6/19/13

The Image of a Writer | Humanities

Return to the main NEH site

BACK ISSUES

MAGAZINE STAFF

MAGAZINE HOME

FEATURES

CONVERSATIONS

STATEMENTS

IQ

IN FOCUS

CURIO

EDNOTE

Humanities Back Issues November/December 2012

FEATURE

The Image of a Writer

By Randall Fuller | HUMANITIES, November/December 2012 | Volume 33, Number 6

THE LATEST ISSUE

read

MAY/JUNE

2013

Emily Dickinson Mark Weber + Click on image to enlarge.

Subscribe To Humanities Magazine Now!

Browse Back Issues

Early in 1851, Herman Melvilles friend and publisher Evert Duyckinck asked the author for a daguerreotype to publish in his magazine, The Literary World. Melville, then in the midst of writing a massive, rumbustious novel that would become Moby-Dick, protested that he had no such photograph, adding, And if I had, I would not send it . . . even to you. Eleven years later, the Atlantic Monthly editor, Thomas Wentworth Higginson, made a similar request to an obscure, retiring poet named Emily Dickinson who had written a letter asking if her verses breathed. Her response was much like Melvilles, if typically elliptical: Could you believe mewithout? I had no portrait, now, but am small, like the Wren, and my Hair is bold, like the Chestnut Burand my eyes, like the Sherry in the Glass, that the Guest leavesWould this do just as well? This pair of polite, but emphatic refusals begins Michael Kearnss Writing for the Street, Writing in the Garret:

March/April 2013

Special Edition 2013

Back Next

Melville, Dickinson, and Private Publication, a meditation on the way both authors imagined themselves as authors. Describing the conditions of authorship in the years just before and after the Civil War, Kearnss book might also be taken as a cautionary tale about the perils of being a writer in a nation defined and driven by the twin engines of democracy and market capitalism. As the Melville scholar Robert Milder has observed, The problem of establishing intellectual and aesthetic standards in an egalitarian society was and remains a difficult and politically volatile one in American culture. In some respects, Melville and Dickinson had the great misfortune of writing just as antebellum America was creating a mass audience for its authors. With almost universal literacy among its nonslave population, increasingly sophisticated publishing and transportation networks, and a widespread yearning for a national www.neh.gov/humanities/2012/novemberdecember/feature/the-image-writer

Classics

A selection of old favorites Supremely Contentious

The Transformation of Advice and Consent
BY MEREDITH HINDLEY

Who Was Westbrook Pegler?

The original right-wing takedown artist
BY DAVID WITWER

1/4

6/19/13 The Image of a Writer | Humanities increasingly sophisticated publishing and transportation networks, and a widespread yearning for a national culture different from but equal to that of Europe, America had for the first time in its brief history a truly national audience that seemed within reach to many writers. The proof of a poet, intoned Whitman in the introduction of

BY DAVID WITWER

his 1855 Leaves of Grass, is that his country absorbs him as affectionately as he has absorbed it. Whitman meant that in a newfound democracy, an author sensitive to his or her audience could expect a widespread readership that transcended class lines and geographical boundaries. While Whitman would not receive the kind of audience acceptance he prophesied and craved for several more decades, other writers of the period became the nations first literary superstars. Ralph Waldo Emerson and Nathaniel Hawthorne were representatives of a new indigenous high culture during the 1850s, their images photographed and painted, reproduced in newspapers, magazines, and the frontispieces of elegantly published books. But it was Harriet Beecher Stowes Uncle Toms Cabin (1852), which sold millions of copies in its first few years, that initiated the era of the best-seller. Stowe and her titular hero became household names, cultural emblems in the cause of abolitionand, in the South, figures of derision. Numerous other women writers, including Fanny Fern and E.D.E.N. Southworth, similarly enjoyed immense readerships. It was these writers who prompted Hawthorne to complain that America is now wholly given over to a dd mob of scribbling women. Attaining such popularity invariably involved certain trade-offs. As Kearns notes, The work of authorship [then as now] requires engaging in publicity, negotiating the best deal, shopping ones goods, reading and marking proof, and other activities that may strike a writer as unpleasantly sordid. The correspondence of Hawthorne, Stowe, and many other writers of the period is filled with responses to requests for autographs, speaking engagements, and other chores that often took away from time spent writing. More important, attaining a democratic audience sometimes entailed a diminishing of literary standards. For years, Uncle Toms Cabin wasnt studied in the academy because it was believed to be too popular, too sentimental, too unconcerned with exceptional language use. Even Whitman, one of the most vocal spokespersons for a broad-based national literature, expressed some reservations about mass audiences in his Democratic Vistas. I say that democracy can never prove itself beyond cavil, he announced, until it founds and luxuriantly grows its own forms of art. . . . The only problem, he continued, is that too often the tastes of the crowd fail to encourage difficult ideas or rich and multilayered literary language. Publishers were therefore motivated to appeal to vulgar sensibilities in order to maximize profit. It seems as if . . . there were some natural repugnance between a literary . . . life, Whitman laments, and the rude rank spirit of the democracies. As Kearns reveals in Writing for the Street, Writing in the Garret, Melville felt this particular conundrum with acuity. In a famous letter to Hawthorne, written several months after his refusal to Duyckinck, he complained, What I feel most moved to write, that is banned,it will not pay. Yet, altogether, write the other way I cannot. So the product is a final hash, and all my books are botches. . . . Though I wrote the Gospels in this century, I should die in the gutter. Melville was by no means alone in his alienation from the market and from mass opinion. Dickinson, too, struggled to imagine her authority as a writer, addressing the tyranny of democratic public opinion in one of her most trenchant poetic observations. Much Madness is divinest Sense To a discerning Eye Much Sensethe starkest Madness Tis the Majority In this, as All, prevail Assentand you are sane Demuryoure straightway dangerous And handled with a Chain According to Kearns, both Melville and Dickinson developed authorial strategies that allowed them to turn their backs on antebellum Americas burgeoning mass audience and to imagine themselves as romantic artists governed solely by inspiration. Instead of courting the crowd, they became garret writers whose artistic prestige was bound up in the fact that they were not writing for the street. So dissimilar in so many ways, both authors nevertheless were linked by a mutual desire to operate outside of the capitalist and mimetic markets (especially opposing advertising). Suspicious of the tastes of a mass audience as well as the techniques by which publishing houses transformed authors into marketable commodities for that audience, they desired to publish in ways that preserved their total control and ownership of their work. By refusing to sell out, Kearns argues, they were able to write works governed by their own autonomous aesthetic criteria, works that ignored popular trends, that aspired to art for arts sake. To accomplish this, however, they had to content themselves with small, private audiences capable of determining their respective works design and intentions. The decision to write in this manner did not come easily for Melville. In 1850, he had all but declared his ambition to become the American Shakespeare. (This declaration was in an anonymous review of Hawthornes Mosses www.neh.gov/humanities/2012/novemberdecember/feature/the-image-writer

The Strange Politics of Gertrude Stein

Was the den mother of modernism a fascist?
BY BARBARA WILL

Friends of Rousseau
Some of the people he has influenced don't even realize it.
BY LEO DAMROSCH

The Other Jefferson Davis

The U.S. Capitol, as we know it today, would never have existed without Jefferson Davis.
BY GUY GUGLIOTTA

VIEW ALL

2/4

6/19/13 The Image of a Writer | Humanities to become the American Shakespeare. (This declaration was in an anonymous review of Hawthornes Mosses

from the Old Manse and printed in Duyckincks Literary World.) In 1851, he was busy attempting to secure that title

by writing Moby-Dick. But after the novels disappointing sales and mediocre critical reception, Melville began the slow, painful process of recalibrating his aspirations. A string of increasingly inaccessible novels and anonymously published short stories eventually gave way to an attempt to become a poet. In the decades following the Civil War, he produced a series of privately printed books filled with difficult, knotty, complex poems, including the longest poem in English, Clarel, which he admitted from the outset was eminently adapted for unpopularity. These books he distributed with little fanfare to a small coterie of friends and devotees, thereby hoping to reach a more discriminating audience. Dickinson, on the other hand, seems never to have seriously considered courting a large audience. While it is often difficult to locate her meaning behind the verbal acrobatics and the smoke screens of her various personae, she made good on her claim to Higginson early in their correspondence. I smile, she wrote him, when you suggest that I delay to publishthat being foreign to my thought, as Firmament to Fin. Except for a few poems published either without her permission or in order to benefit the Union army, Dickinson never published in the sense we understand it. Instead, she eschewed book and magazine publication and distributed an utterly original poetry that dealt obliquely with her eras religious beliefs and sexual relations through letters and manuscripts to friends, family, and a wide range of correspondents. According to Kearns, this decision should not be regarded as a failure of nerve, an example of the gendered tyranny of the domestic realm, or a clue to pathology. Rather it was a shrewd move by an artist intent on exerting the greatest power within a field of extremely limited production, . . . a practice that conduces to the greatest possible autonomy. Although Kearns focuses exclusively on Melville and Dickinson, his book is suggestive for the way in which both authors serve as forerunners to the twentieth and early twenty-first centuries. It was precisely their distaste for a mass audiencewhich they viewed as degraded by the yellow journalism of daily newspapers and magazines that impelled modernist writers such as T. S. Eliot, Ezra Pound, Gertrude Stein, and others to produce difficult works meant to distance themselves from the democratic readers of their period. Their solution to the problem of producing art in a democratic society has sent generations of students through the thickets of footnotes and reference guides. On the other hand, serious authors who courted larger audiences quickly found themselves victims of overwhelming market forces, their lives commodified and branded by publishers and public relations. Twentiethcentury prose authors such as Ernest Hemingway, F. Scott Fitzgerald, and Jack Kerouac are among the bestknown authors who became ensnared by their image. J. D. Salinger and Thomas Pynchon reacted against the literary PR machinery by recusing themselves from the public eye. Ultimately, if paradoxically, it was Dickinson and Melvilles refusal to court and attain a mass audience while they lived that has resulted in their enduring canonical status. Early in the twentieth century, both artists were rediscovered and appropriated by scholars and cultural opinion-makers. In classrooms and anthologies, and later in film treatments and book clubs, the two iconoclasts were, in Kearnss words, shaped to fit the alienatedartist, garret-dwelling, antimaterialistic narrative of early twentieth-century American literature. If our understanding of Melville and Dickinson continues to change and develop, one interpretation continues to stand out. Both authors, in the words of scholar Thomas Inge, represent the danger and tragedy of being an artist in a democratic, capitalist society, where pleasing the tastes of the mob and making money counted for more than producing a classic work of literature.
Randall Fuller is the Chapman Professor of English at the University of Tulsa. With the support of an NEH research fellowship, he wrote From Battlefields Rising: How the Civil War Transformed American Literature. In 2007, Michael Kearns, a professor at the University of Southern Indiana, received a $5,000 grant from NEH to work on Writing for the Street, Writing in the Garret , which was published by Ohio State University Press in 2010.

KEYWORDS:

American Writers Herman Melville

Emily Dickinson

Ernest Hemingway

Ezra Pound

F. Scott Fitzgerald

Tw eet

120

13

EMAIL

PRINT

RELATED STORIES
www.neh.gov/humanities/2012/novemberdecember/feature/the-image-writer 3/4

6/19/13

The Image of a Writer | Humanities

Whaling the Old Way

Faith and Fiction

The Strange Politics of Gertrude Stein

Impertinent Questions with Sandra Spanier

About NEH Contact NEH Organizational Chart Chairman National Council on the Humanities State Humanities Councils Our Partners Awards and Honors History Budget, Performance, and Legal Information Plain Writing at NEH Office of the Inspector General Career Opportunities Brand Materials

Grants Search for a Grant Not sure what to do? Let us help you... Become a Peer Reviewer Manage Your Grant The Application Review Process

Divisions and Offices Education Programs Preservation and Access Public Programs Research Programs Federal/State Partnership Office of Challenge Grants Office of Digital Humanities Bridging Cultures

News Press Releases News Archive NEH in the News Events Humanities Back Issues Subscribe Magazine Staff Explore

CONTACT US National Endowment for the Humanities 1100 Pennsylvania Ave., NW Washington, D.C. 20506 General Information 1-800-NEH-1121 202-606-8400 TDD: 1-866-372-2930 202-606-8282 info@neh.gov Connect With Us

WWW.NEH.GOV
FOIA | NO FEAR ACT | OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL | ACCESSIBILITY | PRIVACY POLICY | OPEN GOV | PLAIN WRITING AT NEH

www.neh.gov/humanities/2012/novemberdecember/feature/the-image-writer

4/4