In his 1955 piece, “A Gentle Dirge for the Familiar Essay,” Clifton Fadiman pronounced the genre dead, done in by a “digressive and noncommitting” method nearly impossible to practice in “an age of anxiety.” More than half a century later, in her charmed and charming collection, At Large and At Small: Familiar Essays, Anne Fadiman might just have proven her father’s lament for the form premature. “I believe the survival of the familiar essay is worth fighting for,” she proclaims, and then she writes her heart out to ensure it will endure.
The familiar essay has gone out of style, and indeed, something about it has the whiff of the 19th century. It was then that the form reached its zenith, having first become popular a hundred years before in Addison and Steele’s Spectator and Samuel Johnson’s Rambler. Although pioneered by Montaigne, who pretty much invented the modern essay (essai is French for “attempt” or “trial”), it was in 1800s England that the form reached its peak of popularity with such practitioners as the cranky William Hazlitt and the playful Charles Lamb (the latter Anne Fadiman’s idol and the subject of one of the best essays in At Large and At Small). Readers enjoyed the essays’ informal tone, the everyday topics, the writers’ light touch and rambling reflections.
But by the middle of the 20th century, Clifton Fadiman–the quintessential TV Literary Man of my childhood, a reader of 25,000 books who gave up his column in Holiday when he discovered to his horror that he’d written more essays than the legendary Lamb–sadly concluded that the familiar essay had been eclipsed by its cousins the critical essay and the personal essay despite the frequent incomprehensibility of the one and the solipsism of the other.
There’s no one better qualified to perform a revival of the form than Anne Fadiman, best known for her prizewinning The Spirit Catches You and You Fall Down, an account of the cultural conflicts between a traditional Hmong family whose daughter is epileptic and the girl’s California doctors, and Ex Libris: Confessions of a Common Reader, whose essays on reading and books cemented her reputation as the baby boomer bookworm par excellence. (Given that one of the essays in Ex Libris is on plagiarism, it’s ironic that this volume’s essay on book mutilation may have been plagiarized for a recent article in The New York Times Book Review.)
In At Large and At Small, Fadiman writes about, um, familiar, often mundane, subjects–drinking, eating ice cream, getting mail, being a night owl, moving from city to country–with wit, erudition, and a strong sensual enjoyment of everyday pleasures. Possessing qualities indispensable to the familiar essayist–a wide-ranging curiosity and sense of wonder on the one hand, a lightness of touch and wry sense of humor on the other–Fadiman reveals just enough about her own experiences that we find her a pleasant companion with whom to explore butterfly collecting, the life of a vain Arctic explorer, or the storied history of the American flag.
More than anything, it’s the personality of the familiar essayist that engages us, keeps us reading whether or not we’re interested in the subject of her essay. I have not tasted coffee or ice cream since the 1980s, but Fadiman’s exploration of each of these pleasures almost convinces me I’m a fool to have given them up.
Her essay on ice cream, for example, begins with a memory triggered by a news article about a town banning ice cream truck music. Fadiman is taken back to the Good Humor trucks of her childhood that served up the serviceable almond crunch bars. From there she moves on to the calculation, based on American Medical Association statistics, that had she eaten no ice cream since the age of eighteen, she would currently weigh -416 pounds. That leads her to describe her favorite flavors, to denounce such modern innovations as cardamom and corn ice creams, to explore butterfat content, and then to a sudden glitch in her research:
When I called the Häagen-Dazs Consumer Relations Department a few days ago to verify the butterfat content of Mint Chip, I was alarmed to hear the following after-hours message: “If you have a medical emergency with one of our products that requires immediate attention, please call Poison Control at 612-347-2101.” What medical emergency could a few scoops of ice cream possibly precipitate? Hippocrates, or one of the anonymous writers who were later known as Hippocrates, warned that snow-chilled beverages might “suddenly throw . . . the body into a different state than it was before, producing thereby many ill effects.”
And then Fadiman is off again on her meanderings: a medical journal article on “ice cream headaches”; an 18th-century Italian treatise on the health benefits of sorbetti; Ben & Jerry’s Ben Cohen’s Internal-External Temperature Differential and Equalization Theory; a description of the highlight of every Nobel Prize banquet, a flaming frozen dessert served with solemn ceremony; and so on. We learn about ice cream’s origins in ancient Greece, recipes from 17th-century Florence, frozen Sicilian breakfasts, Dolley Madison’s White House desserts, the scoop of ice cream once given to every new immigrant at Ellis Island.
And from there, ice cream again becomes personal: the sumptuous Louis Sherry lavender boxes encased in dry ice that lit up Fadiman’s childhood; a 1974 cross-country tour of ice cream parlors with her brother Kim (no one beats McConnell’s in Santa Barbara, rated three cones); and ultimately to her brother’s recipe–with some help from the local sperm bank and precautions to avoid frostbite of the throat–for the exquisite Kim’s Coffee Kahlua Liquid Nitrogen Ice Cream. Most of the book’s bravura performances are similar tours de force, whether Fadiman is discussing sleeping habits, caffeine fixes, or living in lower Manhattan versus the sticks.
She is equally adept in what seem like spellbinding conversations about historical figures: Nabokov on butterflies, Coleridge as a runaway, or her “unfuzzy” Lamb, champion of her chosen genre and the genteel literary life, the writer whose blithe style belied a tragic existence. Fadiman describes the bachelor Lamb’s devotion to his mad sister Mary (with whom he wrote Tales of Shakespeare; like most readers, I’d always assumed Mary was his wife) who had, in a fit of annoyance, stabbed their mother to death and nearly killed their father.
Fadiman, a longtime editor of The American Scholar, where some of these selections first appeared, has presented the essays, except for the last and most personal, in the order in which they were written and with almost no changes from their periodical publication. That leads to such musty and fusty stuff as an essay dealing with mail and email that contains a list of emoticons and their meanings and the translations of “e-acronyms” with whiskers like RTFM and ROTFL; this induces more eye-rolling than rolling on the floor. But these are small lapses in an otherwise fresh and intellectually bracing book.
In addition to “A Gentle Dirge for the Familiar Essay,” Clifton Fadiman also wrote another, more famous familiar essay that may explain the genre’s decline. In “The Decline of Attention” the degeneration of the ability to read patiently and attentively is distressing only from a certain traditional, highly conservative way of thinking:
In a larger perspective it may seem merely an inevitable change in man’s mental outlook as he moves into a new phase of culture. It seems fairly clear that in our time the attrition of one kind of attention–the ability to read prose and poetry of meaning and substance–is becoming more and more widespread; and that the faculty of attention in general is undergoing a wholesale displacement away from ideas and abstractions toward things and techniques.
In his conclusions, Fadiman was not so much rueful as accepting of the inevitable. Yet he admonished those dismayed by the decline of attention and its devastating effect on the popularity of familiar essays to get over it and keep writing them. Readers of At Large and At Small will be glad that his daughter Anne has taken his sage advice.
The latest posts at the blog of The Quarterly Conversation
I’ve been thinking a lot about heat waves. The thick summer weather has felt like a wall of fire that must be bravely pushed through to order to exit from an air conditioned office building and make my way to the corner to board a bus crowded with sweaty citizens. So perhaps it’s no surprise that [...]
"What’s not so up for dispute is that Markson accomplished what, by all rights, should be a literary impossibility." (Colin Marshall for The Millions)
"Ich liebe dich. No sentence pronounced by a judge could be more threatening. It means that you are about to receive a gift you may not want." Via Dylan Suher, Greg Gerke's sort-of review of William H. Gass's Reading Rilke in BIG OTHER.
A fan of Herman Melville must have patience. He must appreciate digression and the dissolution of pattern or plan. He must enjoy the sheer rush of words, a proper Biblical torrent of them. And he must be able to find pleasure in philosophical dialogue as much as in wild anecdote. But must he read Clarel? Can [...]
This is just one small example.
Thomas Bernhard is certainly one of the major, titanic writers of any era, any country. Enormously influential, unremittingly bleak and pessimistic but never without a sense of humor, his style evolved into single-paragraphed philosophical rants extending hundreds of pages, the best of which are Woodcutters, ‘Walking’ (from Three Novellas), and Gathering Evidence. I have finally [...]
Ever since Penguin's 75th Anniversary roadtrip I have intended to address the somewhat simultaneous release of Penguin 75, a sort of vanity book of Penguin covers. This book is delightful, but flawed. Delightful, but misleading.
In The Unicorn Hunt (1993), the fifth book of Dorothy Dunnett’s cycle of historical novels of early Renaissance Europe, the House of Niccolo, Dunnett tells of the deficiencies of wealthy merchant Anselm Adorne’s relations with women thus: His wife Margriet could have warned him. He was familiar with motherly wives and the skittish ways of other [...]
Janet Holmes, director of Ahsahta Press, based at Boise State University in Idaho, took the time this week to share her thoughts on poetry publishing as part of my ongoing series of publisher profiles. Ahsahta publishes seven full-length collections of poetry a year, including recent works by Kate Greenstreet, Lisa Fishman, Rusty Morrison, and Julie Carr. Like some other small presses, Ahsahta offers a yearly subscription option, which is one of my favorite ways to buy poetry and encounter the work of many poets who are new to me, as well as poets whose newest books I always look forward to reading. Janet says more about this and what it's like to craft a press's identity and consistent aesthetic.
An unfortunate side effect to the lengthy transition of print to digital is our long suffering endurance of stale articles in mainstream media rehashing the same points as every other article in mainstream media.
The latest articles published in between issues
In Ransom, Malouf satisfyingly gives us a meeting between Priam and Achilles that builds from the interiority of Priam. The novel seems to want to teach the importance of doing something human to those who might never get around to picking up Homer or who, if they do, might wish they could get into the character's heads.
Winterson has always told and retold the same fictions: of parents and children; of origins, and adoptions; of differences, of margins; of love; of passion; she has always manipulated rhythm and language as an excavation of sources. Much of her fiction mirrors what we know of Winterson's own story, but she agitates against the idea that her work has to be considered as fiction or autobiography, laying claim to both. In Art Objects she writes: "The question put to the writer 'How much of this is based on your own experience?' is meaningless. All or nothing may be the answer. The fiction, the poem, is not a version of the facts, it is an entirely different way of seeing"; a "separate reality." At every turn she eludes the critic, the interviewer, the reader; she offers truth, but not the truth. "I'm telling you stories. Trust me."
It's difficult to pin down exactly why books as objects mean so much to me. I wasn't alive when William Goyen's excellent Come, The Restorer was published, but owning an original printing with the dust jacket—as it would have been purchased at the time of its release—makes the book more special to me than some beat-up paperback reissue. If it's signed, even more so. I'm only really interested in modern first editions (say, post-1950 or so)—before that books get quite expensive, but also I don't think they look as nice, since many were issued without dust jackets, and at that time the dust jacket wasn't considered a permanent part of the book, so they're often missing. So why the obsession and collecting, and why is it so important?
Wood can be harsh, yes, but he is seldom unfair. Wyatt Mason was wrong to accuse him of having suggested, by dint of a string of negative reviews, that no good contemporary literature exists. (He has written favorably of McEwan, Bolaño, Robinson, Ozick, Kirsch, Sebald, Roth, Saramago, Swift, Carey.) He never simply dismisses a writer (in the manor of, say, Dale Peck); on the contrary, his criticism, even at its most polemical and uncompromising, is inexplicably bound to larger concerns about the direction of contemporary fiction. Two major concerns have dominated James Wood's writing: realism and religion. In The Broken Estate: Essays on Literature and Belief, his first collection, newly available in paperback from Picador, these two concerns are beautifully imbricated, resulting in what is surely among the finest achievements in recent literary journalism.
To say that Mark McMorris's Entrepôt is about writing poetry is to do a huge disservice to this beautiful and penetrating book, whose ostensible subject of contemplation is how to live, love, and make do in a time of war, if not cultural crisis. On the other hand, the book's greatest service, at least to my eye, is in its exploration of just what it means to be a poet—I should be more specific and say a lyric poet—amid our contemporary terrors.