tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8800978618139140574.post9088989354432529690..comments2023-08-14T03:19:12.094-07:00Comments on Happy America Literature: A Critical AsideKarl Wenclashttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12328715380823038766noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8800978618139140574.post-54690815254387256362008-03-15T08:51:00.000-07:002008-03-15T08:51:00.000-07:00p.s. I believe Cozzens eventually DID respond to M...p.s. I believe Cozzens eventually DID respond to MacDonald. He was well able to stand up for himself-- as I recall, he handled MacDonald's arguments fairly well.<BR/>p.p.s. Don't think I have any bias toward Robbe-Grillet. Given my own temperament, I was more open to him at the beginning, moreso than to a rabid establishment apologist like Cozzens. I'm just unable to deny Cozzens's abilities as a novelist.Karl Wenclashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12328715380823038766noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8800978618139140574.post-24539009162516489302008-03-15T07:29:00.000-07:002008-03-15T07:29:00.000-07:00You haven't convimced me that you're moved by Robb...You haven't convimced me that you're moved by Robbe-Grillet.<BR/>In fact, if you read his notes in "For a New Novel," you'll see that moving people was hardly his purpose. (Though one can never know where his ideas are concerned. As he said, "Perhaps. Perhaps not.")<BR/>It sure seems to me that R-B rejected communion, transcendence, and tragedy. Isn't that what he said?<BR/>Other points:<BR/>-The phrase "middlebrow" has become a cliche. Most people who use it are short-circuiting their thought.<BR/>It indicates someone who thinks in categories and boxes.<BR/>I'll grant, not everyone.<BR/>-If the young R-B found himself on a pedestal he'd be the first person to pull himself off.<BR/>-I'm not here to refute MacDonald. My point in referring to him was that, yes, his criticism of Cozzens destroyed the man's reputation. Which you agree with. <BR/>I have no disagreement with strong criticism-- today we don't see enough of it. I actually agree with many of the points MacDonald made about that particular book-- which I hope to address in an upcoming post.<BR/>The best way for me to present Cozzens is to explain WHY he's an author who deserves a second look. To do that I've explained his relevance to we the reader now.<BR/>I'll do more of this.<BR/>(There's great irony in lit-bloggers-- most who've been closed-minded toward the ULA and underground writers-- suddenly pleading for fairness.)Karl Wenclashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12328715380823038766noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8800978618139140574.post-54864516261847319262008-03-13T18:32:00.000-07:002008-03-13T18:32:00.000-07:00Also, if you read Macdonald's piece on Cozzens, he...Also, if you read Macdonald's piece on Cozzens, he gives lots and lots and lots and examples as to why he thinks the book is lousy. He was puzzled by Cozzens's prominence and adulation and sought to provide a few reasons for why he thought Cozzens was overrated. He succeeded wildly--the piece just about destroyed Cozzens's career. You might not like it, but that's called criticism. You also might try to write something reasoned and measured for why Macdonald was wrong. That would be called writing and argument. What you've got here are a bunch of non sequiturs and weakly put forth postulations about why you're right. Pardon me if I'm not convinced.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8800978618139140574.post-59764264850515442272008-03-13T11:12:00.000-07:002008-03-13T11:12:00.000-07:00A few points:1. Just because you found some preced...A few points:<BR/><BR/>1. Just because you found some precedence for an opinion doesn't mean that anyone who has that opinion is a parrot.<BR/><BR/>2. Robbe-Grillet is hardly on a pedestal. Go to a bookstore and you'll find him about as often as Cozzens.<BR/><BR/>3. The fact that you can remember incidents from the novel are not necessarily testaments to its greatness. I can quote Austin Powers more than Walt Whitman.<BR/><BR/>4. Ambition is not the hallmark of anything but itself. Dickens was ambitious; so was Hitler.<BR/><BR/>5. The reason you prefer Cozzens is because his prose was effective for you as you read it. Is it really impossible for you to imagine others being moved by Robbe-Grillet? Why are your experiences with literature presumed to be genuine, and mine presumed to be spoonfed?<BR/><BR/>--the wandering jewAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com