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