Another quick hit
One of the things that baffles and angers many of Waugh's critics and even some Waugh admirers who wish more people would read A Handful of Dust instead is the incredible popularity of Brideshead Revisited.
And some people, as I say, get quite angry about this. They ask, how can this exercise in nostalgia for a "world that never existed" appeal to any rational or emotionally mature person. (By the way, did you ever notice the way people always say "a world that never existed", when they get heated up about nostalgic books and shows the public really likes or even the Latin Mass. What a lazy, unthinking thing to say.)
Anyway, the latest issue of Harper's has an excerpt from a longer article conservatism by Corey Robin published. It's a decidedly unfriendly history by a writer more determined to explain conservatism away than really wanting to understand it. And yet, Robin manages to put his finger on something important. Here it is:
And thus the ongoing success of Brideshead Revisited with the public. It isn't some clever con job that fools people into believing in a world that never existed. It was a very real world for some, including Evelyn Waugh. He set a beautiful story about loss in that world. Anyone who knows the pain of loss can read and understand this book and the world it portrays even if they went to the state vocational college and never got any closer to Oxford than watching reruns of Inspector Morse.
Added, January 22, 2012: I think that Corey Robin is wrong about is his claim that the "chief aim of the loser is not preservation or protection but recovery and restoration". No, the chief aim of the loser is to get recognition of his or her loss. I'm sure many losers also seek restoration but in many, many cases restoration is plainly impossible.
The first post in the Brideshead series is here.
The next post is here.
One of the things that baffles and angers many of Waugh's critics and even some Waugh admirers who wish more people would read A Handful of Dust instead is the incredible popularity of Brideshead Revisited.
And some people, as I say, get quite angry about this. They ask, how can this exercise in nostalgia for a "world that never existed" appeal to any rational or emotionally mature person. (By the way, did you ever notice the way people always say "a world that never existed", when they get heated up about nostalgic books and shows the public really likes or even the Latin Mass. What a lazy, unthinking thing to say.)
Anyway, the latest issue of Harper's has an excerpt from a longer article conservatism by Corey Robin published. It's a decidedly unfriendly history by a writer more determined to explain conservatism away than really wanting to understand it. And yet, Robin manages to put his finger on something important. Here it is:
People on the left often fail to realize this, but conservatism does indeed speak to and for people who have lost something. The loss may be as material as a portion of one's income or as ethereal as a sense of standing. It may be something that was never legitimately owned in the first place. Even so, nothing is ever so cherished as that which we no longer possess ....One thing Corey Robin doesn't say, and perhaps he might want to think about this a little, is that "people who have lost something" is pretty much everybody. We don't always feel the loss but everyone has a loss in their life. If a movement can, as he says, "indeed speak to and for people who have lost something," that movement will always be with us.
The chief aim of the loser is not preservation or protection but recovery and restoration, and that is the secret of conservatism's success.
And thus the ongoing success of Brideshead Revisited with the public. It isn't some clever con job that fools people into believing in a world that never existed. It was a very real world for some, including Evelyn Waugh. He set a beautiful story about loss in that world. Anyone who knows the pain of loss can read and understand this book and the world it portrays even if they went to the state vocational college and never got any closer to Oxford than watching reruns of Inspector Morse.
Added, January 22, 2012: I think that Corey Robin is wrong about is his claim that the "chief aim of the loser is not preservation or protection but recovery and restoration". No, the chief aim of the loser is to get recognition of his or her loss. I'm sure many losers also seek restoration but in many, many cases restoration is plainly impossible.
The first post in the Brideshead series is here.
The next post is here.
No comments:
Post a Comment