34
PARTISAN REVIEW
past. I believe it to be chiefly American, but I cannot say, and doubt that
any writer can, with certainty, say where intuitive selection leaves off and
deliberate, or conscious selection begins. Other "figures" in my usable past
are English poetry and fiction, German music, and certain French and
German cartoonists. As between Henry James and Walt Whitman, I think
the latter is more important to the present and future of American writing.
2. When I am engaged in the business of writing I do not have any par·
ticular audience in mind. When I am not writing, I can afford to realize
that every writer must have in mind, whether precisely or vaguely, an audi–
ence of people who have approximately his own background, experience,
and temperament. Otherwise, communication would be a. dull and thank·
less thing to attempt, if not impossible to establish. My own audience
(fortunately for me) could
be
described as liberal middle-class. Whether
or not an audience for serious literature has grown hinges too much on
personal illusion, and .varying concepts as to what constitutes first rank
literature, to be quite answerable. The taste of the reading public has
changed, and will change, that is certain. But in numbers it is probably
little larger than it was ten years ago.
3. With
th~
present set-up of the book industry, in which the fundamental
purpose of nearly all of its literary columns, supplements, and magazines
is the promotion of the sale of books, a creative writer who did not evalu–
ate the criticism his work receives mainly according to this standard would
go quite mad. Personally, I have no great complaint to make on either
of the two standards this implies, neither on the standard of promotion,
nor with respect to the understanding and honesty, generally, with which
my books have been reviewed. Your question as to whether literary criti·
cism is a cult boils down, I think, to this: Just how serious does literary
criticism have to be before it is really serious? The general level of it
keeps pace with the general taste of the public. Otherwise it would fail of
its basic purpose: Promotion.
And as to whether political pressures have further isolated criticism;
Partisan Review's
rather isolated attack upon my recent
Dead Reckoning
gives you a lovely opportunity to answer this one all by yourself.*
4.
I have not ever, quite, beenab-le to live solely by the returns brought
in by creative writing, but I know that it can be done, at least for a time,
or possibly from time to time. Many writers do it.
5. My reply to the second question covers this one also, for me.
•Mr. Fearinc
il
evidently referrinc to R. P.
Blackmur'•
omnibua review of nine new books of
vene
iD
our Winter, 1939, itaue. Thote who have followed Mr. Blackmur'• critical writing will realize that
it
il
abeurd to charge him with playing the kind of political game Mr. Fearing has in mind. And we think
that Mr. Fearin,,
if
he re-read• Mr. Blackmur'• review, will be unable to make any correlation between
M·r. BJackmur'a evaluation of these nine
poeu
and their political viewa.-Ta-.:
EDtToas.
