TNR BLOGS

July 24, 2008 | 6:54 PM
July 24, 2008 | 6:53 PM
July 24, 2008 | 6:53 PM

July 24, 2008 | 6:37 PM
July 24, 2008 | 4:58 PM
July 24, 2008 | 2:31 PM

July 23, 2008 | 7:28 PM
July 23, 2008 | 7:06 PM
July 23, 2008 | 3:04 PM

July 23, 2008 | 1:55 PM
July 17, 2008 | 3:56 PM
June 19, 2008 | 2:54 PM

July 23, 2008 | 1:31 PM
July 23, 2008 | 11:49 AM
July 22, 2008 | 8:06 PM
COLUMNISTS
TODAY'S STORIES
29.02.2008
Buckley: A Squeaky Toy Wheel

Of the trillion words written and spoken by William Buckley, I was the recipient of but one: “Delicious,” which accompanied a check for two hundred dollars, payment for the only piece I published in the National Review (where from 1960 some of my books had been generously reviewed by the likes of then-23-year-old Joan Didion and the brilliant classicist, critic and caricaturist, Guy Davenport). My view of Buckley himself had been tempered by humane snippets garnered from our common friend, Hugh Kenner (whom Buckley, best man at Hugh’s wedding to Maryanne, once said was the most intelligent man he knew). I never took to Buckley’s preachments or his self-relishing wit. The eruptive flash of his tooth-bright smile was to me like chalk on a blackboard. As far as conservative thinking went, I was, after all, on the same campus as Milton Friedman, Leo Strauss (the influences on Willmore Kendall, Buckley’s Yale guru), and Richard Weaver (whose famous course in Expository Writing I took over with his amiable help), had read Russell Kirk, James Burnham, and other popular conservatives, and periodically questioned graduate students about Edmond Burke, Dr. Johnson, and other great conservative writers. Nonetheless, Buckley’s death removes another familiar piece of my world and is mourned as the Margaret in Hopkins’ famous poem mourns the “goldenrod unleaving”: “It is Margaret you mourn for.”

I’d just finished reading Emile Zola’s marvelous novel, Pot-Bouille (1882), translated a century ago under the odd title, Restless House. (The French means something like 'stewpot.") The book charts the two years of young Octave Mouret’s stay in a “most respectable” Parisian apartment house. With systematic power and extraordinary mimicry, Zola strips, floor by floor, family by family, every ounce of respectability from every tenant. Avarice, snobbery, shabby vanity, brutality, cruelty, unbridled, pleasureless lust, impotence, unfeelingness, mendacity, and what have you are scarcely veiled by social and religious genuflections and proclamations. The hypocritical tenants bully, connive, cheat, lie, and struggle to death’s door in intramural ferocity. The novel ends in one of the famous scenes of world literature, the self-delivery of her baby by the semi-imbecilic maid of the Josserand family, Adele, who, after managing to cut the unbilical cord and resting for an hour in the bloody birth mess, struggles down to the trash cans where she deposits the baby. Surrounded by the tenants’ high-minded denunciation of a recent plague of infanticide, Adele fears imprisonment. The book ends with this murder and with a final shower of self-boosting assertion of domestic, civic, political, and religious virtue .

The book is dated by one of the tenants’ denunciation of Renan (“He should be burned at the stake”) and his just published Life of Jesus (1863). This is two years after Octave moved into the veneer-thin splendor of the apartment house and just after he has married the beautiful, unfeeling widow who runs the small department store which she and Octave will transform into the Printemps-like grandeur of Au Bonheur des Dames, title and setting of a later volume in the 20-volume Rougon-Macquart series, Zola’s depiction of the rise and fall of genetically determined members of the two families and their society.

Sixteen years after Pot-Bouille, Zola would publish (in Clemenceau’s newspaper) J’accuse his famous denunciation of the French government’s indictment and imprisonment of the Jewish officer, Alfred Dreyfus.The subsequent uproar forced Zola to flee to England and perhaps, in 1902, back in France,  led to what might have been the murderous, at any rater, lethal blocking of his furnace which asphyxiated him.

Compared to Zola’s amazing depiction-creation of the social, political, economic, moral and spiritual horror of 19th century France, Buckley’s criticism of the America of 1950 to the hour of his death this week is that of a squeaky toy wheel compared to the B Minor Mass.


--Richard Stern

Posted: Friday, February 29, 2008 2:25 PM with 12 comment(s)

Comments

You must be logged-in to comment.

Not a subscriber? Click here to get a digital or print and digital subscription to The New Republic!

ratnerstar said:

Tooth-bright smile?  

I hope that when I die, people don't compare me unfavorably to Emile Zola, Albert Einstein, Catherine the Great, or anyone else.  It seems a bit uncharitable.

February 29, 2008 4:42 PM

csmiller said:

Buckley was an arrogant, elitist bigot and I trust he will rot in hell.  Good riddance to a pedantic blowhard.

February 29, 2008 4:49 PM

basman said:

...Buckley was an arrogant, elitist bigot and I trust he will rot in hell.  Good riddance to a pedantic blowhard...

Ever men's generous spirit aboundeth.

March 1, 2008 12:56 PM

Ivanova said:

If you actually believe in Hell, you know better than to hope anyone goes there. If you don't, you're just posturing. Either way, it's tiresome.

March 1, 2008 1:38 PM

jm_rice said:

Stern sounds like a denizen of that Zola apartment house: pretentious, churlish and mean.  I think He's just a frustrated Buckley wannabe -- with the pretense but without the class to back it up.

I've read my share of classics, and I've never heard of "one of the famous scenes of world literature."  With this and the undisarming name dropping -- the I'm Chevy Chase and you're not" device -- Stern apparently is trying to put us in our place.

There was much for Zola to condemn.  Louis Napoleon's France was ruled by gangsters, anti-Semites far worse than Germans of the time and an ugly Parisian bourgeoisie.  And Pot-Bouille is no doubt some kind of masterpiece of the exposé genre.

But sublime?  Perhaps Stern finds sublimity in such moroseness, the way Baudelaire finds sublimity in merde, Jean Genet in the gutter or Michel Foucault in S&M.  To use the B-minor Mass to compare Zola to Buckley (who was a big fan of Bach) is like an opera queen's looking down his nose at rock and roll.

What I want is an obit by Mike Kinsley, not this dwarf.  Mike cut his teeth at Firing Line and no doubt has some wonderful anecdotes and insights.

March 2, 2008 1:00 AM

akb1 said:

What a peculiar piece this is.  If one wished to compare Mr. Buckley unfavourably with a 19th-century social critic, one would surely be better advised to choose Carlyle or Arnold, or even Ruskin, n'est-ce-pas?  Admire as one might the involuted miseries of Monsieur Zola's works, so reminiscent of the engravings of Hieronymus Bosch or the scenes of the Last Judgment carven into the door of the south transept of Chartres Cathedral (clearly seen as one gazes up in awe at the central portal of that florescence of Late Gothic architectural achievement), one feels constrained to point out that they are, as the saying goes, fiction.  One also feels constrained to mention that Hopkins' evocative, elegiac "Spring and Fall" begins,                 "Margaret, are you grieving/Over Goldengrove unleaving?"; "goldenrod", being, if I'm not mistaken, a member of the genus Solidago famed for its allergenic qualities.  But I digress.

March 2, 2008 5:28 PM

ZACummings said:

Oh, yeah. Now I remember. This is why I never read Open University.

March 2, 2008 7:42 PM

teplukhin2you said:

jm_rice - here you go. Slate.com online Q&A session with Michael Kinsley re WFB: www.slate.com/.../2185283

Headline sums it nicely: Kinsley on Intellectual Honesty

Bill Buckley had it, journalism should strive for it, and politics needs more of it.

March 3, 2008 1:06 PM

basman said:

The comments on this thread had me look more closely at the main post, which I originally just skimmed over.

The criticisms of the main post seem jusitifiable: it is one of the most bizarre that I have read of Mr. Stern.

March 3, 2008 5:47 PM

teplukhin2you said:

basman - sheesh. Well, it's a good thing Stern isn't _jealous_ or anything like that...

March 3, 2008 6:46 PM

jkolic said:

I am going to have to echo everyone else and say that this piece is rather bizzare. What type of obituary spends more time recounting a scene from a Zola novel than remembering particular anecdotes associated with the deceased? Moreover, I see no virtue in drawing an analogy between a fictional writer and a politically active journalist since one wrote of what did not happen, while the other one voiced comments on actual events. And the tremendous difference in contexts out of which Zola and Buckley drew inspiration for whatever they wrote makes the ultimate point of this strange article effectively moot. Surely the American world of the fifties invited denouncements bound to sound squeaky toy-like next to virulent outrage that the toxic world Zola inhabited invariably invited?

I was never a Buckley fan but a part of me is sorry to see him go. He surely deserves an obituary not written by a seeminly pompous individual who uses it more for self-aggrandizement than anything else.

March 6, 2008 12:00 PM

Lurin said:

Tres,tres bizarre! For me, Pot-Bouille is Danielle Darrieux et Geard Philipe, every ones  own point of view, n;est ce pas Monsieur Stern. Ce ci dit: Mr. Buckley peut bien rester un peu dans le purgatoire!!

Lurin.

March 8, 2008 1:51 PM

Double click this space to insert your ad.