Donald Barthelme, always very articulate, wrote (in an essay called "After Joyce" in the posthumously published Not-Knowing) that "However much the writer might long to be, in his work, simple, honest, and straightforward, these virtues are no longer available to him. He discovers that in being simple, honest, and straightforward, nothing much happens: he speaks the speakable, whereas what we are after is the as-yet unspeakable, the as-yet unspoken."
"Language, Barthelme said, had been "contaminated," by being put to "manipulative" use. "The not-knowing [what to write next] is not simple, because it's hedged about with prohibitions, roads that may not be taken." This sentence has the striking ring of inhibition, of neurotic self-censorship. Could it be that, whatever was wrong with various ways language was being used in public by anonymous commercial and political persuaders, the fiction writers and poets were inventing problems for themselves? Is it possible that they were, unknowingly in this "not-knowing," practicing evasion? Of course, as Barthelme was well aware, an ironic stance gets in the way of resolution.
There was no novelty in the idea that language was contaminated by dishonesty:
And the betrayers of language
........................n and the press gang
And those who had lied for hire,
The perverts, the perverters of language
For Barthelme, who was as aware of trends in the visual arts as he was of new writing, the great shift had been in the relation of the work of art to the world. (This point is important about Barthelme because the postmodern writers are so often said to be writing about the fictiveness of fiction, and he was not attracted to that game.) From being a window on the world, art had become an object in itself, and Barthelme was among the very first to notice--and this would be the true postmodernist note distinctive in his work--that by making art works into things, they were then on a par with all other things instead of occupying somehow some higher realm. Claes Oldenberg, an early pop artist who had a storefront studio on the Lower East Side, turned it into a literal store, with objects made of plaster and painted crudely, all with price tags. The monumental, dumb, boring repetitiveness of Warhol's soup can painting rationalized and ironized the urban grid that had supplied the armature of so many abstract expressionist painting. Jasper Johns devoted himself to doing paintings of "things the mind already knows."
The language of fiction took a steep slide in the direction of speech, partly as a way to eliminate outworn diction in the spirit of the early modernists, partly because some writers found it more expressive. Barthelme began to look at language itself, sentence, fragments of sentences, as being more interesting in itself than for anything it might mean. He walked around the city, listened to conversations, and read newspapers and magazines with his ear cocked for some strange new idiom, and took it home with him, wrote it down, and placed it, as if surrounded by scare quotes, into some inapposite context, just as Kurt Schwitters had taken torn pieces of paper and pasted them together to make something new. Instead of a picture of something that existed, something that had not existed before. This approach appealed to Barthelme.
His hope was that the friction between the collaged items would generate new meaning. History was against him there; the world was becoming increasingly opaque and uninterpretable, whether or not banal or exhausted language was itself responsible for leaching meaning out of the world. Not only Barthelme, but most serious artists, had to come to grips with the fact that their work was meaningless at the same time that it had achieved status as a thing among other things. It was a promotion in one dimension, since it was no longer secondary to the world, but a demotion in another direction because it was now just one mnore thing. It was a thing added to the world, but without higher status.
Barthelme's example is a hopeful one, for his work suggests that even if many people feel like they've fallen into an appendix of the universe and can't get out, it's not a dead end. Though he is not likely to have imitators, since the result would be inadvertant parody, his methods may be influential for many years to come.
No comments:
Post a Comment