Аннотация: How I was reading "Vice President Burr" (by Gore Vidal). A literary note.
How I was reading "Vice President Burr" (by Gore Vidal). A literary note.
Recently, in some article I met the mention of US Vice President Burr.
Found a Wikipedia article about him. [Берр, Аарон] [Aaron Burr]
An interesting biography.
Gore Vidal's novel, "Burr" ('Вице-президент Бэрр'), was discovered.
I read, also, a biographical article about the writer Gore Vidal (1925 - 2012).
Interesting too.
I found - with the intention of reading - the novel itself.
For about a week I somehow could not start reading.
It seemed to me that the novel would be partly similar to the works by Theodore Dreiser. An interesting, dynamic plot. A saturated, deep characters.
Perhaps, a figure with characteristic features will appear from the depths of American history, helping to understand the psychology of modern American politicians (Americans in general).
And here came the possibility to read.
Looked at the table of contents.
There were doubts. (almost) An endless list of chapters with a digital number (Chapter One, Chapter Two, Chapter Three ...). According to the chapters, according to the table of contents, the movement of the plot and the content is difficult to understand. Maybe years can tell something for an American reader: 1833, 1834, 1835 ...? ...
It's necessary a some inspiration to read such a voluminous novel ...
Then - after the table of contents - I passed to the final chapter and read it.
It seems to some extent a joke, an anecdote. An ironic text.
A small comment by Gore Vidal ("From the Author"). 'Why a historical novel, not a historical work?' The content mainly corresponds to historical facts, except for dialogues and what was conceived, invented by the author.
Then followed an article by one of the Soviet scientists (Professor Yakovlev). A positive opinion approaching to a level of admiration. A number of interesting biographical details.
'Although Vidal began writing his "Burr" long before Watergate, he was finishing the book in the summer of 1973, when a scandal in the highest echelons of power had already thrown an avalanche of dirt on the country. Vidal sketched the finishing touches, definitely bearing in mind what had happened. As a result, "Burr" and its sequel, the novel '1876', were included in the cage [cartridge] of American literature on Watergate, which naturally adjoins the old American tradition of 'mud rakers [mud sprinters] [dirt collectors].'
Let's take into consideration ...
I started to read a historical novel from the beginning.
The presentation is in the style of an anecdote, in a playfully ironic manner. (This is my subjective impression).
'Honestly, apart from a handful of ambitious lawyers, there were very few 'patriots' in 1775.'
'Contrary to the generally accepted legend, the Philadelphians did not at all object to the presence of the English army in their city: in fact, many of them hoped that Washington would soon be caught and hanged, which would put an end to the devastation brought about by the vanity of several greedy lawyers who cunningly covered their personal plans with vague political theories and exalted platitudes of Jefferson. '
'People from New England and New York lacked personal loyalty to each other, a real political line, and from the very beginning they gave off to the junta from Virginia the American republic, and this junta tastefully ruled us for almost half a century in a row.' [reverse translation from Russian to English]
Well...
Professor N.N. Yakovlev notes: 'The Roman precedent in the eyes of the founding fathers, who were proud of their classical education, was infinitely valuable, because it pointed to the danger of one-man rule, for the stability of the American model of government, it is absolutely necessary to disperse power among the oligarchy with its accompanying division into legislative, executive and judicial, as well as at the federal, state and local levels. '
Professor N.N. Yakovlev really likes the word "oligarchy." Somewhere this word needs to be used.
But the separation of powers in the United States, Professor Yakovlev has to admit.
Professor N.N. Yakovlev believes that the work 'Burr' is about Watergate scandal.
If to believe Professor N.N. Yakovlev, then, therefore, the work is partly motivated by the emotion of disappointment.
There was a reason for the respected Gore Vidal to be disappointed? - His fate (of a writer) developed favourably. American history, also, survived Watergate more or less safely.
I tried to read the historical novel further. A comical, ironic presentation style with some details demonstrating (supposedly) a low flight of figures of American history.
Maybe Gore Vidal is slightly reminiscent of a disappointed writer - Guy de Maupassant (a witness to the defeat of the French army near Sedan)?
Watergate, this is not a Sedan. But anyway, it's unpleasant ...
I was looking through, looking through ... Somehow very long ... And not very logical ... For example, one of the main hobbies of the protagonist of the historical novel (journalist Charles Schuyler) is visiting a brothel. At the same time, he is busy day after day with Burr's biography ...
I looked through a little more, and my reading of the 'Burr' novel was over.
March 28, 2020 08:10
Translation from Russian into English: March 28, 2020 10:22.
Владимир Владимирович Залесский 'Как я читал 'Вице-президента Бэрра' Гора Видала. Литературная заметка'.