14e Sfr4itjan D\ut Seventy-eight years of editorial freedom Edited and managed by students of the University of Michigan 'Ada,' By JOHN RODENBECK or an answer to the Plastic Empire L 420 Maynard St., Ann Arbor, Mich. News Phone: 764-0552 Editorials printed in The Michigan Daily express the individual opinions of staff writers or the editors. This must be noted in all reprints. SATURDAY, JULY 26, 1969 NIGHT EDITOR: MARTIN A. HIRSCHMAN Nerve 'gas and Asian security A'EHE PENTAGON has once again dem- onstrated that ineptitude rather than intelligence governs the making of Amer- ican military policy. And through t h a t ineptitude the Pentagon may have put an end to all of President Nixon's plans for a new Asian security pact. Large quantities of nerve-g a s muni- tions, the Department of Defense con- firmed early this week, have been stock- piled on American bases in Okinawa along with the usual contingent, of nuc- lear warheads. The Pentagon a 1so an- nounced, in response to the demands of outraged Owinawans and Japanese, that the nerve-gas would be removed. How- ever, nothing was said concerning exist- ing stockpiles in W e s t Germany and South Korea, and the Japanese press is investigating the possibilities of the ex- istence of the lethal-gas stockpiles with- in Japan proper. This series of revelations may very well provide domestic critics of the arms race, of imperialism, of the Pentagon's influ- ence in t h e conduct of foreign policy, with the most valuable issue by which to check the emerging Nixonian Asian pol- icy. Mr. Nixon's present world tour cannot be isolated a n d examined as merely a goodwill trip to illustrate to Asia the new leadership of the United States. Ile seeks to actively impose his leadership upon others, to dictate his own world view, to begin marshalling forces for a campaign to make law and order a reality for the entire globe. While his vain dreams have small chance of realization, tlie Pentagon it- self, with all of its misconceived assump- tions, its past history of frightful mis-. management, its ignorance, immorality, and downright evil intentions, may inad- vertently ruin Nixon's glorious vision. The President, in the next few days, plans to capitalize on the grandeur and gTbry a brought to the American image' with the successful completion of the moon shot by a week-long tour of several Asian capitals and a prestige-pr'ovoking visit to Rumania. WHEN ALONE with the Asian chieftains, Nixon w ill describe his vision of a brand-new Asian security pact that will hold forth the promise of massive Ameri- can economic assistance in exchange for regional self-defense, t4hereby sidestep- ping the possibilities of the United States entangling itself in another Vietnam. The focus of the pact is clear: the greatest danger to world peace is the aggressive and belligerent nature of Chinese policy - let us contain them. UNRELENTING PRESSURE will be ex- erted upon the neutrals to join the in- ternational Nixon bandwagon; they will be beseiged with the promises of what the United States can do for them in ma- terial assistance; they will be told that the New Nixon is a subtle and wily poli- tician who will not provoke anti-Ameri- can hostility through s u e h alignment; they will be held captive by Nixon rant- ing about a billion Chinese ever-anxious to conquer the world; they will be sub- jected to the Dullesian sermon that neu- tralism is immoral; t h a t alignment is virtue. The old faithful will be promised that their nation w i 11 not become another Vietnam; that the responsibility for peaceful progress, for domestic tranquil- ity, for the good of their own people will depend upon the extent of t h e i r own commitment to regional self-defense. All will be told that the United States wishes to remain aloof from the actual workings of the organization; that Amer- Ica will have the vote of only one mem- ber; that this will be their show provid- ed it meets certain specifications. This is the Nixon plan to maintain the Ameri- can distribution of power in the world. He hopes to keep law and order abroad by having other cops do the nasty things the U.S. of late has had to do in Vietnam. IF NIXON'S PLAN came to be, one of the most important nations involved would be Japan. It is they who command the resources of the world's third largest in-, dustrial power; they would be the ones frankly: if you want the privileges of the American nuclear and military umbrella, you will have to become responsible for some of the duties. Thus, because of the rapidly deteriorat- ing state of American-Japanese relations, nerve-gas in Okinawa may provide the spark to bust Nixon's bubble-gum vision. The Okinawa base, a 'virtual floating arms platform, is generally considered "the keystone of the Pacific" for the American military. Within a radius of 1700 miles, American aircraft can reach any Asian nation with which the U.S. has a security pact. Every important military, industrial, or civilian center of China is vulnerable to the nuclear sights of the B-52's. Surgical strikes from Okinawa daily blast the jungles of Vietnam. O THE PENTAGON strategists, the special status accorded to American power in Okinawa even outweighs its strategic importance. Ever since the sur- render of Japanese forces to the United States twenty-four years ago, the mili- tary has exercised de facto sovereignty of the island. No legal restrictions enacted by the Japanese can hamper the military operations launched from the base (the Japanese-American Security Pact of 1960 prohibits bases in Japan from being used as indirect combat areas or for the stock- piling of nuclear weapons). Hence, in addition to flying combat missions to Vietnam, the stockpiling of nuclear weapons and nerve-gas muntions, the military also possesses an awesome tactical missile unit and an Air Force strategic wing on Okinawa. "Here," one American military chieftain in Okinawa says, "we're able to do anything, anytime, anywhere, without asking anybody." Unfortunately for the Pentagon, how- ever, Okinawan opposition to the daily abuses of the military is growing. When the B-52's take off, Okinawans know that the planes are off to kill other Asians in Vietnam. The Okinawan press has bitter- ly complained of the buried resevoirs of jet fuel that have seeped into the local water supply, resulting in "flaming wells." American nuclear submarines have left traces of cobalt-60 in the harbors, and hundreds have claims pending for dam- ages to the fishing industry. Add to all of this the crass nature of American mili- tary culture, the obnoxious nature of Americans abroad, and the complete authority the American military exer- cises, over Okinawan political institutions and social life, and an explosive situation is ripe for disorder. EARLY IN JUNE, 18,000 Okinawan lab- orers staged a 24-hour wildcat strike at U.S. bases. A massive demonstration in February was held outside the Kadena Air Force base to protest against the presence of B-52's. And several promi- nent American diplomatic and military officials, including former Ambassador- to-Japan Reischauer, have warned that the growing turbulence threatens the ef- ficient operation of the 117 bases on the island. In Japan proper, Premier Eisaku Sato, under pressure from the Left, began the New Year with the pledge to recover Oki- nawa from American control and place the. bases there under the same restric- tions that govern American bases in Japan. He will visit the States in Novem- ber, and insists that "unconditional re- version" of the island's sovereignty must be granted if the Japanese-American Se- curity Pact is to be renewed- next year. A visit of his Foreign Minister, Kiichi Aichi, to Washington in June gave the Japanese the unexpected gift from the Nixon Administration of the promise to remove all nuclear weapons from the island in the near future, But Nixon is determined to continue using the bases, without prior consultation with the Japa- nese, for training, transit, and supply bases for Vietnam, and perhaps for bombing missions as well. IF SO, THE Sato government of Liberal. Democrats could easily lose power to a coalition of leftist parties. And with their demise, the Japanese-American Se- curity Pact. American miliary nresence' Ada or Ardor: A Family Chron- icle, by Vladimir Nabokov. Mc- Graw-Hill, $8.95. I can remember when many people who said they read books had never heard of Vladimir Na- bokov. At the time Lolita. was pub- lished in France he had been liv- ing a n d writing in the United States for fifteen years; graduate students in English at Harvard would pass around their smuggled copies of the Olympia Press edi- tion andask each other in whis- pers who "vadimir nabokov" could be a pseudonym for. Their chief candidate was, I think John Hollander. He is now being touted for the Nobel Prize. It would certainly be very surprising if they actually gave it to him, even though he is of course one of the bare half doz- en or so writes in English these days who can be said to have the courage - it t a k e s courage at least as m u e h as it takes time, money, honesty, and intelligence - to create literature. But for one thing, unless Nabokov himself ov- ersees the job, he does not trans- late very well. And for another thingvthe Nobel Award, as we all know, is much less a literary prize than the annual excuse for an in- offensive quasi-political gesture. It therefore distinctly w o r k s against Nabokov that he should have b e e n an aristocratic exile from Russia and t h a t he now chooses to live as an exile from the U.S. Since he has no visible connection with the fatuously so- called Third World either, there is nothing in his political circum- stances to pleas anyone and a good deal perhaps therefore to of- fend t h e politicians. Because a Nobel winner, of course, like an Olympic star, becomes automatic- ally a credit to the politics of his country. Who can take credit for Nabokov, though? LeninrStalin? Hitler? LBJ? Teddy Kennedy? Or the Swiss? The main trouble, you see, is not that he is a man with,. out a country but that he is a man with too many of them. There is an additional problem in that like many other twentieth- century writers Nabokov has had to create his own literary audi- ence. Though his works written in Russian are known and have been secretly rated higher than a n y others by his contemporaries in the Soviet Union, the circum- stances of exile have made it dif- ficult for them to provide a le- lihood for him except in English translation, while'even in his Eng- lish works he has had the task of educating enough of the literate public to k e e p himself supplied with a reasonably steady reader- ship. Unlike most other writers who have been forced for the sake of artistic survival into the task of education, moreover, he has not chosen to carry it out in the banal terms of a given ethical, social, po- litical, or economic ideology but has rather planted himself on the grounds implicit in t h e science and humanity of literary art itself. He has tried, that is, to teach his readers, numbed as they all inevi- tably have been by the mechanical nature of their o w n twentieth- century literacy, how once again simply to read. i It is witness to Nabokov's cour- age as an artist that he should have chosen as well for so long such a difficult cultural milieu as the U.S. in which to create an au- dience. We are, most of us, as most of the reading matter in turn that comes our way supremely testi- fies, more or less unable to read, more or less unable to a c c e p t reading as an experience, unable to accept perhaps any moving ex- perience. Citizens of the Plastic Empire, governed by Ant-men, crippled, poisoned; gassed, and stupefied by an increasingly ugly and dangerous physical environ- ment, we live almost by necessity in a mental, moral, and emotional iron lung. And what we usually get that passes for literature is precisely what we are capable of: a small hairless monster that does not provide experience but pad- dles around the edges of it, occas- ionally stumbling with little sur- prised cries upon the slowly filling traces of its own muddy web-foot- ed prints, evidence of endless cir- cumambulation. Its furthest range is a weed-bank on the left hand and its own reflected image in an unbroken surface on the right. And when it turns to s p e a k of these things to us in, say, a novel it invariably uses the empty ideo- gram of the cliche, cheeping at I - b 0 0 k s 0 0 k s b 0 contemporary novelists take per- force as the subject of their books, "culture" being defined in t h i s context as what is left of a man after you substract from him ev- erything that has come to him without any profound engagement of the self, an operation that would leave most of us these days with what we should recognize"as very little indeed either to say or think. For though the novel, as Frank O'Connor shrewdly pointed out, is ninety per cent v e r b a 1 "treatment' and is thus essential- ly, on the one hand, the m o s t wordy and least substantial of all our literary a n d sub-literary "forms," it has also by conven- tion been conceived existentially, on the other hand, as mimetically anthropoand. ethnocentric in its use of verbal "treatment." It is therefore natural, given the gradual obsolescence in our time of the oldfashioned human being, his replacement by the Ant-man, and the consequent disappearance of language-giving, idea-making culture, and given also the schi- zoid literary tradition embodied in the novel itself, with its simul- taneous tendencies towards both logorrhea and the straightfor- ward depiction of what seems to be the cultural status quo, that the work of even "serious" American writers should have become stead- ily more entranced by the Mass- prop social considerations that in the U.S. are the chief substitute for culture. It is particularly natural, given our present situation within this gradual cultural decay and liter- ary evolution, that the only inter- esting passages of verbal "treat- ment" in the t w o best-received works by "serious" American nov- elists over the last twelve months or so should be lyric descriptions of male and female sexual organs in various states of tumescence and acquiescence. For more than anything else that easily comes to mind, the sexual organs are in our present condition the symbolic re- doubts of egoism, of vanity, and of vapity's side-kick, anxiety, the apparently inevitable concerns of a sociological novelist. T h e r e is perhaps some additional irony and pity to be found in the fact that they are also, by accident, nearly all we have left of a genuine cul- ture as well, though we should be warned that even the idea that we continue to be endowed with them may be only another popular delusion. We might take a lesson in this instance from the monkeys of the Detroit Zoo, who, wisely and prudently, are constantly checking themselves. The future belongs to formica- tion, obviously, not fornication. It has been reliably reported, never- theless, that some readers claim to be getting bored with merely fic- tive sexual organs. I should not want them on that account, how- ever, to be put off reading Ada. There is, to be sure, no lack of fictive organs in Nabokov's latest masterwork (see page references, diagrams, line-drawings, and can- did photographs below) but he is not concerned with egoism, vanity, or anxiety; he is concerned in-, stead, among other things; with a phenomenon for which there does not seem to be a word in American English, a phenomenon in which real sexual organs have often been known to play a highly significant part. Lionel Trilling described Lolita years ago as being fundamentally about something called "love" as opposed to something called "lust," a description that must have aroused at least a little laughter in the dark, betraying so much as it did of the limitations of the liberal imagination and conveying so inadequately as it did what it is that Lolita really seems "about." Trilling was attempting to link Nabokov with the last gasp of a specific Victorian literary and erotic tradition that, like most other Victorian traditions, has been revealed as vicious, self-de- structive and meaningless. Nabo- kov's attitude toward what we vaguely refer to as "love" has little to do with the nineteenth century; it leaps back over two thousand year to the more civilized sensi- bility of the ancient Greeks and Romans. The difference between Classical and Victorian notions of "love" has been neatly and honestly sum- marized by Nabokov's old enemy Freud: "The most striking distinction between the erotic life of anti- quity and our own no doubt lies in the fact that the ancient laid stress upon the instinct itself, whereas we emphasize its ob- ject. The ancients glorified the instinct and were prepared on its account to honor even an in- ferior' object; while we despise the instintual activity in itself, and find xcuses for it only in the merits of the object." In Lolita the objects of the erotic instinct--Hu-mbert Hum- bert, the book's madman-narrator, both trapped and freed by the pattern he makes of his own life, Lolita herself, his trollopy teeny- bopper, and Clare Quilty, her kinky sexologue-playwright-are all, like most of us, alas repulsive and two-dimensional, though Lo- lita in her old, age may be given credit perhaps for a certain jaded warmth. They have few merits, either -for the reader or for them- selves and the book is not about Victorian "love." The word that Nabokov. supplies in Ada for what Freud identifies. too specifically as the operation of 'the erotic instinct is "ardor,". the book's subtitle and the fictive sexual organs in the book belong for the most part to Ada herself its heroine-editor, and Van, it hero-narrator. Like all Nabokov's literary characters they are liter- ary characters, which means that the reader will find it, rather dif- ficult if he tries, as some readers' no doubt brought up on George Eliot always do, to "identify with" them, Nabokov himself having re- cently testified, incidentally, that he personally finds both Van and: Ada rather disgusting. In this book he has made "identification" even more difficult, however, by placing' these two figments of the imagina- tion in a world that is much nicer, on the whole, than the one we seem to inhabit and by further allowing them both to live to an incredibly ripe old age. Given- these special qualities of the char- acters and setting of the book, it might be suggested that it is to be regarded as a work of fiction. "Ardor" is the conceptual tread along which Nabokoy knots what mnight be called the "themes" of the book. The most important of these "themes" are time and mor- tality, in regard to both of which his attitude seems to be taken up in opposition to the almost two- hundred-y e a r-old categorizations of post-Kantian Idealism,] which still represents in the United' States a formidable ideologic as- cendancy, especially to the extent that it hasbecome vulgarized. His attitude is closely related to those of Joyce, whom he much admires, and Faulkner, whom he has never understood, as well as to the at- titudes of, among the more ob- vious, Poe, Tolstoy, Borges, and various modemn rationalists, scep- tics, phenomenologists, and struc- turalists. A good reader of Nabo- kov, however, is one who has out- grown Idealist categoresis and is beyond the superstition of ideology altogether, with its worlds, as he once wrote, "hard and round, like painstakingly painted globes." A good reader is a human being conscious that he is doomed to extinction but capable in the meanwhile simply of the qualities that Nabokov identifies with art: "curiosity, tenderness, kindness, ecstasy." And now we must say a word or two, as soberly as paossible, about A a's remaining ninety per cent: the "treatment" or "texture" as Nabokov himself would call it and as all good little nabokovtsy, tak- ing their cue from Pale Fire and its famous line 808, have learned to call it too. The interest of even professional critics has been cap- tured by Nabokov's "texture," some of whom like it, some of whom do not, but most of whom describe him in any case-rather puzzlingly -as a "trickster." This label, in fact, seems temporarily to have satisfied nearly everyone. It pro- vides those who like Nabokov with the excuse for playing a game of allusive one-upmanship, a game that in a' critical article generally results in an .infuriatingly coy strip-tease of the critic's own in- telligence and sensibility. And it provides those who do not like Nabokov with a way 'of slyly sug- gesting that under all those trap- pings the truth is that it is really the Emperor, not the critic, who has no clothes. I do not think there can in fact be any such thing as a literary trick or trickster. The word "trick" implies an intention to deceive and it is. impossible for me to under stand how in anything other thai a purely commercial, criminal sense (forgery, fraud) any work of genuine 'fiction, at least, can be described as having been writ- ten with such an intention. One recalls, for example, the re- view of Pale Fire in a major liter- ary journal by a scholar-critic famous in the general field of lit- erary studies nationally and fam- ous in his specialty throughout the entire world, as he himself would readily acknowledge. His review described the book as neither more nor less than a satire on his profession, despite which, clearly, he felt that it was right for him to be "generous." The re- view exemplified, certainly, this scholar-critic's notion of the un- assailable importance to literature of the scholar-critic. Nevertheless one had the vague feeling as one read it that not only, had the little Dutch boy got his hand stuck in the dyke but that the dyke was no dyke at all, being rather the rear end of a huge bewildered elephant. I picture the elephant as trying uneasily to look back over one grey Shoulder. "Trickery" and "satire" are oubliettes kept open by the critics' sense of insecurity. All literary men are in some degree or other paranoid and critics, who live in a Limbo between writer and audi- ence more so than most. I would like to urge, then, that it is the "treatment" of Ada that is of importance in the book and that its "treatment" should be taken seriously, as neither "trick- ery' nor "satire," but as a noble expression of "curiosity, tender- ness, kindness, ecstacy," which may after all mean "love." In April Nabokov was seventy. There is a Festschrift in preparation- let us not forget that he too is among many other things, a not inconsiderable scholar-critic-and there is every hope that he will live as long as the rest of us. If Ada is a final work, however, it wil make a worthy epitaph. Per- sonally, I shall be rereading it more frequently than any of the other books. 4. Af *& us in a language that strikes the inner eyes and ears of the ima- gination with drab brutality. And all the time it is really talking about ourselves. Supine in o u r mustard-yellow tank with its- lit- tle gauges gleaming as their need- les climb steadily up to the danger point, we let the monster tell us about ourselves endlessly, on clos- ed-circuit Micro-Vision, over and over again, in thousands of tiny repeated dots. The marked verbal and intellec- tual impotence of the contempor- ary American novel is the natural mode of expression for the cult- ural decadence t h a t established 'The Great Conductors:* Filling u pa void By JOHN HARVITH The Great Composers, by Harold C. Schon- berg. Simon and Schuster, $7.50. Even though as distinguished an ex- concert artist as Glenn Gould has joined today's avant-garde musicians in denying the viability of standard repertoire concert performances, that breed of ultra-egoist, the orchestral conductor, still derives nourishment from charisma-craving con- cert audiences. Concert-goers, apparently not in the least fazed by this official death- knell for the "stale concert-tradition," con- tinue to pack halls in order to both see and hear Bernstein, Ozawa, and Mehta, just as they did for Toscanini, Koussevitz-, ky, and Nikisch in past generations. Since it is clear that the conductor is anything but a vanishing phenomenon in the musical life of the West, Harold C. Schonberg's book, The, Great Conductors, should attract the attention of anyone interested in the current musical scene. Contrary to what the title may suggest ing, Mr. Schonberg provides several in- stances of too much anecdote and too little substance. However, even without the anec- dotes this book would be a delight to read, due to the author's witty and urbane prose style, which couldn't be further divorced from the turgid writing currently practiced by music historians (ask any music litera- ture student how exhilarated he is after having wallowed through 100 pages of Paul Henry Lang). What The Great Conductors offers is an historical development of the orchestral conducting tradition in the West, from its hazy beginnings (purely speculative, as no one knows who the first timeibeater was) to the present. This evolution of conducting emerges through sketches of musicians, both past and present, who have been most influential in setting trends in conducting style, and in defining the role of the con- ductor in music generally, as well as in the music which he performs specifically. Thus, relatively obscure musicians of the past century, such as Spontini or Habeneck, receive extensive discussion in the book, since their cntnribution +tolate conduinen- upon which grubby old books, magazines, etc. he bases his history, as there isn't one footnote in the book, nor even a biblio-, graphy. As a source for further investigation and research, therefore, this book has severe limitations. I must hasten to add, however, that the author is not offering us pure fantasy. The basic stylistic qualities of great musicians like Mozart and Wagner in music performance are well-documented elsewhere, and jibe perfectly well with what one finds here. Anyone who has done much reading in music history will also recognize many of the quotes as originating from reputable sources, which lends cre- dence to Mr. Schonberg's exposition, even when his general failure to list sources doesn't. Another drawback is the author's pre- judicial, and in one instance, contradictory approach to the romantic and post-roman- Today's Writers .. . JOHN RODENBECK is a professor in the Enenis e atment. comment on Liszt the conductor as "a cun- ning contriver of effects" with "a sickly sentimentality," as the crotchety com- plaints of a musical conservative. t These opinions would be acceptable if they were consistently held. However, when Mr. Schonberg devotes a chapter to Leo- pold Stokowski, he damns him for the very qualities which he excuses and even praises in Liszt and Mengelberg. The author uses anecdotes and third-person accusations (i.e. the intelligentsia, the musicians) which variously describe Stokowski as i charlatan, a musical ignoramus, and even as a liar. For the showmanship and flexibility of beat for which Liszt is praised, Stokowski is condemned and is finally dismissed as a matinee idol Nor does the author attempt to make obvjous allusions to Stokowski's conducting style as a logical extension of Liszt's. By neglecting to make this last point, Mr. Schonberg fails to follow the basic plan of his book, namely to consider individual musicians only from the stand- point of evolution of style. In the case of C2nrnne.r a s -- r hoc a. a.r...-41 lot 4