Literary Feuds: A Century of Celebrated Quarrels--From Mark Twain to Tom Wolfe

Rating:
Summary: Literary lights behaving badly
Review: --That is, resplendently at their conniving, back-stabbing, vainglorious best.

Anthony Arthur's polished and scholarly accounts of eight famous literary feuds beginning with Mark Twain and Bret Harte, and ending with Tom Wolfe and John Updike, come across as fairly expressed and finely observed. True, with my fabled ability to read between the lines, I can see in places where perhaps the good professor favors one side or the other. Indeed, part of the fun of reading a book like this is discerning where the author's sympathies lie. (You might want to discern for yourself.) But for the most part Professor Arthur lets the chips fall where they may and keeps a balanced keel through the straits of the tempest-tossed tussles while knavishly enjoying himself like an after-the-fact provocateur.

Notable are Arthur's physical descriptions of the gladiators, usually quoting contemporary sources. Thus the young Truman Capote, who is squared off against Gore Vidal, is "unnaturally pretty, with wide, arresting blue eyes and blond bangs" (p. 161) while Vidal is "Tall and slender, Byronically handsome...luminous and manly" (p. 159). (Uh...nevermind.) Sinclair Lewis, who fights with Theodore Dreiser (physically on one occasion--or at least Dreiser is reported to have slapped Lewis), has a "hawkish nose" and a "massive frontal skull...reddish but almost colorless eyebrows above round, cavernously set, remarkably brilliant eyes..." (p. 49) Dreiser, self-described, has "a semi-Roman nose, a high forehead and an Austrian lip, with the edges of my teeth always showing...." (p. 56) The effect of these descriptions along with Arthur's bright and lively (and very careful) style is to make the literary warriors especially vivid and to impress upon us just how human they are.

Arthur however is at his best in coming up with really juicy quotes to illustrate the matters of contention. Thus Lillian Hellman dismissed Mary McCarthy (Chapter 6) as merely "a lady magazine writer" (p. 141) while McCarthy charged in an interview with Dick Cavett that Hellman "is tremendously overrated, a bad writer, and a dishonest writer..." whose every written word "is a lie, including AND and THE" [my capitalization, p. 143], causing the fur to fly. More civilized was the exchange between Edmund Wilson and Vladimir Nabokov where Wilson expresses his disappointment with Nabokov's novel, Bend Sinister: "You aren't good at...questions of politics and social change, because you are totally uninterested in these matters and have never taken the trouble to understand them." Nabokov replies: "In historical and political matters you are partisan of a certain interpretation which you regard as absolute." (pp. 90-91) (They're just sparring: it heats up later on.)

One of the most interesting bits in the book is from page 32 in which it is asserted that Ernest Hemingway learned part of his style from Gertrude Stein (feud number two) by copying her gerund-driven, run-on sentence constructions. What is especially amusing is that Arthur gives a sentence from Stein and then a similar one from Hemingway--"ing's" flying. The effect was bad in Gertrude Stein, and, although improved in Hemingway, it was still bad. Arthur's book is full of these delightfully sly bits of satire.

He also likes to slip in a few literary jokes. For example, British Don F. R. Leavis, who is in combat with C.P. Snow over the famous "Two Cultures," is characterized as saying of his "fellow Fellows": "They can all go to hell. Of course, some should go before the others. One has a responsibility to make discriminations." (Quoted from Frederick Crews, p. 116) Also: "J.B. Priestley...called Leavis a sort of Calvinist theologian...who makes one feel that he hates books and authors...not...from exceptional fastidiousness but...[as a] result of some strange neurosis, as if he had been frightened by a librarian in early childhood." (p. 118)

All in all, a most entertaining and informative read from a fine prose stylist.

Rating:
Summary: thoroughly enjoyable recounting of eight feuds
Review: Anthony Arthur presents eight literary feuds in chronological order: Mark Twain and Bret Harte, Ernest Hemingway and Gertrude Stein, Sinclair Lewis and Theodore Dreiser, Edmund Wilson and Vladimir Nabokov, C.P. Snow and F.R. Leavis, Lillian Hellman and Mary Mccarthy, Truman Capote and Gore Vidal, and Tom Wolfe and John Updike.

Arthur is an excellent writer, and it is great fun to read his elegant prose about badly behaved literary types. I was familiar with some of the authors discussed but not all, as I was familiar with some of the animosities but not all of them. Arthur turns a beautiful phrase and has a knack for finding illustrative, sometimes toxic quotes. One good thing about fights between scribes -- they leave lots of luscious things in writing!

The eight disputes are interesting by virtue of the characters or the topic or both, and the author does a fine job of describing the people involved and laying out the foundation and history of each quarrel. Moreover, he makes insightful comments about the disagreement or the relative merits of the protagonists. I thoroughly enjoyed these tales of intelligent people behaving poorly.

Rating:
Summary: Boy, can writers hold a grudge!
Review: Anthony Arthur takes an interesting look at how far egos can get out of control in this examination of some LITERARY FEUDS. Some of the feuds have been pretty well-discussed in the past, but Arthur's research and willingness to investigate the causes of these feuds makes for an entertaining read. Each feud here has different set up. Starting with the totally one-sided Twain/Harte debacle and wrapping up with latest major battle involving Wolfe, Updike and Irving, Arthur does a fine job recapping the origins and the outcomes of these literary contretemps. He also examines the works that led to these quarrels with a critical eye that gives the reader added insight into these rather fierce battles. While I feel some of these arguments were tempests in a teapot and I still have never read anything by C.P. Snow or F.R. Leavis (Two of the subjects within), I still feel this book added to my understanding of some of these authors and gave me new appreciation for some of their work.

Rating:
Summary: Excellent context on some well-known feuds
Review: Each chapter of Anthony Arthur's Literary Feuds tackles a different feud. The format is quite simple. Arthur sets forth the historical context of the feud. He recounts many of the "shots fired". Then he offers a brief reappraisal of the feud, and its impact on its participants.

The feuds are well-known--Twain/Harte, Hemingway/Stein, the "Two Cultures" debate, McCarthy/Hellman, and other similar literary disagreements. Arthur's style is light without being breezy, informative without being didactic. His critical evaluations are reasonably measured, and interesting rather than annoying or heavy-handed.

This is a fun read. It's serious enough to point up the issues, and in particular the similarities as well as the differences in the feud participants. But it's got a straightforward tone, as the author seeks to entertain rather than to preach. All in all, a very good book.

Rating:
Summary: An intriguing read though not for everyone
Review: There are two routes you can choose when authoring a book like this: the sensational, gossipy Us Weekly tack, complete with inflammatory cover lines, or the staid, straightforward BusinessWeek approach, more proper research than primping revelation. And there's certainly nothing wrong with that. In LITERARY FEUDS, Anthony Arthur applies a fine formulaic approach to his subjects. He introduces them (some better than others), deduces the catalyst for their quarrel and shares a few fun bon mots along the way. It's an interesting subject. The main problem is that a little Us Weekly would have gone a long way to making the book more digestible to the typical non-English major. And even to us English majors, a few of the names are a bit obscure to get too worked up over.

Arthur obviously possesses a clear understanding of the literary landscape. He tinges his writing with knowledge, whether he's describing Gertrude Stein's shortcomings pre-AUTOBIOGRAPHY OF ALICE B. TOKLAS or deconstructing Tom Wolfe's criticism of ANNA KARENINA. Arthur employs a smart if somewhat dry style that gives a fair shake to both participants in the feud. He excels at explaining the authors' literary legacies, why a Sinclair Lewis has become more well known than a Theodore Dreiser. However, although blood pumps through his characters (his description of Edmund Wilson's wardrobe helps define his public and private characters), the feuds remain relatively bloodless.

Perhaps it is the material that Arthur has chosen. After all, in an age where our political candidates attack one another regularly on TV and the local gossip pages print tales that would have made for scandalous fiction 50 years ago, it's hard to be thrilled by a run-of-the-mill tussle. Add to that the fact that many of these "fights" have unclear roots, which Arthur does his best to uncover satisfactorily but not overly convincingly and the book loses some of the title's promised bite.

Many of the authors begin as friends, such as Wilson and Vladimir Nabakov or Mark Twain and Bret Harte. The feud begins with perhaps a bad review by one of the other. It seizes when the less famous overtakes the more famous in literary reputation. It generally never comes to a boil, instead fading into dusty apology (such as Truman Capote's lame note to Gore Vidal) or death.

Most of the fights appear driven by the green-eyed monster. Stein, for example, had no reason to fear Ernest Hemingway until the latter eclipsed her spotlight. Then it became easy for a former friend who had crowed about Hemingway's promise to publish a damaging review. Yet the dilemma for Arthur seems to be that many of these fights were simple sideshows. Authors are, by definition, a class without hubris; you have to have at least some ego to think other people should care to read your words. It's understandable how many of the fights began, but unless they're about something a little bigger than the participants --- like C.P. Snow and F.R. Leavis' showdown over the scientific and literary intellectual communities --- it's difficult to imbibe them with anything more than an "as noted" quality.

With that being said, there are some barnburners in the book. The final three chapters have the most verve, probably because there are better records of what occurred through lawsuits and media accounts. For sheer cattiness and juicy bad behavior, you can't beat Mary McCarthy vs. Lillian "every word she writes is a lie, including 'and' and 'the'" Hellman, as McCarthy characterized her. Gore Vidal and Truman Capote's war of words was as delicious for its cleverness as for its sheer duration and intensity. And while it's unclear why Arthur chooses to pit Wolfe against only John Updike instead of including Wolfe's two other "stooges," nee tormentors Norman Mailer and John Irving, it's priceless to hear Wolfe speaking in his own defense in a letter to the author.

Arthur has done an extremely competent, honest job with this book. Although it isn't packed with fresh insights or lively writing, it's an intriguing read, if only to trace some of the country's literary history through its most well known voices. If Arthur wanted to attract more readers, perhaps he could have dug a little deeper, scandalized a little more, or chosen a different theme --- say, writers with beefs against Hollywood. But as it stands now, this book is certainly worth the price of a stack of Us magazines. Just don't expect that type of guilty pleasure.

--- Reviewed by Toni Fitzgerald

Rating:
Summary: Famous Wordsmiths' Feuds More Than a Gossip Report
Review: What could have driven Edmund Wilson to betray his friend Vladimir Nabokov? Why was Mark Twain so remarkably mean-spirited toward Bret Harte, going to great lengths to ruin Harte's reputation?

Why did F.R. Leavis indulge in character assassination of C.P. Snow? How could a man so celebrated, so revered as Ernest Hemingway let himself be upset by Gertrude Stein, an old woman who had once been his mentor and friend?

What demons drove Truman Capote to the miserable death that Gore Vidal called "a good career move"? Why did Lillian Hellman bring a libel suit against Mary McCarthy, accusing her of slander and defamation of character? What caused Norman Mailer to physically assault Gore Vidal at a cocktail party in 1974?

Anthony Arthur's latest work, Literary Feuds: A Century of Celebrated Quarrels from Mark Twain to Tom Wolfe, is filled with gossip and vitriolic attacks.

Some of our most illustrious writers have tried to destroy the reputations of their enemies, using wit, humor, sarcasm, invective, and the occasional right cross to the jaw.

For example, consider these quotations taken from Arthur's work:
Ernest Hemingway: "Gertrude Stein was never crazy/Gertrude Stein was very lazy."
Sinclair Lewis: "I still say you [Theodore Dreiser] are a liar and a thief."
Theodore Dreiser: "He [Sinclair Lewis] is noisy, ostentatious, and shallow. . . . I never could like the man."
Mary McCarthy: " Every word she [Lillian Hellman] writes is a lie, including 'and' and 'the.'"
Gore Vidal: "It is inhuman to attack [Truman] Capote. You are attacking an elf."

It would be a mistake, however, to think Literary Feuds is only a book of juicy gossip. Anthony Arthur, an accomplished literary historian and critic, demonstrates his expertise in literary history and criticism.

Arthur, who was a Fulbright Scholar and for many years has taught writing and literature at California State University, Northridge.

In the eight essays of this book, Arthur draws on a lifetime of reading and teaching the works of 16 cantankerous writers whom he describes.

Arthur scatters insightful comments throughout the work. For example, "As every teacher of literature knows, comedy and satire are harder to teach than tragedy and melodrama; everyone can feel, but not everyone can think."

Provocative quotations also abound. For example, Gore Vidal, a "born-again atheist," opines, "The great unmentionable evil at the center of our culture is monotheism."

One should not be too eager to search for "opposites" when investigating literary feuds. It does seem, however, that many of the literary artists described in this book are "opposites" in their temperaments, worldviews, politics, or aesthetic tastes.

Those who espouse "realism" or "naturalism" are at cross-purposes with those who champion "idealism" or "romanticism." Rural sentiments clash with urban mentalities; elitism and populism collide.

The outstanding cause of these feuds, however, was pride and the competitive spirit. Mark Twain knew he was a better writer than Bret Harte and could not abide critics who lumped them together as belonging to the same echelon.

Of course, one must not discount that green-eyed monster of envy--the jealousy and bitterness of an outdistanced rival over the fame and financial success of a rival.

Commendable for their style and substance, these true tales of feuding wordsmiths are fascinating, behind-the-scenes glimpses of our (mostly) 20th-century American literati.

Anthony Arthur is the author of Deliverance at Los Banos and Bushmaster, both narrative histories of World War II, and of The Tailor-King: The Rise and Fall of the Anabaptist. He lives in Woodland Hills, California.

Rating:
Summary: Famous Wordsmiths' Feuds More Than a Gossip Report
Review: What could have driven Edmund Wilson to betray his friend Vladimir Nabokov? Why was Mark Twain so remarkably mean-spirited toward Bret Harte, going to great lengths to ruin Harte's reputation?

Why did F.R. Leavis indulge in character assassination of C.P. Snow? How could a man so celebrated, so revered as Ernest Hemingway let himself be upset by Gertrude Stein, an old woman who had once been his mentor and friend?

What demons drove Truman Capote to the miserable death that Gore Vidal called "a good career move"? Why did Lillian Hellman bring a libel suit against Mary McCarthy, accusing her of slander and defamation of character? What caused Norman Mailer to physically assault Gore Vidal at a cocktail party in 1974?

Anthony Arthur's latest work, Literary Feuds: A Century of Celebrated Quarrels from Mark Twain to Tom Wolfe, is filled with gossip and vitriolic attacks.

Some of our most illustrious writers have tried to destroy the reputations of their enemies, using wit, humor, sarcasm, invective, and the occasional right cross to the jaw.

For example, consider these quotations taken from Arthur's work:
Ernest Hemingway: "Gertrude Stein was never crazy/Gertrude Stein was very lazy."
Sinclair Lewis: "I still say you [Theodore Dreiser] are a liar and a thief."
Theodore Dreiser: "He [Sinclair Lewis] is noisy, ostentatious, and shallow. . . . I never could like the man."
Mary McCarthy: " Every word she [Lillian Hellman] writes is a lie, including 'and' and 'the.'"
Gore Vidal: "It is inhuman to attack [Truman] Capote. You are attacking an elf."

It would be a mistake, however, to think Literary Feuds is only a book of juicy gossip. Anthony Arthur, an accomplished literary historian and critic, demonstrates his expertise in literary history and criticism.

Arthur, who was a Fulbright Scholar and for many years has taught writing and literature at California State University, Northridge.

In the eight essays of this book, Arthur draws on a lifetime of reading and teaching the works of 16 cantankerous writers whom he describes.

Arthur scatters insightful comments throughout the work. For example, "As every teacher of literature knows, comedy and satire are harder to teach than tragedy and melodrama; everyone can feel, but not everyone can think."

Provocative quotations also abound. For example, Gore Vidal, a "born-again atheist," opines, "The great unmentionable evil at the center of our culture is monotheism."

One should not be too eager to search for "opposites" when investigating literary feuds. It does seem, however, that many of the literary artists described in this book are "opposites" in their temperaments, worldviews, politics, or aesthetic tastes.

Those who espouse "realism" or "naturalism" are at cross-purposes with those who champion "idealism" or "romanticism." Rural sentiments clash with urban mentalities; elitism and populism collide.

The outstanding cause of these feuds, however, was pride and the competitive spirit. Mark Twain knew he was a better writer than Bret Harte and could not abide critics who lumped them together as belonging to the same echelon.

Of course, one must not discount that green-eyed monster of envy--the jealousy and bitterness of an outdistanced rival over the fame and financial success of a rival.

Commendable for their style and substance, these true tales of feuding wordsmiths are fascinating, behind-the-scenes glimpses of our (mostly) 20th-century American literati.

Anthony Arthur is the author of Deliverance at Los Banos and Bushmaster, both narrative histories of World War II, and of The Tailor-King: The Rise and Fall of the Anabaptist. He lives in Woodland Hills, California.