On the
complex generational relationship that helps explain the Southern Renaissance.
It’s easy
enough, and certainly not inaccurate, to characterize the group of Southern
intellectuals and writers who formed the vanguard of the 1920s and 30s
Southern Renaissance as profoundly conservative, as rebelling against radical
and future-driven national and international movements and trends such as
modernism, urbanization, and (eventually) the New Deal. This was the group,
after all, who called themselves first the Fugitives
and then the Agrarians, and whose collective
writings culminated in the unquestionably conservative manifesto
I’ll Take My Stand (1930). No
American Studiers worthy of the name could fail to take such historical and
cultural contexts into consideration when analyzing why these young men
(mostly) and women
came together at this moment, and why they wrote and thought the things they
did.
Yet there
are other kinds of contexts that also inform any and every writer’s (and person’s)
identity, perspective, and works, of course, and I believe a biographical one
is particularly important when it comes to analyzing the Southern Renaissance
figures. They were born around the turn of the 20th century, which
meant that their parents had been born, in most cases, just after the end of
the Civil War; those parents were thus the children of both Civil War veterans
and of the incredibly complex and fraught post-war period, the children of
(among other things) both the Lost Cause and the New South. To take the
Renaissance’s most enduring literary figure, for example: William
Faulkner was born in 1897, to parents born in 1870 and 1871; his father Murry
both tried to build the family’s railroad company and to carry on the legacy of
his
own grandfather, a writer and Civil War hero known as “The Old Colonel.” Is
it any wonder, then, that young
Quentin Compson is so obsessed with the voice and perspective of his
father, Jason Compson, and of the family and Southern pasts about which he
learns from Jason?
If we move
beyond Faulkner, and into the works of the Fugitive and Agrarian writers who
even more overtly self-identified as part of the Renaissance, we likewise find
works and characters centered on—obsessed with, even—the legacies of their
fathers. Perhaps no work better exemplifies that trend than Allen Tate’s
historical and autobiographical novel The Fathers (1938), a text that
engages in every tortured word with the legacies of the Civil War and its
aftermath and of the familial and cultural issues raised therein. Far more
ambiguous and complex, but perhaps even more telling of this father-centered
trend, is Robert
Penn Warren’s poem “Mortmain” (1960), a five-section elegy for Warren’s
father; the first section is entitled “After Night Flight Son Reaches
Bedside of Already Unconscious Father, Whose Right Hand Lifts in a Spasmodic
Gesture, as Though Trying to Make Contact: 1955,” and while the subsequent four
sections range far beyond that man and moment, they do so precisely to ground
many other historical and cultural questions in that profoundly autobiographical
starting point. As
Warren’s life and career illustrate, the Southern Renaissance figures were
not circumscribed by such generational relationships—but they were certainly
influenced, and in many ways defined, by them.
Next
father-focused post tomorrow,
Ben
PS. What do you
think? Responses, ideas, or suggestions about fatherhood in America?
8/14
Memory Day nominee: Ernest
Thayer, the philosopher, journalist, and poet
whose most defining legacy
is as the author of the
definitive poetic tribute to America’s
national pastime.
No comments:
Post a Comment