|
August 3, Evening Part Two
|
57:09
|
Thank you, Mr. West. The program, I think, for the rest of the evening should be that first of all, we give the speakers a chance to speak to Mr. West's points. And then, people here on the panel discuss everyone-- discuss anything he wants to. And then we will have questions from the audience if there is time.
|
Carvel Collins |
|
August 3, Evening Part Two
|
57:31
|
Should this evening-- the panel take up most of the time and there not be an opportunity for many questions from the audience, I think you might save them up. The whole program has a certain unity, at least of subject, and on Wednesday evening, there will perhaps be more time for questions from the audience. And some of your questions that you might want to raise this evening may be answered a little later this evening or tomorrow.
|
Carvel Collins |
|
August 3, Evening Part Two
|
58:02
|
I'd like first of all to ask Mr. Hyman to use-- just let's all stay right here at the table-- to use that microphone, which I assume is alive, and speak to Mr. West's points.
|
Carvel Collins |
|
August 3, Evening Part Two
|
1:00:25
|
All right, Mr. O'Connor?
|
Carvel Collins |
|
August 3, Evening Part Two
|
1:00:28
|
Mr. O'Connor, would you move the--
|
Carvel Collins |
|
August 3, Evening Part Two
|
1:01:04
|
LAUGHTER
|
Audience |
|
August 3, Evening Part Two
|
58:27
|
I don't have much to say to Mr. West's points, in that I think he summarized and commented on what I had to say fairly, with perhaps one small reservation-- that his feeling that I had somehow underrated E. M. Forster by saying that his work dealt with the vocabulary of bad taste rather than the vocabulary of sin, in writers like Graham Greene, I think is unwarranted.
|
Stanley Hyman |
|
August 3, Evening Part Two
|
59:00
|
I was suggesting, and would argue, I think, that these are both major traditions in the serious and worthwhile novel. And if Graham Greene, and those like him, sees things in terms of sin, and Forster does not, I surely wouldn't submit that as a weakness in Forster. I would also note in that account that when I said that Foster's picture of the human heart was no darker than a well-kept front parlor, that of course, a well-kept front parlor is very dark.
|
Stanley Hyman |
|
August 3, Evening Part Two
|
59:50
|
Other than that, I suppose the big issue is Kafka, which I think is too much to bring up as a discussion now. And all you can fairly say is that Mr. West apparently doesn't share my feelings for Kafka. I refuse to give them up for that reason, and will, left with what I imagine all of you are exercised with, too, which is simply a difference in taste and opinion. And that's all.
|
Stanley Hyman |
|
August 3, Evening Part Two
|
57:00
-
1:03:35
|
August 3 Panel Discusson
|
Program |
|
August 3, Evening Part Two
|
1:00:27
|
Well, I'm in the--
|
Frank O'Connor |
|
August 3, Evening Part Two
|
1:00:30
|
I'm in the unfortunate position that I can't quarrel with anybody, either. I'd love to do it. The nearest thing I can get to a quarrel is with Mr. West on the subject of Kafka. I entirely agree that this thing needs discussion, whether we have time to discuss it or not is another matter.
|
Frank O'Connor |
|
August 3, Evening Part Two
|
1:00:55
|
The point is The Trial, Kafka's Trial has nothing at all to do with life under the Austro-Hungarian empire.
|
Frank O'Connor |
|
August 3, Evening Part Two
|
1:01:08
|
Kafka's two great novels, The Castle and The Trial are the modern equivalent of the Pilgrim's Progress-- they're allegories. And they're allegories written in Freudian terms. I don't particularly like Freud, and I don't particularly admire this as a technique, but there it is, on they're two wonderful books. And we ought to realize that they are dealing with man's destiny. And just man in face of eternity.
|
Frank O'Connor |
|
August 3, Evening Part Two
|
1:01:40
|
And beyond that, I haven't much to quarrel with. I think I gathered a reference to Mr. James Gould Cozzens novel, after which I picked up the words joyful, expansive, moving. Was I dreaming?
|
Frank O'Connor |
|
August 3, Evening Part Two
|
1:01:59
|
Now, as well as that, Mr. West thinks I've exaggerated the subjective element in Proust's work. Actually, I minimized it all along the line of Proust's theory that the reality is in the subject, not in the object, is derived from the Bergsonian philosophy. And you get it all over the book.
|
Frank O'Connor |
|
August 3, Evening Part Two
|
1:02:32
|
And he devotes a whole novel, Le Temps Retrouve, to proving that a objective reality doesn't exist. The only reality which is apprehensive is whatever happens to remain in the unconscious mind after an event has occurred, which is, in itself, inapprehensible and indescribable.
|
Frank O'Connor |
|
August 3, Evening Part Two
|
1:03:01
|
I don't know that there's very much one can say about this question. But the general attack on Bergson is on that level, that he makes no distinction between the subject and the object. And it's not very easy to say with Proust whether he really says, there is an objective reality or not. You can quote occasional passages from Proust which seemed to suggest that he admitted the existence of a reality, though he maintained you could make no statement of value about it.
|
Frank O'Connor |
|
August 3, Evening Part Two
|
1:03:34
|
On the other hand, you can quote innumerable passages from Proust which go to show that there is no reality in the object, whatever.
|
Frank O'Connor |