March 23, 1968—Worried about being financially
overextended one decade after his most successful work, Edwin O’Connor, who chronicled the seriocomic transition of descendants
of Irish emigrants to the U.S. in The
Last Hurrah and other novels, died of a stroke at age 49 at his home on Boston’s
Commonwealth Avenue. Despite considerable literary gifts, the Pulitzer Prize winner's standing in
American literature did not long survive him.
The Last Hurrah, his most popular work, entered the language as shorthand for an old-style politico in his final
campaign. (It was based on longtime Boston Mayor James Michael Curley.) Its
vivid depiction of the end of the era of urban machine politics led to it
joining other, far more prosaic conventional histories on the syllabus of an
American Urban History course I took at Columbia University more than 30 years
ago. The honor (which, I hope, was repeated elsewhere in academe) was
well-earned. But I’m afraid that it only underscores that O’Connor is known--unfairly, I believe--for only one book.
Why has O’Connor fallen into obscurity while other
fiction writers of his generation have not only maintained their sales, but
seen them soar? Several reasons, I think, account for this sorry state of
affairs:
* His life
lacked the personal pathology, and even element of tragedy, that interests
Hollywood. He was not a substance abuser, a philanderer, a hater. He did
not labor in the face of a life-threatening disease, as did another O’Connor
whose fame subsequently surpassed his, Flannery. At worst, it seems, he might have
been afflicted with mild melancholy, brought on by some financial extravagance (a Porsche and a custom-made Cape Cod summer house). When biographer Charles P. Duffy
interviewed his family, friends and associates, nobody seems to have had an
unkind word to say about him. In short, Woody Allen would never have included
him among the flamboyant, tortured geniuses of Midnight in Paris.
* He was
almost guaranteed to be taken down a peg after so much early success. “A
literary intellectual objects to nothing so much as a best-selling book that
also possesses real merit," wrote critic Edmund Wilson. Wilson, a
friend of O’Connor, knew his kind well. Critics have consigned O’Connor to the
ranks of the middlebrow along with the likes of John Marquand and
James Gould Cozzens.
* His brand of
realistic fiction fell out of favor with critics, if not readers. Those
postwar American novels enshrined in academe have often been associated with
the Beat (Jack Kerouac’s On the Road,
William Burroughs’ Naked Lunch) and
postmodernism (Thomas Pynchon) movements. Other novelists who produced their
best work in the Fifties and Sixties—Kurt Vonnegut, Joseph Heller and Richard
Yates—won subsequent acclaim for darkly satiric looks at American life that
rested on a foundation of deep pessimism. While all of O’Connor’s work, in some
way or other, relates to loss, however, they do not fundamentally question the
premises of American life.
* He didn’t have
the time to build a deeper legacy. Aside from The Oracle and a children’s book, O’Connor completed four major novels
in his lifetime. Novelists such as Philip Roth and William Kennedy have had
more than four decades from their first novels to their latest—plenty of time to
create an entire body of work that can be analyzed and appreciated. O’Connor
had fewer years as a published novelist—17—than even F. Scott Fitzgerald. Recent
experiences (marriage at age 44) and sweeping changes in the culture (Vatican
II’s impact on American Catholicism) would have added even greater depth to his
work.
* His titles, except
for The Last Hurrah, were not
memorable. The Edge of Sadness sounds
depressing. All in the Family is
easily confused with the Norman Lear sitcom, even though it predated it by four
years and had nothing to do with it. I
Was Dancing says nothing. To win fame in American literature, it sure doesn’t
hurt to have a title that is symbolic (The
Sun Also Rises), richly apropos (John O’Hara’s Appointment in Samarra), or simply quirky (Truman Capote’s Breakfast at Tiffany’s).
I used the occasion of O’Connor’s birth in 1918 for a prior post, but that hardly seems to
have exhausted what can be said about his life and work. Even all that I’ve
written till now here does not do so. It might be instructive, then, to compare
and contrast him with another Irish-American writer at the height of his fame
at the same time, John O’Hara.
O’Hara won the National Book Award for Ten North Frederick, while O’Connor
appears the following year to have been a runner-up to the eventual Pulitzer
Prize winner, Mackinlay Kantor’s Andersonville.
(The one he received five years later for The Edge of Sadness is often
considered a consolation prize.) Both books were turned into 1958 films starring aging male screen legends
(Spencer Tracy, with Hurrah; Gary
Cooper, for Frederick). Both novels
dealt, in one fashion or other, with politics—Hurrah, as its main subject, and Frederick, as the field that proves the undoing of its protagonist.
Both took their inspiration from real-life characters: Hurrah, obviously, as a roman a clef about Mayor Curley, and Frederick, a good deal less so, as a
what-if exercise: i.e., what if Franklin Roosevelt, instead of being a
patrician upstate New York Democrat with a keen interest in public office, had
been a patrician Gibbsville, Pa. Republican who developed this same interest in
midlife?
Both O’Connor and O’Hara were the sons of doctors,
not only providing them with access to a good education and contact with the
middle and even upper classes, but also, perhaps, with the genetic
predisposition of one on whom nothing is lost.
Moreover, both men exhibited an ear for dialogue so
keen that they paid too much attention to those who insisted they should try
their hand with plays. Aside from Pal
Joey (he wrote the book for the Rodgers and Hart musical), O’Hara, according
to biographer Matthew Bruccoli, worked on 16 plays from 1940 to 1970, with
hardly any being produced. O’Connor’s involvement was more of a one-off, but
also more disastrous: I Was Dancing,
which lasted through only 21 performances on Broadway in 1964 and achieved
equally lackluster sales as a novel (though it did win an extremely warm appreciation from Washington Post critic Jonathan Yardley several years ago).
The most outstanding personal qualities of both men might
have been loyalty. Though infamously cranky, O’Hara adored his second and third
wives, and was devoted to such writer friends as Philip Barry, F. Scott
Fitzgerald, John Steinbeck and Ernest Hemingway. O’Connor, a liberal Democrat
thrilled that fellow Irish-Catholic New Englander John F. Kennedy was elected President, nevertheless broke off a White House dinner invitation from
JFK because he was courting the woman who became his wife.
Yet the distinctions between the two were also
significant. Born 13 years before O’Connor, O’Hara came of age during the
Roaring Twenties and Great Depression, much of which he spent in brawling and
drinking. His first novel, Appointment
in Samarra, created during that extended lost weekend, won him commercial
success at age 29. O’Connor, exposed to a wonderfully charismatic college
English professor who squandered his talent because of alcoholism, became a
teetotaler thereafter. His first novel, The
Oracle, about a conservative radio idol (think Rush Limbaugh, but up one
level intellectually), appeared when he was 33, but it was a slight apprentice
work. He did not really hit his stride until The Last Hurrah five years later.
While both writers worked immensely hard, their
speed varied greatly. O’Hara might have blown through one journalism job after
another in his 20s, but the experience left him with a great facility for
meeting deadlines. Particularly in his short stories, the architecture of the
pieces seemed to have been assembled almost completely in his head by the time
he sat down to his typewriter, so that he could crank them out within a few
days. O’Connor would work a sentence over and over, until it finally took the
form he wanted.
As much as anything, their attitudes toward Roman
Catholicism sharply differentiated O’Hara and O’Connor. O’Hara, like F. Scott
Fitzgerald, lapsed from Catholicism in youth and never looked back. The few
priests who show up in his Balzacian fictional corpus seem included more to
make sociological points (how their brand of alcohol differentiates them from
rich and poor alike) or to shock (one gets drunk and has sex with a married
woman—not shocking now, but perhaps so in 1969, when Lovey Childs appeared). O’Connor was a daily communicant who knew
many priests, and his fiction evinced extensive appreciation for their
complicated humanity.
O’Connor wrote at a hinge point in the life of the
American Irish, when this ethnic group had reached a zenith of influence in
this country’s political, religious and commercial life. At this exact moment,
the tribal loyalties that fueled their rise, forged over nearly a century of exclusion and misery, began to attenuate.
"Sons are put on this earth to trouble their fathers," says John Rooney, the Irish-American crime boss played by Paul Newman, in the 2002 film The Road to Perdition. O'Connor would have disagreed: the grievances ran deep on both sides of the generational divide. Nobody was in a better position than O’Connor to depict the resulting ambivalence of this sunny and sorrowing ethnic group he knew so bone-deep.
"Sons are put on this earth to trouble their fathers," says John Rooney, the Irish-American crime boss played by Paul Newman, in the 2002 film The Road to Perdition. O'Connor would have disagreed: the grievances ran deep on both sides of the generational divide. Nobody was in a better position than O’Connor to depict the resulting ambivalence of this sunny and sorrowing ethnic group he knew so bone-deep.
No comments:
Post a Comment