More About the Great Literary Change

FROM POPULISM TO ELITISM

Has the Eric Bennett article in Chronicle of Higher Education opened a debate about the nature of American literature? Don’t count on it. This is a debate which I’m sure even Bennett’s backers at n+1 would not want to have—because inevitably they’d be caught on the wrong side of it.

Here’s a post I made on another blog about the matter:

http://happyamericaliterature.blogspot.com/2008/12/great-reaction.html

And another post I made here:

http://kingwenclas.blogspot.com/2007/01/plimpton-background.html

There are many connect-the-dots leads to be followed, for those with the time or interest. This includes others in George Plimpton’s generation like William Phillips and Robert Silvers. It includes other publications, and important literary conferences of the 1950’s and 60’s whose intent was to direct the course of American literature into acceptable channels.

Keep in mind that American populism is a style of literature, probably best embodied in the Frank Norris novel The Octopus. The style can be characterized by large themes, characters caught up in sweeping historical currents and changes, and polemical speeches. It represented a large land and broad voice. Also with a trace of old-fashioned American romanticism. The viewpoint is usually against monopoly and/or centralized control. Organic, from the people, not tops-down. It’s a style which once defined American literature and its difference from the European variety. Sadly, that difference now is gone.

In his Chronicle essay, Eric Bennett posits Jonathan Franzen as a novelist of ideas. Maybe—but his recent anti-freedom novel Freedom is more anti-populist than populist. It has more in common with By Love Possessed than The Octopus.

Seven Years Late

I NOTE there are many articles out recently about how the CIA changed the direction of American literature, including via the rise of MFA programs. Here's one of the articles, by Brian Merchant:

http://motherboard.vice.com/blog/how-the-cia-turned-american-literature-into-a-content-farm

Hmm. Where was Brian Merchant, Eric Bennett, and these other folks when the Underground Literary Alliance was pursuing the story? Here's one of many of my own posts on the matter:

http://kingwenclas.blogspot.com/2007/02/trends.html

My posts were follow-ups to a ULA "Monday Report" on the matter by essayist Richard Cummings.

http://outyourbackdoor.com/ULA/mr-cummings-52305.html

Cummings made a lot of accusations in his essay. The ULA presented his essay for informational purposes, letting readers judge for themselves. The key point-- CIA involvement in the world of literature-- is what we stressed. This was seven years ago.

What happened? The ULA was attacked and ostracized by the established lit-world. Because of the flurry of pressure, five key members of the ULA resigned, virtually overnight. NOT ONE established or semi-established literary person defended us-- or even the idea that the matter needed looking into. This issue, more than anything else we did, turned the ULA and its members into pariahs.

Dare I say that the Underground Literary Alliance was right all along?