere richer and f*ller of cosmic elements than any &lay I 6no'!)
and #illiam 'ho li6e'ise made an acc*sation concernin% the family1s (Beltic
do*bleness of nat*re) 'hich he felt had bred a (deficient in sim&le family affection)
,9+#+B+ Le'is 50"<508/+
4
$ne very intri%*in% case of (tr*th and lie) s'irls aro*nd the mother of the James
children! ary #alsh James+ Stories one tells oneself abo*t one1s family are often
metastories abo*t the self+ Jean Stro*se! bio%ra&her of sister Alice James! notes that
('hat the James had to say abo*t themselves and each other 'as so o&a;*e! el*sive
and conf*sin% that it &ractically needed a translator) ,148/+ In &artic*lar! she &oints o*t
that (the %ro'n James siblin%s described their childhood as &*re &aradise+) #illiam!
-enry and Alice all eff*sively evo6ed their mother in an%elic terms+ Fet! the evidence
e5hibited that (All five of her children s*ffered most of their lives 'ith cri&&lin% emotional
tro*bles+ De&ression! nervo*s brea6do'n! alcoholism! and vario*s &sychosomatic
ailments + + + + ( In act*ality! Stro*se says! (ary James seems to have been a cold!
&ractical! s*&ervisory mother! 'ho had little sym&athy for any si%n of 'ea6ness and no
&atience for the fre;*ent illnesses that &la%*ed her children) ,145/+ She also notes
Leon Hdel1s observation that the mothers in -enry James novels are (%ras&in%! selfish!
demandin%! often terrifyin% creat*res+ At least t'o of them resemble v*lt*res or
vam&ires! feedin% off the s&irits of their innocent children) ,144/+
$n the *n&ac6in% of self<dece&tive storytellin%! Stro*se notes that (the myth of
family divinity + + + + sho*ldn1t be disco*nted as mere &ro&a%anda. it serves as an
im&ortant %*ide to 'hat the Jameses 'anted or 'ere s*&&osed to believe abo*t their
lives! and that in itself tells *s a %reat deal abo*t them) ,144<14I/+ #hat do s*ch
children have in common 'ith Strether and others 'hom Poirier says %reatly %ift the
'orld by &ortrayin% 'hat does not e5ist! or does not yet e5ist as a real &ossibilityK the
*&holders of ho&e in times seemin%ly ho&elessE
I
And s*rely one m*st also as6. ho' does this storytellin% &roclivity &osition a
&erson livin% in a 'orld that #illiam James described as a (real fi%ht) and not >*st
(&rivate theatricals)E ,"80/+ #e loo6 at Strether! 'hose &ersonal &ro>ect is b*ilt on self<
dece&tion as 'ell as lyin% by other members of the American set in Paris! and feel
com&elled to as6 if some'here in all this d*&licity he lost the (real fi%ht) : his o'n
freedom to really live+
,C/ The S&irit*al Ima%ination
ost im&ortantly! in terms of a thesis! ho' do self<dece&tion and storytellin%
relate to the s&irit*al life and the reli%io*s (enter&riseE) -o' do 'e conce&t*ali3e and
comm*nicate o*r o'n s&irit*al livesE -o' have seminal fi%*res of s&irit*ality and
reli%ion conce&t*ali3ed and comm*nicated their s&irit*al livesE
Boo6s introd*ced in David Scott Arnold classes indicate that self dece&tion!
storytellin% and the s&irit*al life may con>ointly relate to 'hat Lynn 9oss<Bryant and
others call (the moral ima%ination+) B*rrently I am not clear 'hat this term really means
,b*t see that o&&ort*nity arisin% in the *&comin% (#ays of 2no'in%+)/ ean'hile! for
&*r&oses of this &a&er! I 'ill call this factor the (s&irit*al ima%ination+)
9+#+B+ Le'is directly connects -enry James sense of the theatrical to 'hatever
s&irit*al ima%ination << reli%io*s or moral vision << one may conceive James to have+ (It
remained only for -enry James to carry the scenic method beyond the social and
sta%ily comic realm + + + for him to arrive at the lar%er and *ltimately the reli%io*s vision
that characteri3ed his ma>or &hase) ,50A/+ ,Not to mention that -enry himself called
the scenic method his (only salvation+)/ Le'is later *n&ac6s this a bit! 'ritin% that
James (s*cceeds almost *ncannily in be%ettin% a mystic conscio*sness and a reli%io*s
@
e5&erience o*t of the irredeemably h*man and earthbo*nd modern An%lo<American
'orld+) The methodolo%y here seems to be -enry1s artistic ima%ination s*%%estin% to
the reader1s o'n ima%ination 'hat brother #illiam called (*nion 'ith somethin% lar%er
than o*rselves) ,51C/+
#illiam also insisted that this mystical sense of *nion (defies e5&ression and no
ade;*ate re&ort of its contents can be %iven in 'ords) ,51C/+ #hich leads me to as6.
'hen the h*man s&irit*al realm is advanced by the &ersonal mystical e5&erience of a
si%nificant fi%*re ,B*ddha! Jes*s! St+ Pa*l! ohammed! St+ 7rancis! others/! ho' is that
transmitted to c*lt*reE
I entirely a%ree 'ith #illiam that (The mother sea and fo*ntain<head of all
reli%ions lie in the mystical e5&eriences of the individ*al) ,9+#+B+ 50"/+ B*t ho' has the
(s&irit*al ima%ination) ,or (moral ima%ination)/ been bro*%ht into &lay in comm*nicatin%
that individ*al mystical e5&erience to othersE In terms of c*lt*ral im&act! myriad
;*estions arise abo*t ho' s*ch e5&eriences are comm*nicated! i+e+ sent o*t by the
(e5&eriencer) to be received by initial follo'ers and! from them! transmitted to millions of
adherents+
Additionally! 'hy do so many of these seminal fi%*res have no ori%inal 'ritin%s of
their o'n : the ('ritin% do'n) bein% left to devoted disci&lesE #hat1s ('ritten do'n)
then ty&ically mor&hs into the fo*ndational doc*ment of an instit*tion! thereby becomin%
s*b>ect to a motley cre' of ennervatin% instit*tional distortions+ This is 'here American
c*lt*re seems to sit today re%ardin% reli%ion : %oin% do'n for the third time in a sea of
*nf*lfillin% instit*tional distortions of seminal mystical e5&eriences+
10
#ithin a frame'or6 of these three to&ics << self<dece&tion! storytellin%! and the
s&irit*al ima%ination << I co*ld raise vario*s interrelated ;*estions and concerns in a
thesis+
7or e5am&le! 'hat role does ima%ination &lay in constr*ctin% a s&irit*al life that is
valid yet not self dece&tiveE $r is self dece&tion an inherent &ro&erty of reli%ion and
s&irit*ality as 7re*d maintainedE I ta6e it #illiam James 'o*ld hold that! so lon% as a
&erson1s s&irit*al beliefs foster &ositive o*tcomes in their life! then those beliefs 'o*ld
not be deemed &recisely self dece&tive! even if they are (fact*ally) 'ron%+ $r! more
acc*rately! James mi%ht hold that self<dece&tion is irrelevant on the scale of &ra%matic
val*e! i+e+ can it be ('ron%) if it ('or6s)E
$n another note! Pericles Le'is s*%%ests that Strether &ossesses a &ra%matism
necessary for those livin% in a 'orld 'itho*t ?od : evidenced by his 'illin%ness to
(acce&t the fictions of others 'ith 'hom one is thro'n) and (the necessity of shared
ill*sion as the only faith on 'hich an action can be based) ,"5I/+ This reiterates the
idea that self dece&tive beliefs may be someho' essential to life f*nctionin% and!
therefore! self<validatin% in that sense+
B*t 'here does &erceived (tr*th) factor inE Jltimately! can ima%ination only
reach *s if tethered to some consens*al tr*th or 'hen it &rovides &ra%matic val*e for
o*r daily livesE This may be Poirier1s &ro>ect in elevatin% -enry James beyond the
reach of mere literary criticism into stat*s as a mentor to life+ #here do tr*th=reality
,morals/ and the theatre of &ossibility=vision ,art/ intersect in a dynamic 'ith the &o'er
to %en*inely move e5istential sit*ations for'ardE #here do they disastro*sly collide
d*e to an e5cess of ima%inationE Scientific American recently *sed Steve Jobs and his
11
cancer dia%nosis to as6. at 'hat &oint does *nrelentin% o&timism become self<
destr*ctive self<dece&tionE ,#hich may have affinities 'ith the ;*estion of 'hen the
ima%ination of a %eni*s becomes insanity+/
In terms of s&irit*ality as enter&rise a6a (reli%ion!) it1s 'orth e5&lorin% 'hether
there1s a third 'ay for'ard in &lanetary reli%io*s develo&ment other than the t'o
fre;*ently cited o&tions. tolerant &l*ralism or syncretism+ Bontra Lyotard! co*ld a third
o&tion emer%e in the form of a story more encom&assin% than any c*rrently in &lay that
s*ddenly ta6es the 'orld by stormE $f co*rse! sho*ld s*ch a thin% ha&&en! this 'o*ld
be a direct co*nterthr*st to the 'hole moment*m of (&ost<modernism+)
B*t! in s&irit*ality! 'ill *ltimately (the best story 'inE) Best accommodatin% the
a&&arent scientific realities of h*man e5istenceE Best &a&erin% over e5istential realities
'ith vain ho&esE Best con>*rin% *& (not yet) &ossibilities that e5cite and motivate the
h*man heart into actionE $r &erha&s a story so ima%inative that daily livin% becomes a
&ale and irrelevant alternativeE Dersions of these have been ado&ted by diverse cre's
from e5istentialists to video %amers+
-o'ever! one of the most intri%*in% of these lines of tho*%ht mi%ht come from
combinin% insi%hts from #illiam James and 9ichard Poirier+
James held that ,1/ the ori%in of all reli%ions lie in the mystical e5&eriences of the
individ*al! ,"/ that (&ersonal reli%io*s e5&erience has its root and center in mystical
states of conscio*sness!) and ,C/ that mystical e5&erience (defies e5&ression + + + no
ade;*ate re&ort of its contents can be %iven in 'ords) beca*se it leads to (states of
insi%ht into de&ths of tr*th *n&l*mbed by the disc*rsive intellect!) to (ill*minations) and
(revelations) ,9+#+B+ 51"<51C/+
1"
Place this alon%side Poirier &l*s Leo Bersani1s fore'ord to A World Elsewhere
and observe ho' they &osition the *se of lan%*a%e in American literat*re+ Their
de&iction seems analo%o*s to reli%io*s develo&ment as it ta6es fli%ht from an ori%inal
mystical e5&erience+ Bersani 'rites! (Literat*re &erha&s 0ta6es &lace1 as a certain 6ind
of brea6 in e5&erience! as a more or less deliberate fail*re of comm*nication + + + +
certain &arts of the 'or6 reenact the discontin*ity from 'hich the 'or6 'as born+ + + +
,Poirier1s/ trib*te to that 0somethin%1 o*tside the te5t : or! in other 'ords! to the 'riter1s
movin% if vain effort to transcend his work as an artist and to deny the finality of te5ts+ + +
+ #hich is to say that these moments al'ays are! to *se the La'rentian &hrase
fre;*ently cited + + + a 0str*%%le for verbal conscio*sness1),5iv<5vii/+
This also relates to the descri&tion Lyotard %ives in his a&&endi5 to The
Postmodern ondition of the avant %arde in art! in 'hich he says that modern art is
emblematic of a (s*blime sensibility) that is! a sense (that there is somethin% non<
&resentable demandin% to be &*t into sensible form and yet over'helms all attem&ts to
do so) ,Alys'orth/+ This (*n&resentable) thin% seems 'hat Poirier is tryin% to %et at
'hen analy3in% the dilemma ar6 T'ain enco*nters in &ortrayin% -*c6 7inn+ -*c6
co*ld even be called (&ostmodern) as Poirier de&icts T'ain1s str*%%le! in that -*c6
e5&resses ?ary Alys'orth1s distinction bet'een modern and &ost<modern art. (B*t
'here modern art &resents the *n&resentable as a missin% content 'ithin a bea*tif*l
form! as in arcel Pro*st! &ostmodern art! e5em&lified by James Joyce! &*ts for'ard
the *n&resentable by for%oin% bea*tif*l form itself! th*s denyin% 'hat 2ant 'o*ld call
the consens*s of taste) ,&ar+ @/+
1C
It is easy to discern -*c6 7inn1s (*nbea*tif*l form) for 'hich no consens*s e5ists
by com&arin% -*c6 to the h*man forms &revalent in the fiction of -enry James :
adame de Dionnet as acclaimed by her &eers! for e5am&le+ In fact! James1 criti;*e of
-a'thorne *ses James1s &erce&tion of America1s lac6 of bea*ty of form as one of its
&rimary thr*sts ,Poirier/+ S&irit*ally! this brin%s to mind the &assa%e in Isaiah
antici&atin% Bhrist! that sim&ly says (they fo*nd no bea*ty in him+)
$verall! I feel this analo%y << bet'een T'ain1s diffic*lty &ortrayin% -*c6 7inn
'itho*t doin% so 'ithin the very conventions he is resistin%! and the dilemma of ho' to
translate seminal mystical e5&eriences and their (dan%ero*s *ni;*eness) ,Poirier "0"/
into somethin% c*lt*rally vital 'itho*t 6illin% them off in conventions and lan%*a%e of
reli%ion : deserves a &a&er all of its o'n+
American c*lt*re is in the midst of a reli%io*s meltdo'n 'ith nothin% yet on the
hori3on to re&lace it+ $n a &o&*lar level! #estern society sho's a &la%*e of
meanin%lessness! addictive cons*merism! mindless entertainment and des&erate art
that attem&ts to fill that void+ odernism see6s to &er&et*ate the (cash val*e) of
reli%ion 'itho*t a ?od and 'itho*t the s*&ernat*ral+ Postmodernism &er&et*ates
nihilism and divisiveness+ Fet! beyond the (atmos&here) of academia! mystical
e5&eriences are ha&&enin% all ro*nd and individ*als are &erceivin% themselves to be in
relationshi& to ?od+ Blearly! as #illiam James tells *s! a (real fi%ht) is %oin% on+ If 'e
can1t &reserve the messa%e of the seminal voices &*r&ortin% to be in comm*nication
'ith ?od! if 'e can1t receive them in near essence rather than *nder severe distortion!
ho' are 'e %oin% to 'inE
18
B*lt*rally! 'e are s*fferin% the &li%ht of T'ain and his novel+ As Poirier says!
(!uckle"err# $inn is an instance of 'hat ha&&ens to a novel 'hen society! as the a*thor
&erceives it! &rovides no o&&ort*nity! no lan%*a%e for the transformation of individ*al
conscio*sness into social drama) ,1@C/+ Bonversely! 'e are a society that can hardly
ima%ine a res&ected literary 'or6 &rovidin% an o&&ort*nity or lan%*a%e for transformin%
mystical conscio*sness into social drama+ T'ain! Poirier says! co*ld not conceive of a
society that offered alternatives to artificiality+ #e! li6e'ise! increasin%ly cannot
conceive an acce&ted &*blic disco*rse that offers alternatives to sec*larism! that
conceives the s&irit*al and s*&ernat*ral as res&ectable+ In so&histicated circles! 'e
have become acc*stomed to thin6in% of any stron% conviction as coercive+ #hat1s a
mystic to doE $ther than >*m& on a raft 'ith -*c6 and %o do'n the river searchin% for a
vocab*laryE
I s&ea6 for the mystic and receiver of visions and dreams as Poirier s&ea6s of
American 'riters ado&tin% a (serio*sness abo*t literat*re as an instit*tion) beca*se of
their sense of (the co*ntry1s havin% been betrayed by its other instit*tions),5/+ Bertainly!
those 'ho have 6no'n direct reli%io*s e5&eriences deserve to ado&t a (serio*sness)
abo*t their e5cl*ded &osition : abo*t bein% *sed by reli%io*s instit*tions 'hich betray
their e5&erience and then toss them o*tside the cam& as ho&elessly *nrealistic+
9e&eatedly! the ch*rch has inte%rated its theolo%y 'ith c*rrent science! only to have the
'hole edifice overt*rned 'hen the science is disconfirmed+ It is time to %o bac6 to the
dat*m of reli%io*s e5&erience and b*ild from there+
7rom that startin% &oint! can a mystic1s a*thentic comm*nication be fo*nd in a
te5t as 'e 6no' itE Ban they share Poirier1s belief that! (The %reat 'or6s of American
15
literat*re are alive 'ith the effort to stabili3e certain feelin%s and attit*des that have! as
it 'ere! no &lace in the 'orld! no &lace at all e5ce&t 'here a 'riter1s style can %ive them
one) ,5i/+
$r sho*ld they la*nch o*t 'ith Poirier to farther shores in the (struggle for verbal
conscio*sness),"10/+ (Str*%%le) is a 'orthy 'ord 'ith a fine s&irit*al linea%e that r*ns
strai%ht thro*%h the meanin% of (Israel) as (one 'ho str*%%les 'ith ?od+) Sho*ld their
str*%%le to comm*nicate somethin% a*thentic to their e5&erience embrace 'hat Bersani
describes as (the efforts to esca&e from itself! from the condition of bein% merely
literary) beca*se the mystical revelation is! indeed! a (trib*te to that 0somethin%1 o*tside
the te5t)! an (e5&erience of r*&t*re) callin% him or her to (deny the finality of all te5ts)
,5vi/+
If so! 'hat 'o*ld s*ch a comm*nication loo6 li6eE #here can the s&irit*al
ima%ination ta6e *sE
In my thesis! my ho&e is to travel o*t and brin% bac6 &ers&ective 'ith val*e to the
s&irit*al ima%ination+ The lantern *nder my >ac6et 'ill be Poirier1s sense of (%ift to the
%eneral h*man conscio*sness) softly shinin% as an *nattainable b*t l*rin% icon+
Tre66in% forth into the dar6 'ilds of thesis! I am see6in% in&*t! feedbac6! %*idance!
readin% recommendations! and ma&s of foc*s &oints in the readin% already
recommended+
#or6s Bited
Ayles'orth! ?ary+ (The Postmodern Bondition+) Stanford Enc#clopedia of Philosoph# %
Postmodernism+ C0 Se&tember "00I+ #eb+ " 7ebr*ary "01"+
1A
Bersani! Leo+ 7ore'ord+ A World Elsewhere& The Place of St#le in American 'iterature(
By 9ichard Poirier+ adison. The Jniversity of #isconsin Press! 1@I5+ i5<5viii+
Print+
(7amo*s A*thors Dir%inia #oolf! Novelist+) Prod+ Dir+ Peter -ort for 2*lt*r+ #est Lon%
Branch! NJ. Scan Prod*ctions+ Dideo+
?*nn! ?iles+ Introd*ction+ Pragmatism and Other Writings+ By #illiam James+ Ne'
For6. Pen%*in Boo6s! "000+ vii : 555ii+ Print+
-a*%ht! Nancy+ (1?od is Dead1 Theolo%ian Dies+) The Oregonian 11 arch "01". B5+
James! #illiam+ Pragmatism and Other Writings+ Ne' For6. Pen%*in Boo6s! "000+
Print+
Le'is! Pericles+ (James1s Sic6 So*ls+) The !enr# )ames Re*iew "" ,"001/. "8I<"5I+
Print+
Le'is! 9+#+B( The )ameses& A $amil# +arrati*e+ Ne' For6. 7arrar! Stra*s and ?iro*5!
1@@1+ Print+
Poirier! 9ichard+ A World Elsewhere& The Place of St#le in American 'iterature+
adison. The Jniversity of #isconsin Press! 1@I5+ Print+
Se5ton! David+ (Br*ce Bhat'in. Letters from a 7allen An%el+) 'ondon E*ening
Standard! "5 A*%*st "010+ #eb "4 7eb+ "01"+
Stro*se! Jean+ (The 9eal 9easons+) E,traordinar# 'i*es& The Art and raft of
American -iograph#+ Hd+ #illiam Linsser+ Ne' For6. Boo6<$f<The<onth<Bl*b!
1@IA+ 1A1<1@5+ Print+