I10, 1971
THE MICHIGAN DAILY
Page Five
.
The Silent Revolution: Avoiding society's flotsam
John W. Osborne, THE SIL-
ENT REVOLUTION: THE IN-
DUSTRIAL REVOLUTION IN
ENGLAND AS A SOURCE OF
CULTURAL CHANGE, Scrib-
ner's, $7.95.
By JOHN CUMBLER
Nineteenth cantury culture
and its relationship to the In-
dustrial Revolution has long
been a subject of speculation
among European historians. As
noted in his subtitle, ("The In-
dustrial Revolution in England
as a Source of Cultural
Change"), Professor Osborne
explores the different cultural
changes in England during the
early industrializing period.
Based mostly on secondary liter-
ature, the book would be a posi-
tive contribution to history if it
had, indeed, developed the re-
lationship it proposes. Unfor-
tunately, it does not.
Rather than studying w h a t
the subtitle suggests, the b o o k
serves as an attempt to prove
Pro bin
Theodore Solotaroff, T H E
RED HOT VACUUM, Athen-
eum, $3.95, paper.
By ELIZABETH WISSMAN
BRUSS
The occasional essays and book
reviews which Theodore Solo-
taroff has collected under the
title The Red Hot Vacuum, were
probably b o t h intelligent and
intelligible in the context of their
original appearance in Commen-
tary, Book-Week, and other pub-
lications during the 1960's. Even
this collection, although hardly
an "event" to mark your inter-
national calendar of aesthetics,
has its interest. However, the
manner of publication has dis-
torted whatever value these es-
says may have possessed, ap-
parently convincing even Mr.
Solotaroff himself that he was
unconsciously creating a master-
piece of cultural criticism, bring-
ing (as the book jacket pro-
claims) "a notable lucidity and
perspective to "the red hot vacu-
um" at the core of this chaotic
creative age (the 1960's)". In his
introduction, Solotaroff claims
that The Red Hot Vacuum re-
. veals an implicit unity among his
pieces of literary journalism, a
unity which is half Biographia
Literaria, half barometer of the
Zeitgeist: "a way of responding
somewhat more directly and in-
dividually to the altered environ-
ment of letters, and inevitably, to
4 the political, social and cultural
developments that related to it.
Since it is in this guise that he
has allowed his work to be mar-
keted, it is in this guise it must
be reviewed.
As for Mr. Solotroff's sociologi-
cal pretenses, his "response to
-the environment" appears to be
strictly mediated by the text at
hand; and not always the most
adequate text for that purpose,
either. His "response" to the
Civil Rights marches of 1964 was
to re-appraise,' some twenty
years after the fact, the work of
Richard Wright. This is, em-
barrassingly, the only r e v i e w
of Black literature during a dec-
ade in which Black authors at
last emerged,.without an apolo-
gy for their vision. Solotaroff's
response to student activism is a
s t r a n g e 1 y euphemistic and
guarded review of The Straw-
berry Statement, comparing it
somewhat wistfully to the agonies
of Holden Caulfield. Another re-
view, a summary statement on
the life and work of Paul Good-
man, completes Mr. Solotaroff's
adventures in the culture at
large, although he makes occa-
sional reference to the pwverty
he sees through the window cf
his commuter train, and the dis-
comforts he experienced with his
friend Philip Roth, until the dis-
parity in their economic ,;it,a-
tions was resolved by Solotaroff's
upward mobility into New York
affluence.
Even in the more rarified at-
mosphere of the arts of .he '60's,
Solotaroff's selection of subject
matter is narrow to the point of
claustrophobia. None of the arts
(musical, visual, theatrical or
film) receives even his passing
attention: again, in a deeade in
which there was full-scalb ex-
that England's strength as a
nation lay in her choice to re-
form "an existing situation ra-
ther than innovate in a major
way . . .'. Although the review-
er does not agree with this pre-
mise, he would not object if the
author pursued that theme with
logic and methodological con-
sistency. Instead, the book ap-
pears as a kaleidoscope of poli-
tical and social reforms in Eng-
land at the time of the in-
dustrial revolution.
T. S. Eliot once described Ob-
jective Correlative as the pro-
cess by which a poet makes an
objective fact into a subjec-
tive situation. The historian.
like the poet, must create an
objective correlative, but t h e
historian must use tools differ-
ent than those of the poet. The
historian must work with cau-
sal relationships. The historian,
unlike the poet, can not argue
simply by juxtaposition or meta-
phor.
Unfortunately, Professor Os-
borne attempts to show the In-
the 'Re
perimentation with mixed media.
But even literature is far from
fully represented: there is vir-
tually no poetry under review, a
few books of essays, with the -rest
almost entirely devoted to long
fiction. And, even in thi., Mr.
Solotaroff has ignored as many
important authors as he has con-
sidered. Where, we might ask, -
are Nabokov and Borg:s, 'where
-save an admiring allusion of
two-is Mailer. If Mr. Solotaroff
so abhors the "vacuum," of the
Sixties, he might remind himself
that nothing is found where
dustrial Revolution as a source
of cultural change through a
simple juxtaposing of the In-
dustrial Revolution (which he
places anywhere between t h e
late 1750's to 1856) with cultural
change. Typical of Osborne's
argument by juxtaposition is the
following:
The Society for the diffu-
sion of Useful Knowledge,
(founded and financed by the
upper middle class and direct-
ed to the working class) Me-
chanics Institutes, and o t h e r
organizations with similar
purposes were part of the op-
timistic view of human inter-
ests and potentialities which
followed the application of
steam power to production.
(117)
Surely more could be said
about the relationship between
Mechanics Institutes and the in-
dustrial revolution than t h a t
they were simply part of "t h e
optimistic view of human inter-
ests and potentialities w h I c h
d Hot I
metaphysical and ethical real-
ism. And yet, he cannot pene-
trate his own loss of faith in or-
der to employ his canons, "sani-
ty," "compassion," and the
whole Leavis retinue, as at least
instrumental and r e g u 1 a t i v e
truths. His concepts are nct-
systematically opposed: there is
no defined evil for his good. no
scale of relative "health" by
which to measure his demands
for sanity-as a reader, I was
only aware that at some vague
point Mr. Solotaroff begins ac-
cusing an author of "obsession,"
Ol
00,
followed the application of
steam power to production."
The difficulty of developing
industrial discipline in a non-in-
dustrial work force has long
been a concern of industrializ-
ing nations. It seems possible,
if not likely, that the Mechan-
ics Institutes and the Society
for the Diffusion of Useful
Knowledge were directly relat-
ed to the process of developing
an intelligent, disciplined in-
dustrial work force out of an
illiterate, non-regimented agri-
cultural work force.
Osborne misses the connec-
tion between the Industrial Re-
volution and cultural change
again when he attributes the
Society for the Suppression of
Vice as "symbolic of a middle
class moral earnestness." T h I s
explanation avoids rather than
deals with the issue of cultural
change. It avoids the fact that
such societies also contributed
to making the English work-
ing class into prudent and ef-
ficient factory operatives. This
Vacuum'
South. Essentialy, M. Soloaroff
praises what he can see, and sees
only that which he already
knows. It can be no surprise,
then, that the title essay con-
cludes with this proposed solu-
tion for the condition of litera-
ure at the present time:
Perhaps the best that can be
asked is that we become aware
of the vacuity of the literary
culture, that we cease trying so
hard to jump with the Zetigeist
or to beat it at its own frag-
menting and frantic game antd
begin again to restate the cul-
tural tradition from the per-
spective of the present ... For
it is around such restatements
of a cultural tradition that new
viewpoints spring to life, true
centers of literary community
and authority begin to form,
and works like the Waste Land
and Ulysses and The Magic
Mountain begin to be imagin-
able again.
The program is derivative-
and to his credit, Mr. Solotaroff
does recognize the debt to Mat-
thew Arnold-and the literary
goal is derivative as well. Sure-
ly Mr. Solotaroff must know that
a principal of the modernism he
so nostalgically admires is the
recognition that we can never go
home again? The danger of
Solotaroff's formulation is pre-
cisely that he would be appalled
at a literary revolution of the
dimensions of Joyce or Eliot.
Indeed, the New American Re-
view which he edits can hardly
claim to be a controversial cen-
ter in the manner of the Dial
during the early years of this
century.
Much of the vitriol in this re-
view I would regret, had Mr.
Solotaroff made less pretentious
claims for his book. And, yet, of
Red Hot Vacuum perhaps, the
claim to be a "representative"
volume is not entirely false. It
may be a document of the '60's
if not about them. Certainly, "the
shrinkage of extremes between
hard thought and easy attitudi-
nizing, between originality and
novelty, relevance and chic, dis-
tinction and celebrity" which
characterizes the decade fo'
Solotaroff is at times painfully
evident in his own efforts. And.
in the midst of this brooding and
desperate ambivalence, the fail-
ure of a grand assault on a "new
frontier" becomes less surpis-
ing. Perhaps, it was foolish to
hope-foolish to excite ourselves
with futile activism-but no ac-
count of the Sixties is possibld
which ignores the xcitement
that was there, however vain-
gloriously, and the plenuin,
which for some of us, filled this
Red Hot Vacuum.
society was one of many which
grew up during the industrializa-
tion period with the aim of com-
bating the drunkenness, ineffi-
ciency and riotous behavior of
the working class - while co-
incidentally, combating deport-
ment of the working class which
would hurt production.
Occasionally Professor Os-
borne intrigues us with the pos-
sibility of a direct relationship
between industrialization a n d
and jetsam floated to the sur-
face of society." (1351
Osborne's concept of the peo-
ple, especially the working class
is distorted by his acceptance of
Le Bon's concept of the apoli-
tical crowd. Osborne describes
the poor as ignorant and "easy
prey for agitators." He argues
that most of the riots were with-
out "deep-rooted political or
economic motivation," because
of their "spontaneity." (9)
can claim that a formerly ac-
cepted practice became unac-
ceptable. he must show us that
not only the factory child la-
bor. but also that the old home
and shop exploitation became
intolerable.
Unacceptable professionally.
especially in this age when we
are supposed to be sensitive to
cultural racism, and when the
war in Viet Nam tends to lead
us toward racial stereotypes to
justify our own brutality, is Pro-
fessor Osborne's comment that
"life was cheap . . . (as in) the
Orient." (109
What Professor Osborne has
performed is a survey history of
English social change during the
industrial revolution. What he
has not done is grapple with
the relationship between what
culture is and how it is affect-
ed by economic and social
change. Unfortunately Profes-
sor Osborne's data and method
are tried if not tired. Sociologists
a r e attempting to understand
what social disorganization and
reorganization mean for the to-
tal culture. Historians need to
become aware of the sociologist's
methods and begin applying
some of these techniques. They
need to see causal relationships
on multidimensional levels rath-
er than in purely one-dimen-
sional terms. Man lives a com-
plex life, he lives in multidi-
mensions, and we must s t o p
studying his past on a one di-
mensional, simplistic level.
b
0
0
k
s
nothing is sought. It is strange
that with all his rather smug
allusions to his graduate study
of Henry James, Mr. Solotaroff
never recognizes the possibility
that he is himself a "flawed re-
flector" of the events surround-
ing him.
There are other indicaticns that
The Red Hot Vacuum is in part
the product of Mr. Solotaroff, and
literary lions like him, that it is
both what he sees, and what he
"half creates." The anxiety, am-
bivalence, and derivative quality
of which he most often complains
is to be found in his own critical
categories as well.
. .in questioning the ideo-
logical assurances and literary
standards of o u r cultura.l
fathers as increasingly beside
the point of contemporary
American reality, one has lit-
tle left-besides a massive sense
of fluidity. The Liberal Imagi-
nation or The Waste Land or
The Portrait of a Lady are of
little help after the candors of
the newsstand of a Sunday eve-
ning of watching TV, but what
else is of help?
Mr. Solotaroff wrote that in
1961; in 1969, he still can Find no
better metaphor for Queens than
"wasteland," and he still praises
his favorite authors (Bellow an~d
Roth) for the "aspiration, suf-
fering, s p i r i t u a l discovery"
which make their "characters so
real" - invoking by synonym
Lionel Trilling's "moral real-
ism." For Solotaroff such ter-
minology has lost its roots, is
"hysteria, and "ego-mania."
maintaining all the while his dis-
dain for "pop psychiatry. Solo-
taroff is capable, of at once
praising V.S. Pritchett's re-
strained autobiography for its
lack of preoccupation with "the
aberrant and the perverse" and
the other trappings of contemn-
porary "'psychic voyeurism",
while also claiming that Part-
nov's Complaint is rendered a
masterpiece by these same quali-
ties.
It would appear that Mr. Sole-
taroff combines a demand ino
"emotional candor" with the
single restriction that such can-
dor must appear "natural." '3ut
his bases for deciding of what
such "naturalness" must consist
is at best idiosyncratic and at
worst ethnocentric. His praise
for the "realism" of largely
Jewish novelists is suspect, as is
his limitation of "moving and
true" apocalyptic statements to
only those who have been victims
of Jewish concentration camps
-apocalyptic vision in Henry
Miller is "mere surrealism," in
R.D. Laing, an example of an
author "conning himself." Rath-
er than evidence of a religious
bigotry on Solotaroff's part, these
are examples of a rather limited
imagination. He is equally will-
ing to praise William Bour-
rough's, insofar as he represents
a continuance of Eliot's Waste-
land and Flannery O'Connor, in-
sofar as she keeps her sadistic
subject matter withinthe recog-
nizable boundaries of Faulkner'.
social change. For example, "one
would like to give Promilly and
the rest of the small band of
humanitarians who dedicated
their lives to the reform of the
criminal law credit for this
change, but in fact, reform of
the legal system, as was true of
other reforms, came about
largely, because of the demands
of the new industrial age."
(109) But, again, Osborne fails
to show how the industrial age
or its demands, effected or af-
fected the new criminal code,
(for that matter he doesn't tell
us what the demands them-
selves were.) One might specu-
late that during periods of in-
dustrial growth, efficient and
effective rather than brutal
codes of law were required. The
industrial system, with its
crowded living conditions de-
manded a relatively peaceful
and orderly community. This
required systematic and effec-
tive law enforcement which the
old criminal codes could n o t
provide; thus they were reform-
ed.
Professor Osborne's tendency
to editorialize about the na-
ture of discontent and rebellion
particularly annoyed this re-
viewer. Osborne's idea of what
England needed in the way of
a labor leader was Sam Gomp-
ers: what she needed least was
a radical labor agitator.
The Grand National Consoli-
dated Trades Union and sim-
ilar schemes, with their dedi-
cation to reweaving the entire
fabric of society . . . did not
point the way to a better
future for the English worker.
(It was the craft union)
which, making no promises to
its m-mbers of a utopia and
displaying a splendid disre-
gard for working class soli-
darity, inspired future union
activity. (76).
Again Osborne states "T h e
times were out of joint and a
certain amount of noisy flotsam
Today's Writers . .
John Cumbler is 'a graduate
student in the history depart-
ment and a former reviewer
for the Daily.
Liz Bruss, when not working
on her doctoral dissertation,
counsels freshmen in the Eng-
lish department.
At other times Professor Os-RadiclFilm S
borne's attempt to prove that
England was changing her val-
ues through some sort of middle D
class awakening due to industri-
alization, leads him into contra- in
diction. After describing the fact
that child labor was tolerated in
the home or shop of parents or
relatives but resisted in the fac-
tory, he states that "in an age TONIGHT!
which was growing more sen-
timental and humanitarian, a NEWMAN CENTER, 331 Thompson
formerly accepted p r a c t i c e
(child labor) became an abom-1/ of profits to: Corntree Day-Care Center
inable evil." (71) Logically the
factory system of child labor 75c . 7-9-11 p.m.
was n o t a formerly tolerated
evil but a new evil qualitatively
different from the old family- (NEXT WEEK: Douzhenko's "Earth")
exploited child. Before Osborne
Applications now being taken to fill:
1 vacancy on Student Government Council
(member-at-large seat)
4 openings on 'U' Cellar Boakd of Directors
(Bookstore policy board)
a 3 Student openings on University Council
(proposes uniform conduct rules and investigates procedures concerning
police on campus)
Pick up applications and sign up for interviews at 1546 Student Activities
Building (For 'U' Cellar Board-also can get applications at 'U' Cellar)
APPLICATIONS DUE TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 16
You say you're feelin'
cold and lonely?
-----
New Shipment
CONTI NENTAL
TYROLEANS
I OPENING TODAY
BORDERS BOOK SHOP
211 So. State St.
An alternative bookstore is now open
New, Fine Used, and Rare Books in Literature, Art, History,
and Political Science, all at reduced prices; over 4000 paper-
backs at 1; price. Also, complete 19th century standard
editions of McCauley, Carlyle, Thakeray, Byron, Coleridge
--SPECIALS-
1)}FAULKNER AT THE 4) PHOENIX I-
UNIVERSITY COLLECTED
Req. 5.95 WRITINGS OF
Hardbound Edition D. H. LAWRENCE
Only, $1.45 Req. 12.50
2) COMPLETE Now 4.95
PAINTING SERIES 5) MAN, STATE,
For the student body:
Genuine
Authentic
Navy
PEA COATS
By
DUNHAMS
$24 & $28
Cheer Up!
Come on up to the 2nd floor of the Student
Publications Bldg. We'll give you warmth, under-
, - . I -L
ii
,, ,
t r .-
I
I
I