David M. Poxson I948
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
_ .v - THE CRITICAL RECEPTION OF c- W'v‘ WILLIAM FAULKNER IN AMERICA Thesis for the Degree of M. A. MICHIGAN STATE COLLEGE David M. Poxson I948 LIBRARY ’ Michigan State University " PLACE IN RETURN Box to remove this checkout from your record. To AVOID FINES return on or before date due. MAY BE RECALLED with earlier due date if requested. -. .-- c-oou-o .3”- .v—Otn — 6/01 cJCIFIGIDamepGS—pjs mmh—I’ ”w r- _ - i '7 r77 '-' 'r THE CRITICAL RECEPTION OF WILLIAM FAVLKNER IN AMERICA by David M. Poxson A THESIS Submitted to the Graduate School of Michigan State College of Agriculture and Applied Science in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF ARTS Department of English 1948 TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER Page I Introduction. 1 11 Early Novels. 8 In mwmam:aimmo - . ~18 1V Sanctuerz . 29 V Theee 13 . 58 V1 .Eéflfifiuég August . 42 V11 2192.9. My 23. Martino, 3221; Others, mag . 53 V111 Abealam, Abealoml.. e . 64_ 1x ‘223_Unvanquiehed . 74 IX ‘ggg,flélgugglgg_ . 80 XI {222_§§2}g§’ . 88 III 'qugggg,‘§gggg . 95 XIII ‘zéggl Return: . 101 BibliographyOtoooeeeeeeeeeeeeo106 CHAPTER I Introduction The aim of this essay is to collect and analyze American criticism of William Faulkner's prose and poetry. It is not concerned with biographical studies of Faulkner, except as they are applicable to critical estimates of Faulkner's work, nor does it treat, directly, his work itself. It is a synthesis of critical Opinion of Faulkner's published works based on material selected from periodicals and books which have been published in the last twenty five years. This critical material has been selected with.two principles in mind: general critical excellence, and availability. Some criticism has been omitted because it simply was not good, some because it duplicated in less trenchant form that which had been said better in other articles, and some because it was difficult to procure. Much of this last group, if files are trustworthy, would have duplicated the comment of that which was available. William Faulkner's literary reputation is here followed chronologically as it deve10ped around his major workc-from his first novel, Soldier's £21 (1927) to his last volume of short stories, 39. M W, and Others (1942). His privately printed early verse, essays and verse which appeared in the University of Mississippi student magazine, and newspaper articles written for the New Orleans Picayune apparently have never earned more than a line or two of incidental criticism. Critics have said little or nothing about Salmagundi, a small book of which 500 OOpies were published in 1932, and of which cepies are more elusive than some of Faulkner's own more intricate stories. When pertinent, general criticism involving overlapping chronology and a particular technical, stylistic, and thematic milieu (including some discussion of not otherwise criticised magazine short-stories) will be interpolated. A final section will be devoted to essays in such.works as Joseph warren Beach's American Fiction, 1920-1940, maxwell Geismar's Writers '52 Crisis, Malcolm Cowley‘s 232 Portable Faulkner, and others which attempt to appraise all, or nearly all, of Faulkner's major work. Significantly, much murky fog enve10ps Faulkner's reputation. Many critics overlook him entirely, others ridicule him.exces- sively, some praise or damn him for the right reasons, some for the wrong. Nearly all admit his tremendous power as a writer: very few have put their fingers on the source of that power. In their pursuit of Faulkner's meanings, many critics develOp weird Faulkner themes and motives to fit pro-conceived ideas-- ideas as foreign to Faulkner as Faulkner himself would be to Siberia. As late as 1955, Amy Loveman, 1 giving advice to a Texas student writing a paper on the negro in recent American fiction, failed to mention Faulkner as a writer interested in negroes-- this at a time when two-thirds of Faulkner's novels and collected 1 Saturday Review 2; Literature, (August 24, 1955), 24. short-stories had been published. In 1942, Maxwell Geismar, on the other hand, makes the negro one of the "twin furies" which dominate Faulkner's work from the beginning. In 1930 the editor Of the American Mercugy, commenting on Faulkner as a contributor, said "His first novel, 2139.. _S_9_u_r_1g and £132 _Fu_r_y, was published last year. His second, Sanctuayy, will be out in the fall."2 313339313 2331 £32 £221 is Faulkner's fourth novel: Sanctuayy is his sixth. Timothy Fuller, in 1956, displayed the rather typical pro-occupation with nothing in Faulkner but horror when he used strained simile to produce an amusing story of Jack and Jill as Faulkner might tell it.3 Interestingly enough, Fuller cannot reproduce the visceral horror of Sanctuary or 3."). 3939 £93 Emily. {is evidence of his mercenary sensationalism, many critics triumphantly dangle before the reader's eyes Faulkner's claim.that Sanctuary was a mere pot-boiler. Those are but a few examples drawn from the amorphous mass of Opinion based on an equally amorphous mass of hurried reading, preconception, and.misinformation. As background for a survey of the contemporary critical Opinion of William Faulkner, it is useful to note briefly some general trends in literature, particularly that of the 1930's, Faulkner's most productive period, as seen by several reputable 2 American Mercgyy, (July, 1960), 584. 3 Saturday Review gg Literature, (December 19, 1966), 10. critics. In the summer of 1937, Bernard DeVoto produced a series Of articles in which he attempted to summarize the qualities essential to modern fiction.4 In it he establishes spatial, temporal, or emotional movement as essentials to modern fiction. If a writer does not convey motion he is not writing fiction, says DeVoto, even though what he says may be important. Description, itself, steps motion. modern fiction transforms descriptive material into the Springs of action, but usually, the modern novelist has to strike a compromise between necessary description and movement. Practically, the novelist may render movement directly by using dialogue, but the minute he begins to recount action, even through a fictional character, action steps. A relatively new method of getting around this difficulty is the Joycean technique of internal dialogue, or "stream-of-consciousness." DeVoto illustrates the latter method's weakness when he says,"A method waich requires eight hundred pages to render partially the events of less than twenty- four hours in the lives‘of three characters must be used spar- ingly in a novel about twenty people which covers half a century."5 The modern novelist, trying as he does to make his work a vehicle for an idea, must skillfully present information-~which is exposition or description--and yet not stOp essential move- ment, without which he will not be read. At the same time, preoccupation.with ideas is a dangerous invitation to the writer 4 "English ’37." Saturda Review of Literature, (June 26, 1957 to August 28, I933) "' 5 Saturday Review 2£ Literature, (August 7, 1967), 24. to become prolix. DeVoto implies that Faulkner, in The £9329- _a_r_l_d_ 213 _F_u_ry has partially solved the inherent problem of the stream-of-consciousness technique. The burden of collecting information is transferred from the page of the novel to the mind of the reader. Of course, warns DeVoto, the strain on the reader's mind may be too great, in which case he will probably pick up 2993 w E13 .3119. before which "intelligence is not only uncomfortable, but downright anguished."6 Although DeVoto's articles are too long to be comprehensively summarized here, they show clearly the components of fiction in Faulkner's time, and their application to Faulkner's work is obvious. Addison Eibbard, in an excerpt from.§2y32 Tempers‘gg Literature.7 recognizes, with DeVotO, the modern's interest in ideas, but apparently, unlike DeVoto, he includes static writing in the definition of fiction. He points to a prevailing tend- ency in fiction to move away from the general toward the par- ticular, to an interest in "mental states" rather than "exter- nal actions," and concludes by saying that "unity, coherence, and emphasis is Jettisoned, and in its place is written sug- gestion, association, and indirection."8 An anonymous article “9 ”Note for the end Of 1939 and the 1930's works out three 6 Saturday_Review‘2£ Literature, (July 24, 1937), 17. 7 Saturday Review gg Literature, (January 21, 1939), l. 8 Ibid. 9 Saturday Review 2; Literature, (December 30, 1959), 8. tendencies in American fiction: the develOpment of social awareness as against self-expression; the increasing con- sciousness of American history focussed mainly on the Civil War but found elsewhere; and the depiction of violence, most of which was, in the 'SO's, "more significant for what it suggested than for what it accomplished. "10 In" U’hat Deep South Literature Needs",11 Cleanth Brooks, believing that wide misunderstanding of the South has led to an equally wide misunderstanding of the Southern artist's purpose, says that southern literature needs release from "those twin evils of modern literature: sociologism and romantic escapism.”12 This remark especially fits Faulknerian criticism: he who interprets Faulkner as a sociologist is lost from the beginning. In Brooks's eyes, Faulkner is pro-eminently a tragedian: when Faulkner trips over his broken buskin straps and falls flat on his face, the critics pounce joyfully on the resulting disorder and confusion. Southern writers in general, and Faulkner in particular, thinks Brooks, are also misunder- stood for their ceaseless attempt to evolve new forms adequate to express their tremendous nervous force. In approaching the criticism of iilliam Faulkner, it would be well to use as a touchstone Brooke's words, "To sum up, the Deep South presents a picture of a section producing a vigorous and powerful 10 Ibid.