Writer John Irving has written an interesting piece on the Grass affair in today’s
Guardian. Irving is a close friend of Grass and, as you can see, feels strongly about the furore. Here is an edited extract.
Günter Grass is my hero, as a writer and a moral compass
How do I feel about what Kurt Vonnegut would describe as a "shit storm" in the wake of my friend Günter Grass's revelation that he was drafted into the Waffen SS at the age of 17? From what I have read of the editorials, and the lofty remarks of my fellow writers, critics, and journalists of various political persuasions, there has been a predictably sanctimonious dismantling of Grass's life and work from the oh so cowardly standpoint of hindsight, from which so many so-called intellectuals safely take aim at their targets.
Grass remains a hero to me - a courage heightened, not lessened, by his most recent revelation. I do not judge what 17-year-olds volunteer for - short of premeditated rape and murder.
I'm a slow processor; many writers are. I like getting some distance from those things I write about that have seriously affected me. I wrote about my childhood and adolescence not in my first or second novel, but in my 11th and most recent novel, Until I Find You. Only then did I reveal to the media that the central experiences in that novel were autobiographical - namely, the missing and unmentioned father and the sexual abuse (in my case, at the age of 11 with a woman in her 20s; in the novel, the character is 10, the woman in her 40s).
Now there is all this bitching in Germany about when Grass chose to reveal his Waffen SS enlistment as a teenager! The man (and the writer) is a model of soul-searching and national conscience. People are saying he deliberately withheld this information until after he won the Nobel prize for literature, because he would never have won the prize if it were known he'd been in the SS. And some people are saying that Grass chose to time his revelation to sell copies of his new autobiography. I heard that when I talked openly about my sexual experience as an 11-year-old with an older woman - that I was just selling books.
The fulminating in the German media has been obnoxious. Grass is a daring writer, and he has always been a daring man. I wish Günter Grass all the best.
Gunter
Grass
SS
16 comments:
Hmmmm. But what do you think about it all, jams? You usually include your own personal insight. Did you deliberately leave it out?
John Irving's story reminded me about the actress Teri Hatcher who had been molested by her Uncle. She specifically waited to go public about it when she didn't have a new project, because she inherently knew that people would accuse her of using personal tragedy to her benefit. Snap judgements come with being human.
For me Grass is a great writer. his brief membership of the SS as a teen does not diminish that. As I said before I think the root of the furore is that the German people have found a hero has feet of clay. There is a foolish tendency to canonise heroes then get all shocked when they are shown to be human!
As for Irving, I think he has a lot of interesting things to say. There is more of peronal interest to Irving himself on the article. I am not sure if he has gone OTT in his attacks on the german press.. I must check Der Spiegel (in English), pretty odd I haven't since the story broke. I support the basic thrust of his argument though
What a hero! Thanks for this interesting post
Irving's writing is fantastic and that comes out in his rebuttal. However I've never read Grass' work. Still, when we have a Pope who used to be a Nazi Youth, I don't think there's anything wrong with a former SS winning a Nobel Prize for Literature. After all, most of Germany, even people who would probably be classified as "good" by many were coerced by the Nazi's into hating the Jews.
Jams
I want to point out that Grass and the Pope do not run around like David Irving or Norman Finklestein.
Both were teens and have spent lifetimes dedicated to renouncing Nazism.
I also wish to remindyou that skilled writters and politcal morality are not the same. Norman Mailer, Arthur Miller and many other writers were apologists for the Soviet Union.
Upton Sinclair turns out to be loathsome. However in Schwartz from West to East his relationship with the American Communists was more complicated then assumed. Sinclair was a radical but way too independent and egotistical for the Soviets and their American stooges. Sinclair did push the Sacco and Vanzetti myth knowing it was false. He is more complicated then the current wisdom but still loathsome.
Beakerkin, let me remind you: Brecht or Sartre were apologists for example. They did know what was going on: ignorance in their case is no excuse. Nonetheless, they were great writers, giants of the 20th century.
I could offer you a whole list: Cioran or Eliade for example were not only apologists of the Nazi regime: they did collaborate in a rather active way.
Celine, Ezra Pound or T.S. Eliot: very well known for their sympathies. I could go on. Shall we stop reading them? I would say not.
However, the Grass case is different: and in none of his writings did he support the regime. As for Ratzinger, he was drafted. Grass was not, as he confessed.
The American media is in the toilet. Thru all their coverage of the ar in Lebanon, I haven't bothered with the one-sided coverage, and I tend to believe the opposite of whatever Bush has to say... so I will have to learn about hezbollah thru a credible source.
Beakerkin, once again I agree you do. The thrust of these points is because I support Grass! You are preaching to the converted so to speak!
I don't hold the pope's membership of the Hitler Youth against him. My own beef with Ratzinger surrounds his co-authorship of procedures that went a long way to covering up acts of paedophile priests.
Always glad you like what I have to say woo woo, thanks!
Dave, give Grass a read. Start with the Tin Drum then maybe Cat and Mouse, the Flounder, Dog Years and the Rat. You have a lot to choose from
Sartre may be a giant but he bores me rigid, Red! That is my reason for not reading him. You are correct though. Sinclair, Pound et al should still be read if anyone wishes to do so.
Thank you John Irving
I guess there is a moral to this story. Many people put writers and other artists on a pedestal. We think because they are skilled craftsmen their lives and ideas are
also super human.
In reality artists like anyone else are very capable of poor judgement. The age of the indicretion and the rest of the life have to be taken into account.
Crallspace, it depends on what you want to find out about Hizbollah. If you want something sympathetic try indymedia. If you want the truth on hizbollah, your press is probably not far off.
Not just writers and artists, beakerkin. All of us have some tendency to make saints out of our heroes then go potty when we find out they are human after all.
Check out the full article if you have not done so Pisces. It is well worth reading.
Like Miss Jane Marple, I work best by comparing with local examples, so let me put you an imperfect analogy. As I stood at Mecom Fountain, homemade signs in hand, in the run-up to the Iraq war, trying to persuade people that going to war was a terrible idea, many of those at my side were Vietnam veterans. Would Grass's most vociferous critics say that these Vietnam vets had no standing to condemn a war?
Jams, I really like your blog. I think I'll be reading it frequently, once I get past this spell of intense work.
welcome to the Poor Mouth SLB. I hope you come back.
Steve, of course the vets have the authority to condemn a war. Their most vociferous critics may not come from teh right but the ultra left on the basis that they should never have been soldiers in the first place. One may consider the view of the Right to be wrong, that of the ultra left (I am thinking the likes of teh Maosits here) if just plain mad!
But enough of this. Welcome also to the Poor Mouth. I hope you enjoy what you read when you get the chance to view it at length!
Post a Comment