And in that moment Sherman made the terrible discovery that men make about their fathers sooner or later. For the first time he realized that the man before him was not an aging father but a boy, a boy much like himself, a boy who grew up and had a child of his own and, as best he could, out of a sense of duty and, perhaps, love, adopted a role called Being a Father so that his child would have something mythical and infinitely important: a Protector, who would keep a lid on all the chaotic and catastrophic possibilities of life. And now that boy, that good actor, had grown old and fragile and tired, wearier than ever at the thought of trying to hoist the Protector’s armor back onto his shoulders again, now, so far down the line.
२८ फेब्रुवारी, २०१९
"... the man before him was not an aging father but a boy, a boy much like himself..."
Time to roll out another passage from Tom Wolfe's "Bonfire of the Vanities," which some of you are reading along with me. Here's a little something from 66% of the way through the book, in a scene where our main character Sherman McCoy is revealing his impending arrest to his father:
याची सदस्यत्व घ्या:
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा (Atom)
पोस्ट्स
४५ टिप्पण्या:
My sister and I talked about this while our father lay dying. Women must feel it, too.
If my Dad ever felt his way, he never let on. Wolfe gets the sentiment almost right. After a certain age "Dad" welcomes you to the club of men. You've got your big boy pants on, and there's no more need for him to look out for you.
That's a passage that I overlooked. Wolfe is rarely delves into family psychology in this novel.
I love Tom Wolfe.
It's a shame he is a Dead White Male and thus has nothing to offer the next generation.
I miss being that dad with the "armor", now that all are grown and flown away.
Its not that the armor was heavy.
It looks funny there in the corner, all dusty.
There is no occasion to put it on, to do the thing I have enjoyed more than anything.
On the other hand, I don't want any of mine coming back and asking for me to put on that old thing. That's not going to happen without a serious problem somewhere. And if there is, I hope, and expect, that all of mine will have their own armor, and will meet me in the field, and that we can then stand shoulder to shoulder, in line.
My father was the most gentlemanly man I have ever known.
When we were all launched, he took on my mother's lost eyesight, became the care-giver, learned to cook, supervised the house, read to her two hours every day. When she died, he grieved, but recovered and lived for 13 more years, becoming a pseudo-father to several people two generations younger in the village where he lived. It is what he did.
I have thought about this part of the novel at various times in the last 7 years. I retired and moved back to Tennessee to help my mother care for my father who had a severe health scare in the Spring of 2012. He recovered from that incident (a very large, but non-malignant tumor on his spine was removed in a 12 hour surgery), but was never again the man he had been. Parkinson's and Alzheimer's only further degraded his physical and mental state over the next 6 years, and I greatly missed the man he had been for me all my life to that point.
When I first read the book, I was 21, and so this passage was a kind of warning of what I might discover later in life, but it didn't make an impact- I didn't think about it again until I reread the book at age 41. By that second reading, though, I had a great deal more life experience, and understood this part much better, and, like I wrote above, it was on mind on several occasions over the last few years. When Althouse started her project on Bonfire, I had expected this passage to be one of the ones she picked, and am pleased that she did.
You make me want to reread it. I loved it, 30 years ago now I guess.
Insightful.
Sherman’s dad was a big shot Wall Street lawyer at firm like Ann worked at before the University of Wisconsin.
This is a good reminder of the importance of taking the time to talk to your father while he is still among us. There are hundreds of questions I wish I could ask my father. I hope my children will think to ask their questions of me while I'm still here.
Much as I like Wolfe, this is the sort of thing that irritates me about reading fiction.
Not all men make the supposed discovery, for many of those who do it is not "terrible," and many of those late-discovered boys are not Good Actors acting out of duty.
Sherman, is a master of the obvious from his perspective, the firm of dunning spunget, that his father, used to fund his schooling at Buckley, St. Paul and Yale, is not a denizen of boys, in fact it is more accurate about hims, as they say 'lets put away foolish things' something McCoy has not done, otherwise he wouldn't play such precarious games with maria, that will threaten his standing at Pierce and Pierce, (one wonders if Wolfe was doing a homage to trading places, winthorpe and duke and duke,)
That was just Sherman trying to bring his father down to his (Sherman's) own pathetic level. He knew his father was a straight shooter who, while patrician, snooty, and elitist, was nonetheless a guy who did the right thing for his wife, his family, his clients. Sherman on the other hand is grubby all around; for money, for sex, for making sure that others knew that he thought that he was better than everyone else. Ha!
And the contemptible Sherman now realizes how pathetic and grubby he is today, and has been all along.
Of course, Sherman, reminds me of chris buckley, the wayward son to the patriarch, who hid his rebelliousness with false bon homie, who would step out on his wife, who was the daughter of spymaster don Gregg, and previously his boss,
"...and, perhaps, love,..."
Anne, I became a major consumer of Wolfe in the now somewhat hack 'The Sixties', and I've enjoyed/appreciated reading your posts on his work but refrained from comment. Why spoil a good thing. But then I read this by a commentator: "(Wolfe)has nothing to offer the your next generation..." What a completely moronic comment. Of course, Wolfe could be easily be credited OR blamed with inventing post-modern 'journalism' and non-fiction-fiction, but what do many(most?) of the the troll crowd know about anything, I'm afraid. But some DO know a lot and are honestly interested in virtually everything. Keep up the good fight. My own petty contribution at this point is to urge - those who have not already - read Wolfe's 'Radical Chic & Mau-Mauing the Flak Catchers', 1970. It has changed our world in its own modest but important way. And, according to Michael Lewis, Wolfe said to him in 1987, “As a piece of sheer writing, it’s my favorite book.” It's certainly one of mine, I know - one of those literary gifts that keeps on giving.
Much as I like Wolfe, this is the sort of thing that irritates me about reading fiction.
Agree. I'm currently reading Bonfire (1/3rd), and Sherman is quite the shallow little prick, whose perceptions, insights and experiences probably shouldn't be generalized: "discovery that men make about their fathers sooner or later"; no not really.
If anything, the discovery is that your parents are humans with foibles, like you, they're not the super-beings they may have appeared to be when your were six years old. But they're not children either, that's a silly idea.
btw, and for the record, I recognize that the frequent poster who made the "moronic comment was being - in his own 'I'm so brilliant' mind - 'Ironic'. Which was simply another moronic mistake - to think that slapstick rhetoric is the same as Irony. Sad.
If Sherman is supposed to realize anything it isn't that his father is a boy, but that he is a boy.
I think Wolfe is much more mocking in this passage than a straight reading suggests.
I was going to post this in the Michael Cohen thread where people are wondering how Donald Trump got hooked up with a sleaze like Cohen.
Wolfe has Cohen to a T and explains precisely why Trump needed him. Sherman has gone to see his tony whiteshoe lawyer about his potential legal troubles. This lawyer would never get withing 10 miles of something as tawdry as a criminal proceeding but explains who Sherman needs:
"“Dershkin, Bellavita, Fishbein & Schlossel,” said Freddy. “Three Jews and an Italian, and Tommy Killian is an Irishman. Let me tell you something, Sherman. The practice of law gets very specialized in New York. It’s as if there are a lot of little…clans…of trolls…I’ll give you an example. If I was being sued in an automobile negligence case, I wouldn’t want anybody at Dunning Sponget representing me. I’d go to one of these lawyers on lower Broadway who don’t do anything else. They’re the absolute bottom of the barrel of the legal profession. They’re all Bellavitas and Schlossels. They’re crude, coarse, sleazy, unappetizing—you can’t even imagine what they’re like. But that’s who I’d go to. They know all the judges, all the clerks, the other lawyers—they know how to make the deals. If somebody named Bradshaw or Farnsworth showed up from Dunning Sponget & Leach, they’d freeze him out. They’d sabotage him. It’s the same way with criminal law. The criminal lawyers aren’t exactly the bout en train, either, but in certain cases you’ve got to use them. Given that situation, Tommy Killian is a very good choice.”"
John Henry
I agree with the others up-thread. Sherman McCoy although more sinned against than sinning is a yuppie "what's in it for me" asshole. He's not fit to shine his father's shoes.Yeah, he's "Human" - but he doesn't really deserve his wealth or position in society.
Of course, 30 years later - in the age of Micheal Cohen and Jeff Bezos - McCoy looks like George Washington.
Well - Fernandistein - if reading about "shallow little pricks" annoys you so much, perhaps you should avoid reading Fiction altogether. God knows, there ARE enough of them in the 'NEWS' every morning, yes? But some of us find a difference between these two optional experiences and we find it well worthwhile. And, btw, Wolfe is not the first one in human history to remark that aging often seems to make humans more 'childish'....
"For the first time he realized that the man before him was not an aging father but a boy, a boy much like himself, a boy who grew up and had a child of his own and, as best he could, out of a sense of duty and, perhaps, love, adopted a role called Being a Father so that his child would have something mythical and infinitely important: a Protector, who would keep a lid on all the chaotic and catastrophic possibilities of life."
If I tried to write a sentence that long, I'd be hopeless. Eloquence, thy name is Tom Wolfe.
Blogger narciso said...
Of course, Sherman, reminds me of chris buckley
On the other hand, Chris Buckley is one Hell of a writer. I love all his books.
What has Sherman McCoy accomplished with his life? What joy has he brought into the world?
his wife, who was the daughter of spymaster don Gregg, and previously his boss,
And cousin to Adam Curry, the Podfather. I've heard a lot about Don Gregg listening to No Agenda. Even bought Gregg's book "Potshards" which is kind of interesting. Kind of disappointing in that he let's the reader know that there is a LOT that he is not telling us.
John Henry
I imagine from the way my dad is, the best part about putting away the armor is sharing in the success of your children and watching them surpass your achievements. I hope to enjoy seeing my kids do better. And I’ve done pretty well.
Interesting yes Donald gregg was a base chief in the Saigon district where he worked with felix Rodriguez, who he would later enlist for work in central America. Felix helped hint down che Guevara and sundry Argentine guerillas, ended up the rather portly head of the pay of pigs veterans association w
This is indeed one of the memorable scenes, in the book which I read before I had children, and it stuck with me. The scene shows something of the narcissism of Sherman, and how insulated he was. He did not look at his father seriously, as another adult. He saw his father as a powerful guy who was always there in the background, who would somehow always be able to fix things for him. But if you blow it big enough, even the Lion of Dunning Sponget can't save you -- and the Lion is not what he used to be, anyway. Sherman had an adult income, and adult vices, and adult credentials, and adult responsibilities -- but he was childish and failed as an adult and lost everything. One of the good things about the book is you sympathize with Sherman over the mess he created, but Wolfe does not make it easy by making Sherman a good guy. He's a prick. And Wolfe shows that. But he is also naive and not deeply evil, and he gets eaten alive. he gets worse than he deserves, not because he was bad, but because he was ignorant, cowardly and foolish and he came to the attention of forces he did even know existed and they crushed him like an insect because it was useful for them to do so. He was nothing.
I should read the book again.
Blogger DavidUW97 said...
I hope to enjoy seeing my kids do better. And I’ve done pretty well.
20 years ago my daughter would complain (sort of complain) that as she met people in industry they would often say "Oh, you're John Henry's daughter." I think sometimes it bothered her, as a young engineer, wondering if she could measure up.
These day I complain to her that people keep telling me "Oh, you are V****'s father" And I can only wish I could measure up to her.
I kid her about it but in reality I could not be more proud to have people say that. And I make sure she knows that.
I know, I know, it goes without saying. Right?
But I say it anyway just to make sure there is never any doubt.
John Henry
Wolfe is trying to show how the rarified world of Louis auchinsloss no longer exists if it ever did. It's more like the world of gekko (milkin) bud fox (Levine, who flipped on him) and across the pond Larry wildman (modeled on goldsmith, the founder of the independence party)
I love TomWolfe as he writes about those things that are unfashionable in the most fashionable way. He was grounded in a very airy time. An artist to be savored.
At New York magazine, he was chronicler of the disruptive along with practicing wasp wiccan Sally Quinn,
I am enjoying this series of Bonfire blogs by Althouse.
And, with this post in particular, I am much enjoying the comments.
A nice break from the flame-throwing.
The barricades will still be there tomorrow. But for tonight, lets talk of loved fathers and smoke French cigarettes, mais non?
I am Laslo.
Not that I've read much auchinsloss, but you get the idea. It's a much more meritocratic world that of the Kramers and killians rather than the mccoys
Who comes closest to a hero a father figure, I suppose judge kovitsky.
The cold hard truth is that, once the comfortable years are over, most children look on their aging parents as burdens.
I did not look at it that way because I prayed for my parents every day and I looked on them as one looks on any other poor lost soul one prays for every day.
Speaking of fathers, the actor who played Rollo on Sanford and Son died this week.
Shortly before this scene Sherman stands up, in spite of himself, while in his boss's office and says "I've gotta go." I was relieved that Sherman was finally facing up to the situation he was in. That relief continued for me into this scene with his father, and later the scenes with his wife and his daughter. As he is being brought low he seems to be connecting better with reality — and that feels to me like a good thing for him, whatever else may be in store for him.
I worked in a couple of law firms in that world of Dunning Sponget. I have sat in those offices getting advice from semi-retired partners like Sherman's father. Those scenes bring up a sense of nostalgia in me that probably make me more sympathetic to Sherman and his crowd than I should be.
@ Buwaya - You have said a lot of good and true things on this blog, but this is one of the truest and best :
I miss being that dad with the "armor", now that all are grown and flown away.
Its not that the armor was heavy.
It looks funny there in the corner, all dusty.
There is no occasion to put it on, to do the thing I have enjoyed more than anything.
On the other hand, I don't want any of mine coming back and asking for me to put on that old thing. That's not going to happen without a serious problem somewhere. And if there is, I hope, and expect, that all of mine will have their own armor, and will meet me in the field, and that we can then stand shoulder to shoulder, in line.
I'm not reading the book, but this passage really strikes home to me as I am dealing with my 90 year old father who is mentally reverting to a small child (Alzheimers) and experiencing the pain of seeing him gradually being erased.
At some point, when you are growing up, it dawns on you that your Parents (capital P) are just people like yourself. People who have wants, needs, feelings, dislikes and have other roles than being your parent. That your parents are still feeling the way they did when they were young, like you are feeling and thinking now.
First it occurs to you, as teen-aged YOU is discovering dating and sex, that your parents also had sex and are probably STILL having sex at their advanced ages of 35. Oh GROSS!!!! Hah. Just wait until the teen-aged you is in your 60's and 70's and see if you think it is still gross :-D
Then you have children and become a Parent (capital P). You look at your brand new baby and see all the obstacles, sacrifices, joys and the future ahead and realize: My Parents felt this way too. They did all these things for me and I never realized or really appreciated.
If you are lucky, you can see your Parents for the people they are and find out that they are people that you like. That you want to hang out with as adults. They are fun. They are interesting. That they have stories and experiences to share that are not a part of the role of Parent. If you are not lucky. You might also find out that they are people you just really wouldn't want to be with as friends. People you don't really like. Acquaintances that you must interact with to be polite.
I got lucky.
Maybe it's the last line but I wonder about down the line. Why not down the winding road or path or trail? Or too far up along the way? You draw the line going down and you get to death. Is that a negative? But then life is chaos, you plot the events, you got points all over. The catastrophes you want in negative territory? The line connecting those points is probably a bit more than squiggally? If you're lucky?
"Not all men make the supposed discovery"
Wolfe said "fathers", not "all fathers".
"Those scenes bring up a sense of nostalgia in me that probably make me more sympathetic to Sherman and his crowd than I should be."
That sets you apart from all the perfect people here who can't see any redeeming qualities in Sherman, or any path to redemption for him. I never lived in a world anything like Sherman's, but I never saw him as the villain of the novel. I see him as a flawed person, like the rest of us.
Jesus, the drama. I explained to my sons at an early age that their parents were human, with all the attendant fallibility. This wasn't in reaction to any particular failing of ours. I merely wanted them to strive to see people clearly. No so that they could judge, but so they could approach life without the expectation that their fellow beings be some kind of paragons of virtue. I think it made them both less cynical and less susceptible to bullshit.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा