PARTISAN REVIEW
Rosenzweig finds the artist's
strength
in his neurosis. "The broader
application of the inherent pattern," he says, "is familiar to readers
of Edmund Wilson's recent volume,
The Wound and the Bow
. . .
Reviewing the experience and works of several well-known literary
masters, Wilson discloses the sacrificial roots of their power on the
model of the Greek legend. In the case of Henry James, the present
account not only provides a similar insight into the unhappy sources
of his genius, but . ..," etc.
This comes as a surprise. Nothing in Dr. Rosenzweig's theory
requires it. The theory asserts no more than that the young Henry
James, predisposed by temperament and family situation! to certain
mental qualities, was injured- perhaps unconsciously inviting the
injury-in a way he believed to be sexual, thus identifying himself
with his injured ("castrated"-a leg had been amputated) father,
and that this resulted in a certain pattern of life and illj a preoccupa–
tion with certain themes which more or less obscurely symbolize
his
sexual situation. For this I think Dr. Rosenzweig makes a sound case
which could, indeed, be further substantiated from the novels, for
Dr. Rosenzweig derives his evidence only from the short stories. Yet
this, I submit, is not the same thing as disclosing the roots of James's
power or providing all! insight into the sources of his genius. It tells
us nothing about James's energy and devotion; nothing about his
architectonic
~kill;
nothing
abou~
his gifts of wit ahd phrase; nothing
about his power of judgment; nothing about the other themes that
were important to him and that cannot be connected with
his
"castra–
tion."
A neurosis or a neurotic fantasy always relates to a reality, and
a neurotic expression; of a reality is likely to have more force than a
"normal" one. And neurotic people, because they are more apprehen–
sive tha...n "normal" people, are actually likely to see a great deal more
of reality and to see it with more intensity. We may therefore accept
it as true that the neurotic element in the artist may give rise to
his particular subject-matter. Yet granting these things to be true,
and true of James, I believe it is still wrong to find the root and source
of power and genius in neurosis.
The particular essay which gives Edmund Wilson's book its title
and cohering principle does not explicitly say that the roots of
power are sacrificial and that the source of genius is unhappy. Where
it is explicit it states only that " genius and disease, like strength and
mutilation, may be inextricably bound up together," which of course
says no more than that personality is integral and not made up of
detachable parts. And certainly the Philoctetes legend, which Mr.
