HOME / the book club: New books dissected over e-mail.

The Golden Age

Contrarian Impulses

Posted Wednesday, Sept. 20, 2000, at 4:15 PM ET

Jim and Tony,

I confess I may not be quite the Vidalian you both seem to be. He's a considerable figure, a civilized and intelligent man of letters, and some of his work will endure. But he's also a member of what Tom Brokaw has called "the greatest generation," and that description justly applies to writers as well as to World War II infantrymen. The novelists who came to prominence during the war and the decade following probably included a higher density of heavyweight talent than any other in our history. In that impressive company, Vidal holds a respectable place, but not, I think, a stellar one.

I even find myself resisting the contrarian qualities he enjoys displaying, and which both of you applaud. They're in a grand old American tradition, and it's obviously a healthy thing to have our national shibboleths questioned, but his iconoclasm is so unrelenting it can seem knee-jerk. Was the Cold War a transparent fiction designed to promote American imperialism? Not if the recently opened KGB archives are any indication. Was Alger Hiss framed? Were the Rosenbergs innocent? Probably not. Did FDR deliberately engineer a Japanese sneak attack on American Pacific forces? Well, perhaps in the same sense that Lincoln, unwilling for political reasons to initiate the impending hostilities, engineered the firing upon Fort Sumter, but surely not out of some intricate, covert scheme of world conquest.

If he selected his targets with discrimination rather than firing scattershot, I think he'd be a more effective naysayer.

One thing I do admire about him, something which has perhaps received insufficient attention in these exchanges of ours (although Tony adverts to it briefly in his note about The Best Man), is the role homosexuality has played in his work. From his second novel, The City and the Pillar, through the one under discussion, it has been a consistent theme. (Included in my observation are even several of his screenplays; Tony mentioned Ben-Hur, a wonderfully mischievous bit of subtext, but his teleplay for The Left-Handed Gun provides another example. A gay buckaroo? Played by Paul Newman, no less? You have to give Vidal credit for chutzpah.)

The courage involved in publishing The City and the Pillar back in 1948 must have been considerable. He risked not only scorn and social disgrace, but potentially even more injurious, a kind of ghetto-ization, relegation to a nether world of gay genre fiction. The novel itself is neither very good nor very bad, but it's impossible not to applaud the author's guts. There are no precedents I can think of in mainstream English literature (Proust might be cited as a French precursor, although Proust's narrator/alter ego, "Marcel," never strays from heterosexuality himself, which may be interpreted as a kind of authorial insurance policy). The sort of camp fiction written by Ronald Firbank occupies an entirely different literary realm.

Therefore it should come as no surprise that among the things I liked best in The Golden Age were some of the New York party scenes. Unlike Jim, I didn't even mind it when Vidal himself occasionally put in a stray appearance (although I agree with him that the self-praise, whether intended humorously or not, struck an embarrassingly discordant note). Party scenes are notoriously hard to bring off, and it's here that Vidal's craft is most in evidence; he navigates unerringly through the crowded rooms, providing us with a wonderfully vivid sense of time, place, and ambience. But what I liked best about these scenes remains all but unmentioned, remains, characteristically, as subtext (there is one small, glancing overt reference on Page 321): It's the notion that there is an unwritten cultural history of any given epoch, a history involving the relationships within a clandestine gay coterie.

A much younger writer, an Englishman named Alan Hollinghurst, has written a provocative novel, The Swimming-Pool Library (click here to buy it), concerned almost exclusively with this same notion. But Vidal, precisely because he integrates these elements within a larger social history, and because he doesn't hit us over the head with them, probably paints the more compelling picture. Here are Tennessee Williams and Paul Bowles, Leonard Bernstein and Virgil Thompson, all sharers in a secret (a pretty open secret in their own circle, of course, but one "which dare not speak its name" in the world at large), and all influential shapers of a culture. There is an integrity to these scenes, and a verve, otherwise sadly lacking in the novel as a whole.

And it would be remiss of me, before I close, not to mention what I regard as the single best passage in the novel, a virtuoso piece of writing that demonstrates what Vidal is capable of when he's at the top of his form. It is a long drunken monologue put in the mouth of Dawn Powell, an all but forgotten novelist from the period (and, it should be said, a real-life friend of, and mentor to, Vidal), largely but not exclusively devoted to Ernest Hemingway. It is funny, bitchy, erudite, and devastating. It sounds exactly like the inspired rant of a brilliant, bitter drunk who has watched the reputations of her inferiors eclipse her own. One needn't agree with it to be dazzled. The passage is at once a generous tribute to Ms. Powell herself--she's probably due for a revival, and this passage might single-handedly encourage one--and a classic piece of comic writing.

A few more passages like that, and I might have become a Vidalian.

Jim, I suppose it's a shame we weren't able to disagree more, but conflict isn't the only useful mode for a discussion of this kind, and I do believe we've been true to our reactions to the book. And Tony, what the hell are you doing out there on the wrong coast? I mean, sure, you have all that music and art and theater and the better newspaper, but we have Peet's and Chez Panisse and San Francisco twinkling across the bay like the Emerald City of Oz. We'll buy you lunch. Pack your bags!

Best wishes,
Erik

Contrarian Impulses

Posted Wednesday, Sept. 20, 2000, at 4:15 PM ET
Print This ArticlePRINTEmail to a FriendE-MAILShare This ArticleRECOMMEND...Get Slate RSS FeedsRSS
 The Golden Age, by Gore VidalThis week, our Book Clubbers discuss The Golden Age, Gore Vidal's opus about Washington and Hollywood in the 1940s and '50s. Click here to buy the book and here for an explanation of Slate's new and improved "Book Club" format.
COMMENTS

Reader Comments from The Fray:


Mr Tarloff's memory fails him concerning Vidal's discussion of The Winds of War; [Monday] Vidal gave the book a pretty thorough drubbing. It was Mary Renault for whom he betrayed the sneaking affection. Alas, the sentences you fellows have chosen to quote are pretty dire, and it seems that the Lion of Ravello may at last be succumbing to the writerly entropy that drags down all except Saul Bellow (so far). I always found most of the novels a bit--what, astringent?--but let's remember him above all as the finest essayist our nation produced in the 20th century. The American Montaigne will always be welcome on that shabby table at my bedside.

--Bruce Lanier Wright

(To reply, click here.)


If I might rattle the teacups a bit, these two gentlemen are delineating fine points of the novel in an atmosphere so rarefied as to be all but unbreathable. What has happened to the Berkeley air?

I, too, remember with deep admiration Vidal's NYRB piece reviewing all 10 novels on the NY Times fiction bestseller list. Have our correspondents looked at the NY Times fiction bestseller list lately? Granted there are 15 books on it now, but no writer who prizes his sanity would dream of reviewing most of that sludge. But it was possible back then. It's not now.

My point is not that in a sloppy age Vidal is to be forgiven slapdash practice of the craft of fiction. By all means, summon Tolstoy and Joyce and Henry James to make your case against Vidal (if, indeed, those writers are precisely relevant to a discussion of The Golden Age?) But both of you go on to fault Vidal for writing about, caring about, a Big Idea. For pete's sake, at least he has one! Roth, Updike, Bellow-and Vidal--can barely make it to the bestseller list these days, and surely can't stay on it long.

Do you gentlemen who care for the craft of fiction note the decline that has occurred in the last quarter-century? Vidal does, I'm sure; and I'll wager The Golden Age will be more important, more memorable, than the finely crafted Jamesian ironies now propounded by twelfth-rate imitators of James currently practicing fiction, precisely because Vidal's work does at least tackle ideas. That's one of the jobs of the novel, a job few "craftsmanlike" writers today even consider undertaking. Please ponder that poisonous state of affairs before you start lambasting Vidal for not advancing the art of fiction in his latest novel. What art of fiction? Him and who else?

Besides, Vidal has already advanced the art considerably (to take a small example, consider the paradox that Vidal's Lincoln, beloved of both our correspondents, is about a tragic president yet is structured comically, like a Trollope novel, with the White House at the center of the action like a Barchester manse; this is a book written by a man who knows the novel form intimately). In novel after novel, from Myra Breckenridge to Creation, Vidal has stretched the form to accommodate ideas. To take him to task now for finishing what he--and, I'd submit, largely he alone--started with respect to American historical fiction is to underappreciate his considerable contribution. I'm betting that The Golden Age, even if wobbly, will stand alone as a kind of fiction not much honored, much less done well, these days. As a novelist, Vidal will take a tormenting idea over a tormented ego any day. That fast-fading literary instinct--you can't buy it or teach it in a writing class--is to be cherished, not trashed.

--Ivan Webster

(To reply, click here.)


Notes from the Fray Editor: There was this argument on which was Vidal's first historical novel. And Colleen wants to tell James Fallows "if you read Washington, DC you will find out all about Diana, Clay and Peter in the early years and it will answer all the questions you asked in your piece. He is just not re-treading old ground--it is a series and meant to be read that way."

Loki says Gore Vidal just is like that, he hasn't changed: "These types of sentences have appeared in almost all the novels I've read from him. I guess it's a matter of taste, but hardly worth pointing out, really...and what exactly is anachronistic about the term 'elitist'?"

What did you think of this article?
Join The Fray: Our Reader Discussion Forum
POST A MESSAGE | READ MESSAGES
TODAY'S PICTURES
TODAY'S CARTOONS
DOONESBURY FLASHBACK
TODAY'S VIDEO
Christo and Jeanne-Claude's "The Gates."92/091120_TP.jpg
Cartoonists' take on health.15/091120_TC.jpg
The cutting edge.1/122939/2183724/DoonesburyPlaceholder.jpg