Pigment and Ether: A Comment on the American Mind

T. Tanner
{"title":"Pigment and Ether: A Comment on the American Mind","authors":"T. Tanner","doi":"10.1017/S052450010000262X","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ions and generalisations only had 'barren insulated facts' to work from. When young Hemingway watched the modern world at war he 'saw nothing sacred': 'Abstract words such as glory, honor, courage, or hallow were obscene beside the concrete names of villages... the names of rivers, the numbers of regiments and the dates.' Such 'barren insulated facts1 are like Hugh McVey's pebbles, not like Margaret Fuller's. Behind the material world tnere is no God, no Over-Soul: only a horrible nothingness nada for Hemingway, 'a vastness and emptiness1 for Anderson. The Hemingway hero has to orient him self as best he can by limiting himself to what the eye can witness, what the hand can verify. Which is why Hemingway devised the style he did: it is a Style which believes only in the authenticity of concrete particulars and works hard to separate out individual sense impressions and exclude all vague generalisations. Hemingway is a man trying to estab!\"-h some personal moment by-moment; order and significance by carefully picking over the fragments of a world no longer held together by the large affirmations of the transcendental ists. Where Emerson saw all fragments of concrete reality as being hinged to some superior Reality on which they readily opened, Hemingway saw only detached details of matter, marooned in a meaningless void. Emerson's wondering is a constant act of worship: Hemingway's lucid scrutiny betokens a continuing effort of orientation. Emerson praised God by looking through matter; Hemingway saved himself by holding onto it. Emerson believed what he could infer; Hemingway relied only on what he could see and touch. Instead of the consolations of religion we have the consolations of sensation. Vague general isations have been abandoned in favour of increasingly accurate perceptions. The transcendental ists asserted that a man who could not see God everywhere was blind. The blind men of a later age had to return to a brail Ie-l ike reading of the world. Let us return to Tocqueville's point by quoting a worried entry from Thoreau's Journals which nicely bears out its validity. 'Let me not be in haste to detect the universal law; let me see more clearly a particular instance of it.' This hastejtowards universal generalisations seems to have had a peculiar magnetism for American writers at the same time as they have shown a real genius for the unbiased notation of concrete particulars. Certainly, much of what I have said attempts to suggest that American writers have shown an increasing suspicion of vague generalisations, and from Mark Twain onwards we have a series of writers who work increasingly hard to keep their gaze on the veridical details of the phenomenal world. And yet their emancipation from This content downloaded from 207.46.13.12 on Thu, 12 May 2016 05:56:56 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms","PeriodicalId":159179,"journal":{"name":"Bulletin of the British Association for American Studies","volume":"29 3 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1963-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Bulletin of the British Association for American Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S052450010000262X","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

ions and generalisations only had 'barren insulated facts' to work from. When young Hemingway watched the modern world at war he 'saw nothing sacred': 'Abstract words such as glory, honor, courage, or hallow were obscene beside the concrete names of villages... the names of rivers, the numbers of regiments and the dates.' Such 'barren insulated facts1 are like Hugh McVey's pebbles, not like Margaret Fuller's. Behind the material world tnere is no God, no Over-Soul: only a horrible nothingness nada for Hemingway, 'a vastness and emptiness1 for Anderson. The Hemingway hero has to orient him self as best he can by limiting himself to what the eye can witness, what the hand can verify. Which is why Hemingway devised the style he did: it is a Style which believes only in the authenticity of concrete particulars and works hard to separate out individual sense impressions and exclude all vague generalisations. Hemingway is a man trying to estab!"-h some personal moment by-moment; order and significance by carefully picking over the fragments of a world no longer held together by the large affirmations of the transcendental ists. Where Emerson saw all fragments of concrete reality as being hinged to some superior Reality on which they readily opened, Hemingway saw only detached details of matter, marooned in a meaningless void. Emerson's wondering is a constant act of worship: Hemingway's lucid scrutiny betokens a continuing effort of orientation. Emerson praised God by looking through matter; Hemingway saved himself by holding onto it. Emerson believed what he could infer; Hemingway relied only on what he could see and touch. Instead of the consolations of religion we have the consolations of sensation. Vague general isations have been abandoned in favour of increasingly accurate perceptions. The transcendental ists asserted that a man who could not see God everywhere was blind. The blind men of a later age had to return to a brail Ie-l ike reading of the world. Let us return to Tocqueville's point by quoting a worried entry from Thoreau's Journals which nicely bears out its validity. 'Let me not be in haste to detect the universal law; let me see more clearly a particular instance of it.' This hastejtowards universal generalisations seems to have had a peculiar magnetism for American writers at the same time as they have shown a real genius for the unbiased notation of concrete particulars. Certainly, much of what I have said attempts to suggest that American writers have shown an increasing suspicion of vague generalisations, and from Mark Twain onwards we have a series of writers who work increasingly hard to keep their gaze on the veridical details of the phenomenal world. And yet their emancipation from This content downloaded from 207.46.13.12 on Thu, 12 May 2016 05:56:56 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
颜料与乙醚:美国人思想评析
离子和归纳只有“贫瘠的绝缘事实”作为依据。当年轻的海明威目睹战争中的现代世界时,他“没有看到任何神圣的东西”:“与具体的村庄名称相比,光荣、荣誉、勇气或神圣等抽象词汇显得令人厌恶……河流的名字,兵团的数量和日期。”这种“贫瘠的绝缘事实”就像休·麦克维的卵石,而不像玛格丽特·富勒的卵石。在物质世界的背后,没有上帝,没有超灵:对海明威来说,只有可怕的虚无“无”,对安德森来说,只有浩瀚和空虚。海明威的主人公必须尽可能地定位自己,把自己限制在眼睛所能看到的,手所能证实的。这就是为什么海明威设计了他所做的风格:这种风格只相信具体细节的真实性,努力分离个人的感官印象,排除所有模糊的概括。海明威是一个努力建立的人!“——一些个人的时刻;秩序和意义是通过仔细挑选不再由先验论者的大量断言维系在一起的世界的碎片来实现的。爱默生把具体现实的所有碎片都看作是与某种更高级的现实相联系的,而海明威只看到物质的分离细节,被困在一个毫无意义的虚空中。爱默生的好奇是一种持续的崇拜行为;海明威的清晰审视是一种持续的定向努力。爱默生通过透视物质来赞美上帝;海明威抓住它救了自己。爱默生相信他的推断;海明威只依靠他看得见摸得着的东西。我们得到的不是宗教的安慰,而是感觉的安慰。模糊的概括已被抛弃,取而代之的是越来越准确的认知。先验论者断言,一个不能处处看到上帝的人是瞎子。后来的盲人不得不回到一个巴西式的阅读世界。让我们回到托克维尔的观点上来,引用梭罗的《日记》中的一篇令人担忧的文章,很好地证明了它的有效性。“让我不要急于发现宇宙法则;让我看得更清楚一些。”对美国作家来说,这种急于进行普遍概括的做法似乎具有一种特殊的吸引力,同时,他们也表现出对具体细节不偏不偏的描述的真正天才。当然,我所说的大部分内容都试图表明,美国作家越来越怀疑模糊的概括,从马克·吐温开始,我们有一系列作家,他们越来越努力地关注现象世界的真实细节。然而,他们的解放,从207.46.13.12下载的内容,2016年5月12日星期四05:56:56 UTC所有使用服从http://about.jstor.org/terms
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Joel Barlow's The Hasty Pudding : A Study in American Neoclassicism The Implementation of the Civil Rights Act of 1964: Title VI and the Use of Federal Funds State Rights and the South 1850–1860 The New Economic History W. R. Brock, An American Crisis: Congress ond Reconstruction, 1865–1867 . (London: Macmillan, 1963), pp. xii, 312.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1