I didn’t recognize Gilbert Sorrentino the one time I was lucky enough to meet him and hear him read. Next to William Gaddis’s, his writing is the funniest in American literature, yet this humor is incongruent with dustjacket photographs that made him look alternately like some Mafia don silently ordering whackings, and the greaser with a thick handlebar moustache in the high school bathroom ready to kick your ass, just because. When I saw Sorrentino in the flesh, he was much taller than I had assumed, and thin, and looked like a sweet old man. He asked how long he had to read and someone said “How about forty-five minutes?” and he began to read in this slow, quiet voice that had me panicking that, favorite writer or no, this was going to be a long forty-five minutes. But it wasn’t: he went straight into the raunchy stuff, laughing at his sorry characters and their sorry lives (which I laughed at too, even though I could recognize myself) with the surety and confidence of a natural storyteller.
My hardcover copy of Gilbert Sorrentino’s Red the Fiend bears the author’s tiny, unreadable signature on the full title page.1 When he signed it he told me that his royalties statements indicated that it sold approximately one copy per year. Thankfully, Dalkey Archive, which now keeps the majority of Sorrentino’s fiction in print, has rescued and reissued this book, one of the top three or four American novels of the 1990s2 and one of Sorrentino’s very best. They’ve brought it out in a nice paperback edition, one which should expose many new readers to this book in which Sorrentino’s writing is even funnier and more depressing than usual. When Sorrentino died on May 18, 2006, we lost a colossal, monstrous, intense, outstanding writer, one of the best ever, a man who was prolific, but whose less successful books are better than most writers’ best. With Dalkey now printing Sorrentino, it looks like this legacy will not be lost.
Red the Fiend is a standout in a career built on writing funny and depressing books that wouldn’t be so funny if they weren’t so depressing, and vice versa. It’s the story of Red, a boy growing up in Brooklyn at the end of the Great Depression. He’s a violent, idiotic, filthy, lonely, mean, wretched kid.
His father is a man full of the empty promises of the dedicated alcoholic. Red lives with his vacuous mother, his spineless “mollycoddle” of a grandpa, and of course, Grandma. Grandma is one of the most hateful, evil characters in all of American literature, one who never has anything nice to say about anyone or anything and who speaks in a truly bizarre collection of personal clichés, epithets, and bigoted remarks.3 Quite possibly the most judgmental person in all of Sorrentino’s stable, she’s a racist know-it-all drama queen who’s constantly in need of attention and carping about the collusion of the world against her, the thoughtlessness of everyone else. She’s a niggardly woman, religious when it suits her, one who doesn’t believe life is for enjoying, a woman who can put an ugly spin on anything, as if to highlight for others her personal suffering in every aspect of life.
Red, whose “face is the very essence of stupidity,” is subjected to daily verbal abuse by Grandma for offenses imagined, picayune, or authentic:
If Red becomes terrified when Grandma summons the demon, Hurley Lees, by thrice intoning, Hurley Lees, come blow your horn, the king’s son is in your garden, she contemptuously knocks him on the sconce till his eyes rattle. 4
as well as:
The next day Grandma whips Red with her belt for getting a towel too wet. The day after she pinches his arms black and blue for not changing his shoes after school. The next day she boxes his ears until his head sings and buzzes for not washing his hands before supper like some kind of a black nigger. And the day after that she drums on his skull with her knuckles for getting a spot of ink on his white school shirt.
Sorrentino had the incredible ability to replicate, with a chameleon’s accuracy (and one is tempted to believe, its speed), the voices of his characters. He often did this without the benefit of dialogue or personal narration, and moved effortlessly among multiple voices without confusion (or superfluous, intrusive attributions). Despite the hyperactive misery, the no-holds-barred judgmentality, and the unmitigated racism of Red’s characters, Sorrentino expresses their thoughts, feelings, and actions with prose that is blunt, brutal, and poetic. He makes us want to get right up next to some very ugly people.5
This is the key to Sorrentino’s genius: there are many writers who, like Sorrentino, can be funny and sad at the same time, but none can make their books hurt the way Sorrentino did. Sorrentino wound the humor and the misery together like a tight length of hurt: the funnier it was, the sadder it was, and the more it hurt. Importantly, he never lost touch of the difference between sentimentalism and genuine emotion.6 He knew that showing us Red’s lie-filled school compositions (his “cousin Katys husband used to be mayer of Union city Jersey till he fell off a trolley whose door opened by a nigger he is now a crippel”) could be more painful and show us more about him than working up some tearjerker narrative about poor, poor Red and his hard, hard life.
Sorrentino’s love of lists is put to maximum use in this novel, as several chapters are nothing but: strings of insults, catalogs of feelings, lists of reasons. It’s a book so good that I’ll venture to say—at the acknowledged risk of sounding like one of those “tour de force” movie reviewers who only want to see their names in the marketing copy—it is honestly sad when the book ends after a cyclone of 213 pages. The material is so rich, however, and Sorrentino packs so much feeling and information, that in many ways the book is better the second time through. And of course it reminds you that you’ve not yet re-read Odd Number, Gold Fools, Blue Pastoral, Little Casino, The Sky Changes, Mulligan Stew . . .
Read more articles by Scott Bryan Wilson
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.