432
PARTISAN REVIEW
Doctorow's
Ragtime
paved the way for Coover, whose parodic
history contrasts sharply with Doctorow's own revisionary, but
profoundly historical, dramatization of the Rosenberg case in
The Book of Daniel.
The basis for my criticism of historical fiction was beauti–
fully formulated by Benedetto Croce in
La storia come pensiero e
come azione:
"Poetry and history are, then, the two wings of the
same breathing creature, the two linked moments of the know–
ing mind." From this point of view the novelist and the histo–
rian are both engaged in knowing. 1 also take as a standard one
of Bertolt Brecht's warnings against any modern attempt to "an–
nihilate distance, fill in the gap, gloss over the differences" be–
tween old plays and new, instead of taking a "delight in compar–
isons, in distance, in dissimilarity-which is at the same time a
delight in what is close and proper to ourselves." Brecht did not
take his own advice, however, in his play about Galileo, nor did
Heinar Kipphardt follow it in his play about
J.
Robert
Oppenheimer, who functions in the drama as Brecht's Galileo in
modern dress. Kipphardt invents a final monologue for
Oppenheimer in which he condemns himself as a betrayer of the
international spirit of science, while urging scientists to work no
longer for purposes of national defense. The actual Oppenheimer,
after his prejudiced hearing in 1954 had come to its unfair and
unintelligent conclusions, spoke in very different terms about
scientific advisers: "I know that they will work faithfully to pre–
serve and strengthen this country. 1 hope that the fruit of their
work will be used with humanity, with wisdom and with cour–
age. 1 know that their counsel when sought will be given hon–
estly and freely. 1 hope that it will be heard." For Kipphardt he
was only a ventriloquist's dummy used to pass judgments on all
those scientists who have worked on war projects, while the
documentary form of the play encouraged the audience to think
that the author's own point of view was actually mirrored in the
thousand pages of testimony. Oppenheimer legitimately at–
tracted a dramatist's attention, because there were certainly
tragic elements of
hubris
in his distinguished career, but
Kipphardt's hero, who condemns himself for subservience to the
demands of the Defense Department, is more like Brecht's self–
condemning Galileo than either character is like his historical
counterpart.
