December 16th, 2009 / 1:36 pm
Snippets
Snippets
Blake Butler—
– I never read philosophy.
– Why not?
– I don’t understand it. […]
– Why did you write your books?
– I don’t know. I’m not an intellectual. I just feel things. I invented Molloy and the rest on the day I understood how stupid I’d been. I began then to write down the things I feel.
– Beckett
[Thanks Jon Cone]
It’s good luck Beckett never read philosophy. Otherwise…
It’s good luck Beckett never read philosophy. Otherwise…
I take that he was being coy in this exchange.
I take that he was being coy in this exchange.
any more information on this? when/where/with whom?
any more information on this? when/where/with whom?
“I’m not an intellectual. I just feel things.”
I have serious doubts that Beckett would have said this–at least that he would have said this and really meant it.
“I’m not an intellectual. I just feel things.”
I have serious doubts that Beckett would have said this–at least that he would have said this and really meant it.
it was in a French newspaper, is the only context i’ve been able to find.
it was in a French newspaper, is the only context i’ve been able to find.
he did say that, and i wish a lot of writers who have followed him would take that to heart. it doesn’t mean that he’s not smart or that he isn’t well-read. it means the basis of his art, his great art, is not mental hand-wringing and intellectual gamesmanship.
he did say that, and i wish a lot of writers who have followed him would take that to heart. it doesn’t mean that he’s not smart or that he isn’t well-read. it means the basis of his art, his great art, is not mental hand-wringing and intellectual gamesmanship.
Well of course he read philosophy he was just playing. He had a strict classical education.
But I think he was more of an imp/jokester and that’s why no matter how hard the academy wants to claim him as their own, they can’t. Buster Keaton is one of his greatest influences.
In an old Paris Review story about him, he was at a cafe, yelling about farts in French–that was Beckett. And all the psycho-babble/marxist/eco-feminist literary critics can go back to the library and have a bagel.
Well of course he read philosophy he was just playing. He had a strict classical education.
But I think he was more of an imp/jokester and that’s why no matter how hard the academy wants to claim him as their own, they can’t. Buster Keaton is one of his greatest influences.
In an old Paris Review story about him, he was at a cafe, yelling about farts in French–that was Beckett. And all the psycho-babble/marxist/eco-feminist literary critics can go back to the library and have a bagel.
Yes, I agree with what you’re saying, of course.
I looked for this quote and found only this, which appeared in an opinion piece in The Irish Times, on April 13, 2006 (100 years after Beckett’s birth):
“Beckett himself was well read but admitted that his own intellectualising as a younger man had blocked him as an artist. ‘I had thought I could rely on knowledge. That I had to equip myself intellectually,’ he says in Charles Juliet’s Conversations with Samuel Beckett and Bram Van Velde. ‘I invented Molloy and the rest on the day I understood how stupid I’d been. I began then to write down the things I feel.’”
This is to your point.
I don’t know what the exact quote is. These interviews were held and originally published in French. Makes me wonder if the quote in the original post here had been translated and translated poorly from that French newspaper or from the original interviews. Maybe not. The Irish Times writer may have left a sentence or two out between quotes. And it’s a quibble perhaps, but to say something along the line of “I had thought I could rely on knowledge. That I had to equip myself intellectually” is a lot different than “I’m not an intellectual. I just feel things.” I guess he could have said those words and it makes sense that that would follow ““I had thought I could rely on knowledge…”, but the context is important, naturally.
By the way, Conversations with Samuel Beckett and Bram Van Velde is being published in the US by Dalkey Archive Press this very month, December 2009.
Yes, I agree with what you’re saying, of course.
I looked for this quote and found only this, which appeared in an opinion piece in The Irish Times, on April 13, 2006 (100 years after Beckett’s birth):
“Beckett himself was well read but admitted that his own intellectualising as a younger man had blocked him as an artist. ‘I had thought I could rely on knowledge. That I had to equip myself intellectually,’ he says in Charles Juliet’s Conversations with Samuel Beckett and Bram Van Velde. ‘I invented Molloy and the rest on the day I understood how stupid I’d been. I began then to write down the things I feel.’”
This is to your point.
I don’t know what the exact quote is. These interviews were held and originally published in French. Makes me wonder if the quote in the original post here had been translated and translated poorly from that French newspaper or from the original interviews. Maybe not. The Irish Times writer may have left a sentence or two out between quotes. And it’s a quibble perhaps, but to say something along the line of “I had thought I could rely on knowledge. That I had to equip myself intellectually” is a lot different than “I’m not an intellectual. I just feel things.” I guess he could have said those words and it makes sense that that would follow ““I had thought I could rely on knowledge…”, but the context is important, naturally.
By the way, Conversations with Samuel Beckett and Bram Van Velde is being published in the US by Dalkey Archive Press this very month, December 2009.
one more thing to add is that one can be intellectually trained or have a great mind without being “an intellectual.” i’d prefer that an artist not be an intellectual. that’s not to say one should be ignorant or that one should be the dreaded philistine (shudder) or that one should shun a nice academic job to pay the bills if one is available, but i think that being thoughtful and mindful and emotionally in tune are more useful qualities to an artist than thinking of oneself as or producing art as “an intellectual.” now of course, any intellectuals out there would destroy my argument left and right, but that’s why they’re the intellectuals.
one more thing to add is that one can be intellectually trained or have a great mind without being “an intellectual.” i’d prefer that an artist not be an intellectual. that’s not to say one should be ignorant or that one should be the dreaded philistine (shudder) or that one should shun a nice academic job to pay the bills if one is available, but i think that being thoughtful and mindful and emotionally in tune are more useful qualities to an artist than thinking of oneself as or producing art as “an intellectual.” now of course, any intellectuals out there would destroy my argument left and right, but that’s why they’re the intellectuals.
Perceptive internalizing + the cathartic sifting of bullshit and anxiety into writing will look like existential graffiti most of the time. Talking about loneliness and absurdity. It’s probably a disease. I’m reading Molloy. It’s dense. A little goes a long way.
Perceptive internalizing + the cathartic sifting of bullshit and anxiety into writing will look like existential graffiti most of the time. Talking about loneliness and absurdity. It’s probably a disease. I’m reading Molloy. It’s dense. A little goes a long way.
Beckett was clearly an intellectual. That’s why the “I’m not an intellectual” line struck me as disingenuous, out of context. When Beckett came on the scene, artists were not only intellectuals, they were *the* intellectuals (not in the academic sense), though these interviews took place in the 1960s and maybe he had reconsidered. I have no idea. Artist is a broad term. Some artists do not need to be great thinkers to produce great art. Painters, for example. But writers must be thinkers, in my view. Over-intellectualizing gets in the way of art-making, as noted in the Irish Times quote above, hindering it or blocking it. But just as trying to produce art as an intellectual exercise can be troublesome, writing based solely on how you “feel” can be equally fraught with pitfalls. A balance might be best. “Whoroscope” is a very early work in which Beckett’s erudition and intellectualizing are on full view. “Godot” – he wrote it while on a break from his *serious* work and it was meant as an exercise. He just wrote, that is. But of course he had his education behind him and the themes in that work are not emotional and speak with authority – as an intellectual might. When it was first staged, however, friends remarked that the dialogue was reminiscent of conversations Beckett would have at home with his wife.
Beckett was clearly an intellectual. That’s why the “I’m not an intellectual” line struck me as disingenuous, out of context. When Beckett came on the scene, artists were not only intellectuals, they were *the* intellectuals (not in the academic sense), though these interviews took place in the 1960s and maybe he had reconsidered. I have no idea. Artist is a broad term. Some artists do not need to be great thinkers to produce great art. Painters, for example. But writers must be thinkers, in my view. Over-intellectualizing gets in the way of art-making, as noted in the Irish Times quote above, hindering it or blocking it. But just as trying to produce art as an intellectual exercise can be troublesome, writing based solely on how you “feel” can be equally fraught with pitfalls. A balance might be best. “Whoroscope” is a very early work in which Beckett’s erudition and intellectualizing are on full view. “Godot” – he wrote it while on a break from his *serious* work and it was meant as an exercise. He just wrote, that is. But of course he had his education behind him and the themes in that work are not emotional and speak with authority – as an intellectual might. When it was first staged, however, friends remarked that the dialogue was reminiscent of conversations Beckett would have at home with his wife.
Most definitely he was a mix of high and low.
He liked to slum it, no doubt.
Most definitely he was a mix of high and low.
He liked to slum it, no doubt.
Another quote from the Irish Times opinion piece mentioned above (“An Irishwoman’s Diary” by Mary Boland, The Irish Times, April 13, 2006):
“His are lowly people, tramps whose domains are dustbins and ditches, not castles or battlefields, and whose actions could hardly be described as magisterial feats on which kings’ lives and nation states depend. Yet, what more heroic deed could there be, in a world bereft of values, than to make up one’s own moral code that accommodates responsibility to others? “Was I sleeping, while the others suffered?” Vladimir asks himself, in what might refer to guilt about inaction during the second World War.
“In this centenary year, Beckett might be remembered not only for his contribution to high literature but for teaching us to relish life’s smaller details and to face apparent triviality and intellectual darkness with humour and stoical grace. There is a tendency to forget, amid all the highbrow discussions currently taking place about his work, that we don’t need a degree to enjoy a good yarn.”
Another quote from the Irish Times opinion piece mentioned above (“An Irishwoman’s Diary” by Mary Boland, The Irish Times, April 13, 2006):
“His are lowly people, tramps whose domains are dustbins and ditches, not castles or battlefields, and whose actions could hardly be described as magisterial feats on which kings’ lives and nation states depend. Yet, what more heroic deed could there be, in a world bereft of values, than to make up one’s own moral code that accommodates responsibility to others? “Was I sleeping, while the others suffered?” Vladimir asks himself, in what might refer to guilt about inaction during the second World War.
“In this centenary year, Beckett might be remembered not only for his contribution to high literature but for teaching us to relish life’s smaller details and to face apparent triviality and intellectual darkness with humour and stoical grace. There is a tendency to forget, amid all the highbrow discussions currently taking place about his work, that we don’t need a degree to enjoy a good yarn.”