The READ: Ephemera, Run
The most interesting piece I read in the Times last weekexcluding the profile in which Reykjaviks new mayor said that he would rule out as a coalition partner any party whose members had not seen all five seasons of The Wirewas Book Review editor (and TNR contributor) Sam Tanenhauss 2,500-word exploration of John Updikes archive. Tanenhaus reports that Updike, who died about a year and a half ago at age 76, left an enormous cache of papers fashioned as meticulously as one of his lathe-turned sentences. Now at Harvard Universitys Houghton Library, it is closed to the public until archivists have had a chance to catalog its 170 boxeswhich they estimate will take about two years. In the meantime, Tanenhaus got a sneak peek, and writes that the files, which occupy an aisle and a half worth of shelves, hold the keys to Updikes literary universe. They include manuscript drafts in pencil and typescript, photocopied pages of research material, and hundreds of letters Updike wrote to his parents that chronicle nearly 20 years of his life.Microsoft Office is my best friend.
Just about any person fascinated by books has felt the seductive pull of the writers archive. Human beings love creation stories, and thats what the researcher hopes to discover: to witness, in retrospect, the birth of a masterpiece. Literature itself is full of these fantasies, from the stack of letters that obsess the narrator of Jamess The Aspern Papers to the revelatory discovery about a famous poets private life made by a young researcher in the first pages of A.S. Byatts Possession. Tanenhaus writes excitedly of the trove of materials that went into the making of Rabbit at Rest: snapshots of storefronts in a Pennsylvania town, photocopies of pages from medical books on heart disease, a memo from a researcher on sales practices at Toyota dealers, a list of basketball moves. Theres even the wrapper from a Planters Peanut Bar, as lovingly preserved as a pressed autumn leaf, which Tanenhaus imagines Updike using to come up with the novels vivid description of Rabbit dumping the sweet crumbs out of the wrapper into his palm and with his tongue lick[ing] them all up like an anteaterone of those actions weve all done but would be at pains to describe.
But if these are the keys to a literary universe, where are the locks? None of us, presented with this miscellany of sources, could sit down and write the Rabbit novels. What they actually reveal is how mysterious the essential act of creation is. You might as well gather together Picassos paint jars, canvas, and easel and try to reconstruct Les Demoiselles dAvignon, or imagine a ballet by looking at the music, costumes, shoes. Whats missing is the alchemy that takes an assortment of random objects and transforms them into a work of art. And that process leaves no trace.
Whats more, the archive offers an illusion of completeness not entirely different from the way the novel itself offers an illusion of reality. All those boxes, their contents neatly filed and numbered and alphabetized, in all their exquisite order! But anyone who has spent time poking through a writers archiveand I have been doing a bit of this myself latelywill realize that the apparent intactness masks what is not there. The letters that got torn up, the drafts that were burnedif youre lucky, there are hints of these in other documents, so that you can agonize in frustration over what was lost. But for all the diary entries and recipes and Christmas cards that your subject saved, there might have been an equal number that he or she threw away. And perhaps rightly so. Even the most dogged researcher, poring over pages after page of publishers correspondence (Enclosed please find your royalty statement for the period January through June 1951 ) and similar monotony, will remember why this stuff is called ephemera. In 170 boxes of stuff, is there really nothing that Updike could have parted with? A judicious edit of the archives would make it easier to find those documents with true literary value.