B007RT1UH4 EBOK (76 page)

Wisconsin quarterly: see note to 21 August 1964.

Koenig: Peter William Koenig, “‘Splinters from the Yew Tree’: A Critical Study of William Gaddis’
The Recognitions
,” PhD diss., New York University (1971).

page 689: fearing that his art career began with copying a forgery, Wyatt discovers that the Bosch painting he copied from was indeed the original, not a fake, so he says with considerable relief, “—Thank God there was the gold to forge!

To Matthew Gaddis

[
WG enclosed a review of Rudolph Wurlitzer’s novel
Quake
in which Morris Dickstein discusses “the One Big Book syndrome”: “Such disparate writers as Ralph Ellison, William Gaddis, Joseph Heller and Thomas Pynchon appear to have fallen prey to the syndrome in the last two decades
[
...
]
. Instead of publishing, they have tantalized their admirers with fragments of work in progress, which quickly conspire with time to make the Work itself seem all the more elusive” (
New York Times Book Review
, 22 October 1972, 4).
]

Piermont, NY

2 November 72

Dear Matthew,

Can’t believe it. Thursday again. I’m beginning to think there are more Thursdays than other days of the week because each one reminds me how fast time is passing.

And I hardly needed the enclosed reminder in the
New York Times Book Review
of having appeared to fall prey to the One Big Book problem, and trying to solve it by writing Another Big Book . . . I am not ‘trying to tantalize’ admirers of
The Recognitions
by just publishing fragments of
J R
. . . apparently I’m regarded as an ‘experimental’ writer, and one thing that takes so much time with
J R
seems to be that since it’s almost all in dialogue I’m constantly listening, write a line and then have to stop and listen, does it sound like this character talking? and get across his feeling and appearance without me describing them? Anyhow they spelled my name right . . . [...]

with much love from Papa

To Thomas J. J. Altizer

[
Radical theologian and author (1927– ), then teaching at SUNY Stony Brook.
]

Piermont, NY

10 February 1973

Dear Dr. Altizer.

I am sorry to be late answering your letter and, next, to send you the unsatisfactory response this will probably prove to be. Of course I was and remain most impressed and gratified by your response to
The Recognitions
especially upon looking at the list of your own publications, all of which may be why I found your letter a difficult one to rise to and may also partly explain the time I have taken precoccupied by why this should be so.

First certainly the aspect of Christianity itself and the distant thing it has become to me in these 20 years since the book was written. I am not being facetious when I say it is a long time since I have read it; but certainly it betrays my suspicions even then just inhowfar I was sincere and serious in its preoccupation with Christian redemption as opposed to the attraction of versions of Christianity as vehicles for writing about redemption. Regarding Roman Catholicism for instance it obviously had its attractions and I was pleased at the time the literate Catholics who saw the derogatory & ridiculous ‘anti’Church material as all there to strengthen rather than weaken the idea of the Church that could survive it. But in the years since I’ve come finally to regard Roman Catholicism as the most thoroughly irritating and irrelevant anachronism in sight and the incongruity of the Papacy simply appalling, really surprised at the vehemence of my own feelings.

Basically I suppose what seems to have drained away is any but the faintest nostalgia for absolutes, finite imperfectability without Wyatt’s grateful revelation that ‘there was the gold to forge’. What’s remained seems to be preoccupation with the Faust legend as pivotal posing the question: what is worth doing? (Wyatt was meant to be not the depth of genius, which knows, but just short of it & therewith the dilemma, the very height of talent, which doesn’t.)

At any rate it is this question what is worth doing? that has dogged me all my life, both in terms of my own life and work where I am trying now again in another book to fight off its destructive element and paralyzing effects; and in terms of America which has been in such desperate haste to succeed in finding all the wrong answers. In this present book satire comic or what have you on money and business I get the feeling sometimes I’m writing a secular version of its predecessor.

Returning to
The Recognitions
I had pretty much from the first a feeling of sending it out on its own, of being (top of p. 96) simply ‘the human shambles that follows it around’; and both time and its original meager reception have I suppose only gone to strengthen that feeling, again not being flippant I wonder how much use I would be in discussing it, still surprised (of course greatly pleased) at letters from college age students who find it relevant.

Surely none of this lessens my appreciation of your estimate of it and I would be most intrigued to see any use you made of it in your own work (I’m not that clear remembering
Under the Volcano
and never read
Ulysses
), right now about 30 miles up the Hudson here panic stricken in terms of time work money this book but would look forward to meeting and talking with you at some point if the above isn’t entirely self defeating.

Thank you again for all in your letter and its tacit encouragement at a welcome time.

Yours,

William Gaddis

destructive element: cf. Jack Gibbs’s description of his work-in-progress as a “sort of social history of mechanization and the arts, the destructive element” (
J R
244).

To Candida Donadio

[
Well-known literary agent (1929–2001) whose clients included Joseph Heller, Philip Roth, and Thomas Pynchon. She was WG’s agent from the early 1960s (when she was at Russell & Volkening) until the early 1990s. The following concerns a rival offer made by Georges Belmont of Éditions Robert Laffont to publish a French translation of
R
, on which Gallimard was dragging its feet.
]

Piermont

17 April 1973

Dear Candida,

I enclose a letter from Jean Lambert pleading on Gallimard’s behalf, and a carbon of my letter to him which I have
not
sent. Will you please call me when you have read it and tell me if you think I should make any changes or deletions (or additions) (I think for instance the $600 figure is correct?) —since a copy of it will probably go posthaste to Gallimard. Poor Lambert, honestly his position in the whole thing is the only part that would make me want to change our position, otherwise I see none, it damned near seems that Gallimard is blackmailing him and me through him, and I only wish one could be sure Gallimard would sell Lafonte the Lambert translation if they drop out. At any rate I will hold the letter till I hear from you but think one should go off as soon as possible.

I have a nice note yesterday from Aaron who says to his dismay “the last batch of pages (740–787) have arrived here unacknowledged,” but that “what’s more important, I have read them and continue to be astonished . . .” at what? that I’m still alive? that the God damned thing goes on, and on, and on? No, he’s a kind and loyal fellow but God I could use some good news.

Please tell Hy that I haven’t answered his letter because I’ve been trying to stay in
J R
as much longer as I can (now page 814, have a toothache and wasted the whole damned morning on this Gallimard nonsense), I know Hy will understand but regret the time he gave it after I’d rushed in with it as I did, but I will get to it as soon as Bast leaves on the bus with Charley Yellow Brook and his brother (the Brook Brothers) for the reservation. [
J R
564]

I can’t but think that the English hope for money has fallen through and that Aaron (despite he says “seeing the Pynchon hysteria as a good omen”) would not write me such kind notes if he could write me a check instead, so the generally rollicking tone of this note is a fraud, I hope to heaven you are keeping well.

[signature missing]

Aaron: Asher, who planned to publish
J R
at Holt, Rinehart & Winston, where he currently worked.

Hy: Hy Cohen, an associate of Donadio’s.

the Pynchon hysteria:
Gravity’s Rainbow
had been published in February to great acclaim.