If we are going to deal with epigrams, we must first
distinguish between wit and humor. Humor makes you laugh, as with every good
joke that someone tells you. Like the loony in the bin telling the other loony
who is painting the wall, “Hold on to your brush, I am about to move the
ladder.” Or James Thurber writing, “Poe . . . was perhaps the first great
nonstop literary drinker in the American nineteenth century. He made the
indulgences of Coleridge and De Quincy seem like a bit of mischief in the
kitchen with the cooking sherry.” Humor’s most renowned achievement may be the
slip on the banana peel.
Wit is something else—something, if you will, much more
serious while still funny. Unlike humor, which at most makes you slap your
thigh, it pierces to the quick, wherever your quick may be, and elicits
laughter almost as a byproduct. The epigram, witty rather than humorous, needs
an object to skewer.
To be sure, that is a slight oversimplification. Not all
humor is a thigh-slapper or a roller in the aisle. And not all wit must wound.
Take Oscar Wilde’s “The youth of America is their oldest tradition. It has been
going now for three hundred years.” This is a good-natured spoof that does not
really hurt. Or take this, again from Wilde, “Truth is rarely pure and never
simple.” Very often it is the inversion of a truism, as in his “Work is the
curse of the drinking classes.” Sometimes an epigram is downright melancholy,
as in Shaw’s “England and America are two countries separated by the same
language.” Or in Rochefoucauld’s “We have all enough strength to bear other
people’s troubles,” and in his even stronger “In the misfortunes of our best
friends, we find something that’s not unpleasing.”
The epigram, when it’s truly great, is the shortest,
snappiest work of art or philosophy, and a burr to the memory. Take Stendhal’s
“The only excuse for God is that he doesn’t exist.” Thus the epigram tends to
be the funny way of insulting
someone, in this case God. When it doesn’t offend, it is rather a mere
aphorism, i.e., pregnant saying, than a witty epigram, as, for instance, in
Lichtenberg’s “Nothing contributes more to peace of soul than having no opinion
at all.”
Let us first look at the straight insult, usually merited,
which embodies some kind of truth. Take this, to an overeager actor being
directed by either Noel Coward or George S. Kaufman (multiple attribution is
quite frequent): “Don’t just do something, stand there!” Even more succinctly,
W.S. Gilbert commented on he Hamlet of Henry Irving or some other stage star
(alternative targets are also frequent): “Funny, but never vulgar.” Manifestly,
terseness adds impact to the epigram. Take this by Beachcomber, the nom de
plume of a British humorist, “Wagner was the Puccini of music.” A double-edged
sword that cuts brilliantly in two directions.
Such double duty we get also from Wilde’s “Poor Danton, to
have come to such grief for having once in his life taken a bath.” That hits
not only the victim of Charlotte Corday, but also the French in general, not
known for their regular use of the bathtub as opposed to that of the bidet. Two
for one we get, also from Wilde, in “[George] Meredith is a prose Browning, and
so is Browning.” A whole profession can be skewered, as in Christopher
Hampton’s “Asking a working writer what he thinks about critics is like asking
a lamp-post how it feels about dogs.”
But back to the double whammy: Ava Gardner, about her ex,
Sinatra, upon his marrying Mia Farrow, “I always knew Frank would end up in bed
with a little boy.” Or take Noel Coward, about Jeanette MacDonald and Nelson
Eddy in the movie version of his “Bitter Sweet”: “Like watching an affair
between a mad rocking-horse and a rawhide suitcase,” with the only problem
trying to figure out which is which. Sometimes the wit and his target are both
made fun of, as in Charles Widor about a dissonant work of Milhaud’s: “The
worst of it is that one gets used to it.” Or take Heine: “There is nothing on
earth more horrible than English music, unless it is English painting.”
Music has yielded some memorable epigrams. Thus Shaw, early
on as music critic: “There are some sacrifices that should not be demanded
twice from any man, and one of them is listening to Brahms’s Requiem.” Such things elicit amusement
even without our agreement. Or take this, from Ravel: “Berlioz is France’s
greatest composer, alas. A musician of great genius, and little talent.”
(Reminiscent of Gide on who is the greatest French poet, “Victor Hugo, alas.”
Which, in turn, suggests Cocteau’s “Victor Hugo was a madman who thought he was
Victor Hugo.”) After playing a violin piece, Albert Einstein asked the great
cellist Gregor Piatigorsky “How well did I play?” Answer: “You played relatively well.” Some epigrams are
answers to a question.
Here is Stravinsky: “Too many pieces of music finish too
long after the end.” Or Sir Thomas Beecham, asked if he ever conducted any
Stockhausen. “No,” he said, “but I have trodden in some.” And Stravinsky again,
“Why is it that whenever I hear a piece I don’t like, it’s always Villa Lobos?”
Sometimes an epigram comes in duplicate. Take this dialogue:
“Shostakovich: What do you think of Puccini? Britten: I think his operas are
dreadful. Shostakovich: No, Ben, you are wrong. He wrote marvelous operas, but
dreadful music.” Now take Britten talking to W. H. Auden about Stravinsky’s
“The Rake’s Progress”: “I liked the opera very much. Everything but the music.”
Who plagiarized whom? I suspect the rather humorless Britten. And here is one
to enshrine in music history, Oscar Levant about Leonard Bernstein: “He uses
music as an accompaniment to his conducting.”
Literature, expectably, also offers some of the wittiest
epigrams. Take this rather poetic one by Edith Sitwell about F.R. Leavis: “It
is sad to see Milton’s great lines bobbing up and down in the sandy desert of Dr. Leavis’s mind
with the grace of a fleet of weary camels.” Here the subtractable epithets
“sandy” and “weary” contribute the necessary cadence. Or this from Philip
Larkin, “’The Wreck of the Deutschland’ would have been markedly inferior if
Hopkins had been a survivor from the passenger list.” Or Evelyn Waugh, somewhat
less funny about himself than about others: “You have no idea how much nastier
I would be if I was not a Catholic. Without supernatural aid, I would hardly be
a human being.”
Here again is Waugh on Stephen Spender: “To see him fumbling
with our rich and delicate language is to experience all the horror of seeing a
Sevres vase in the hands of a chimpanzee.” Or consider Gore Vidal on Hemingway,
“What other culture could have produced someone like Hemingway and not seen the
joke?’ Or, more succinctly, about the death of Truman Capote, “Good career
move.” An effective device is starting out as if in praise, and then sticking
in the knife, as in Wilde’s “Shaw has not an enemy in the world; and none of
his friends like him.”
About actors and actresses, theater and movies, there is
such a wealth of epigrams as to merit a separate blog post to begin doing them
justice. I confine myself to repeating a couple of my favorites. Thus Kenneth
Tynan about Vivien Leigh in “Titus Andronicus”: “As Lavinia, Vivien Leigh
receives the news that she is about to be ravished on her husband’s corpse with
little more than mild annoyance of one who would have preferred foam rubber.”
And Margot Asquith at lunch with Jean Harlow, who keeps sounding the T in
Margot, “My dear, the T in Margot is silent, as in Harlow.”
Finally, I come to my own modest contribution to the
epigram, which comes down to a single entry in the anthologies, always misquoted,
even by Diana Rigg herself, as follows: “Diana Rigg is built as a brick
mausoleum with insufficient flying buttresses.” What I wrote was “Diana Rigg .
. . is built, alas, like a brick basilica with inadequate flying buttresses.”
This concerning a scene in Ronald Millar’s “Abelard & Heloise,” where Ms.
Rigg knelt nude in profile. Now “basilica” is obviously not something with
which the misquoters are familiar, hence “mausoleum,” which, however, has
nothing to do with anything. But neither, I confess, has basilica, a type of
church that never had any buttresses. “Inadequate,” though, does make sense for
what the actress herself has described as “I was only ever a B-cup,” referring
to size; whereas “insufficient” refers to quantity, as if two were not enough.
What I should have written is “cathedral,” an edifice that does have flying
buttresses.
Isolated quotations of another Simon epigram do crop up now
and then, but for an epigram to count, I firmly believe that it has to appear
in several anthologies. So I find a couple exclusively in “Simpson’s
Contemporary Quotations,” and even there one misquoted and another cut to
shreds. And I certainly haven’t made it to Bartlett’s even once. Something to
look forward to.
Charlotte Corday killed Jean-Paul Marat not Georges Danton. Guillotine got him.
ReplyDelete"John Simon is the greatest film critic of the 19th century." -- Andrew Sarris.
ReplyDeleteAin't that the truth.
http://www.filmcomment.com/article/hail-the-conquering-hero-andrew-sarris-profiled
Hilarious stuff, and yes, Diana Rigg is a cathedral I'd love to worship in.
ReplyDelete“What other culture could have produced someone like Hemingway and not seen the joke?"
ReplyDeleteWhat other culture? Perhaps one that takes MYRA BRECKINRIDGE seriously as literature.
http://thecriticjohnsimon.com/paradigms-lost/the-good-and-bad-of-gore-vidal/
ReplyDeleteThe Good and Bad of Gore Vidal
From Paradigms Lost
Vidal on Simon:
"“There is nothing he cannot find to hate. Yet in his way, Mr. Simon is pure; a compulsive rogue criminal, more sadistic Gilles de Rais than neighborhood thug. Robert Brustein . . . is not pure; he has ambitions above his station. Mr. Simon knows that he is only an Illyrian gangster [a reference to my origin, or, as Vidal put it a few lines earlier, "a Yugoslav with a proud if somewhat incoherent Serbian style] and is blessedly free of side; he simply wants to torture and kill in order to be as good an American as Mr. Charles Manson, say, or Lyndon Johnson.”
Simon on Vidal: "Gore Vidal is a slick novelist, impressive essayist, and perfect bitch."
Deletehttp://www.newcriterion.com/articles.cfm/What-Gore-remembers-4170
John, who was it who wrote something to the effect that Southey will be read when Homer and Virgil are forgotten, but not until then?
ReplyDeleteHere's AN answer, can't vouch for its veracity:
Delete"Thalaba, Mr. SOUTHEY'S second poem, is written in open defiance of precedent and poetry. Mr. S. wished to produce something novel, and succeeded to a miracle. Joan of Arc was marvellous enough, but Thalaba was one of those poems 'which,' in the words of PORSON, 'will be read when Homer and Virgil are forgotten, but — not till then'" Lord Byron, English Bards and Scotch Reviewers (1809) in Poetical Works, ed. E. H. Coleridge (1898-1904) 1:313n.
http://spenserians.cath.vt.edu/TextRecord.php?action=GET&textsid=35535
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteWhile the baby shouldn't be thrown out with the bathwater, the disposable diaper needs to be thrown out with the turd.
ReplyDeleteMost of pop culture aren't babies but disposable diapers. Good ones are clean diapers that you can use and throw away. Bad ones are diapers already soiled with shit. Just toss away.