Sunday Morning! “Stoner” by John Williams
I remember something I was told when I was in graduate school, or more specifically that my ex-wife was told. I struggled in grad school; not with the work, which I loved; or with teaching, which was an expression of that love. But I had a tendency to get lost in the archives and books and miss departmental meetings, talks, parties, date nights, and anything that blocked the way to the world I had created from books and art and esoterica. In fact, I had the singular experience of being nearly pulled from instructing a course due to complaints that I “cared too much” about teaching. And so, an academic friend of my wife said to her:
There are people who go into academia because they love being in that world of a department and feel they belong there; and then there are people just love learning and they often hate things like departmental meetings.
I’m a little skeptical that anyone loves department meetings, but this week’s book, Stoner, is a lovely portrait of a lifelong scholar. There is a passage that takes my breath away early in the novel. William Stoner is the son of hardscrabble small farmers; his mother “regarded her life as if it were a long moment she had to endure.” They have sent him to the University of Missouri to study agricultural science, but something happens when he takes the required survey of English literature: it unsettles him. He has to work harder than any of the other student and his professor is aloof and disdainful, yet he chases the subject as if it is something that might get away from him and whose passing from his life would be insufferable.
And so, in his final year, the aloof professor calls Stoner into a meeting and suggests he might consider entering the Master’s program and then begin teaching while he completes the doctorate. Stoner is dumbfounded and a bit bewildered and so the professor asks:
“But don’t you know, Mr. Stoner?… Don’t you understand about yourself yet? You’re going to be a teacher.”
How does he know, Stoner stammers. The professor replies: “It’s love… You are in love. It’s as simple as that.” And this simple truth determines the course of William Stoner’s life.
And it is as simple as that. You know, in many ways, “academic” has been made into a garbage profession: highly educated people are exploited and then expelled in the main; most PhD.s won’t teach after grad school, and most of them that do will be schlepping from one temp position to another for years on end, asked to bring their passion to serve dispassionate, bottom line obsessed institutions. And yet, they come. Because they are in love and that requires you to shuffle around your life and priorities around the thing you love. If academia is often an abusive partner, well, that’s not the object of their love as much as an encumbrance: it is something that blocks the path.
Stoner is one of those novels that took its time to find its way in the world. Released in 1965 to some recognition and little fanfare- not unlike its title character, one might note- the novel survived because all of its admirers were enthusiastic ones. As the famous line about the Velvet Underground holds, they didn’t sell many records, but everyone who bought one went out and started a band. As a result, Stoner is now a “rediscovered” masterpiece, called by some “the perfect novel.” This weekly(ish) column has long been fascinated with the reception of works of art: how it is that some mediocre works are hailed as masterpieces only to sink into obscurity, while others languish for years, or are rejected and reassessed when their time comes. And I do think one can also damn by strong praise; calling a novel “perfect” is a challenge to readers to find something wrong with that novel.
It is a great novel and a sad one. Stoner is never a “success” in the eyes of the world: he marries badly to a woman who seemingly hates him; he finds his true love late in life, and it is thwarted by those people around him; he makes a powerful enemy who tries to ruin his career, and succeeds in limiting it; and in the end, he is little remembered by his students and colleagues- something the book tells us on the first page. Driven away from the world and into himself, he discovers a stoic solitude that sustains him.
And yet, there is something deeply heroic in his sense of a calling and his love for that calling. The novel does a superb job of describing what it is to love a subject or a person in passages such as this one:
In his extreme youth, Stoner had thought of love as an absolute state of being, to which if one were lucky, one might find access; in his maturity he had decided it was the heaven of a false religion, toward which one ought to gaze with an amused disbelief. a gently familiar contempt, and an embarrassed nostalgia. Now in his middle age he began to know that it was neither a state of grace nor an illusion; he saw it as a human act of becoming, a condition that was invented and modified moment by moment and day by day, by the will and the intelligence and the heart.
The novel finally does what great works do: it immerses us fully in the inner life of an individual without romanticizing him, but in doing so, it brings out his nobility. It is an absolutely beautiful work of art about the values that are the most important.
So, what are YOU reading, pondering, playing, creating, or learning about this week?
I haven’t read the novel (or heard of it, til now). One question I have of you (and others who might have read it): is it plausible to interpret the novel as criticizing the main character, as portraying the main character as someone who makes an idol of intellectual pursuits to the detriment of his health or his obligations to loved ones?
I ask because that’s my go to when I think about academia and the so-called “love of knowledge,” even if “knowledge,” per se, isn’t what we’re talking about. In addition to it being a “go to,” it’s also one of my priors because in my young adulthood, I made such an idol of academia and intellectualism. In other words, that’s the baggage I would bring to this novel, if I choose to read it.
As for what I’m reading, I’m making my way through Herman Wouk’s War and Remembrance. I have already seen the made-for-TV miniseries, which came out in the 1980s, and the miniseries seems to track pretty closely to the book.Report
(To be clear: just because my go-to interpretation would be to criticize the character doesn’t mean that interpretation is right, or plausible.)Report
Well, I wouldn’t say it’s critical as much as clear-eyed. There are parts of his life where he fell short, as we all do, but I think ultimately the great love of his life was something pretty central to civilization. I think the important thing to understand about the character is it’s a depiction of someone who was a good teacher because he loved his subject. That’s not so common in academic novels.Report
Thanks for clarifying.Report
Well, I’m also going by the interview with the author that gets excerpted in the intro. But, since you’ve been “in the life” as it were, I’d recommend reading it and seeing what you think. Preferably before the Casey Affleck movie comes out!Report
I haven’t read Stoner, but I would heartily recommend another novel by Williams, Butchers Crossing.Report
I have heard this! It’s apparently very different and also very very good.Report
I’m pleased to have left the part of my life where people ask me “do you want fries with that?” when I tell them what I got my degree in and have entered the part where they ask “wait, why did you get a degree in *THAT*?” when the topic comes up.
“I went crazy” is usually the shortest answer I can get away with.Report
I read this book several years ago on the recommendation of a co-worker. It was one of the most melancholy works of fiction I’ve ever read. My take on the character is that he is, like most all of us, here in the present but will hardly, if at all, be remembered 100 years from now. It’s so rare to see a life come to naught in a novel.Report
I read the NYRB reprint a few years ago. The woman who wrote the forward or afterward had Williams as an MFA professor. The thing I remember he that he told her to read a lot of Edith Wharton. Now that I think about it, Stoner is a lot like a hardscrabble, midwestern Archer Newland from the Age of Innocence.
In terms of degree, I have an undergrad and masters in theatre and then I abandoned arts for the law. When people find this out, they often say something like “I am sure your parents are glad you went into law.” And I don’t think the answer is yes necessarily. But I think there are people who are taught to do well in school so it leads to corporate careers and there are people who are told to do well to show academic mastery in a subject.Report