notes show us Proust's awareness of the unity of novelistic
genius. Proust notes that all Dostoyevsky's and Flaubert's works could be entitled Crime and
Punishment . The principle of the unity of all the great works is clearly stated in the chapter on Balzac: "All the writers come together at certain points and they seem like different and
sometimes contradictory elements of a single genius."
There can be no question that Proust was aware of the connection between The Past
Recaptured and the classical novelistic conclusions. He could have written the one book on
the unity of novelistic genius which would have been worthy of such a great topic.
-53-
Under the circumstances it is surprising that Proust never broached the theme of novelistic
unity in his own conclusion, The Past Recaptured , which broadens into a meditation on
novelistic creation. His silence on the topic of other novels is all the more surprising when we
consider the number of literary references he makes. He acknowledges forerunners of the
"affective memory" in Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Chateaubriand, and Gérard de Nerval. But he
does not mention a single novelist. The intuitions of Contre Sainte-Beuve are never taken up
and developed. What happened?
In Proust, as in all persons who experience a very intense and solitary spiritual experience,
the fear of appearing extravagant is superseded only by that of seeming ridiculous by
repeating universally accepted truths. The wish to avoid both of these opposite dangers would
seem to have suggested to Proust the compromise he finally adopted. Fearing that he would
be accused on the one hand of leaving the royal paths of literature, and on the other of
plagiarizing the great novels, Proust picks out some literary ancestors but scrupulously avoids
the novelists.
Proust, we know, lived only for his work. Léon-Pierre Quint has demonstrated the forces he
could marshal in the art of literary strategy. This final "idolatry" does not blemish the
perfection of The Past Recaptured , but it somewhat limits its universality. The author of
Remembrance of Things Past is not interested in indicating similarities of structure among the great novels. He is afraid of putting his critics on a track that would lead to too many
discoveries. He knows the importance given to originality in his time, and he is afraid of
having some of his literary glory taken from him. He emphasizes and brings into relief the most "original" elements of his novel's revelation, especially the affective memory which we discover upon examination to play a much less central role in the works which precede The
Past Recaptured than that assigned to it in this final novel . 1.
What explanation other than "literary strategy" can be given for Proust's silence? How are we to explain the omission, in his reflections of the art of the novel, of Stendhal's conclusion
whose every characteristic we had pointed out in his Contre Sainte-Beuve , characteristics
which can be found in The Past Recaptured : "An exclusive taste for sensations of the soul, revivification of the past, detachment from ambition and lack of interest in intrigue." How
can we not be impressed by the fact that Proust is the only one to have seen the part played by
memory in
____________________
1. We are far from seeing in that central position given to the affective memory a "fault" of the novelist or a betrayal of the original experience. This position is justified by reasons of
economy in the novel. We wish only to note that Proust managed to combine very cleverly
the superior demands of revelation in the novel with the practical demands of "literary
strategy."
-54-
Julien's death, and that he perceived this role at the very moment he was preparing to write
The Past Recaptured ?
Proust was also very interested, at the same time and in that same conclusion, in the visit paid
to Julien by the Abbé Chélan, very much weakened by age. "The weakening of a
genius. Proust notes that all Dostoyevsky's and Flaubert's works could be entitled Crime and
Punishment . The principle of the unity of all the great works is clearly stated in the chapter on Balzac: "All the writers come together at certain points and they seem like different and
sometimes contradictory elements of a single genius."
There can be no question that Proust was aware of the connection between The Past
Recaptured and the classical novelistic conclusions. He could have written the one book on
the unity of novelistic genius which would have been worthy of such a great topic.
-53-
Under the circumstances it is surprising that Proust never broached the theme of novelistic
unity in his own conclusion, The Past Recaptured , which broadens into a meditation on
novelistic creation. His silence on the topic of other novels is all the more surprising when we
consider the number of literary references he makes. He acknowledges forerunners of the
"affective memory" in Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Chateaubriand, and Gérard de Nerval. But he
does not mention a single novelist. The intuitions of Contre Sainte-Beuve are never taken up
and developed. What happened?
In Proust, as in all persons who experience a very intense and solitary spiritual experience,
the fear of appearing extravagant is superseded only by that of seeming ridiculous by
repeating universally accepted truths. The wish to avoid both of these opposite dangers would
seem to have suggested to Proust the compromise he finally adopted. Fearing that he would
be accused on the one hand of leaving the royal paths of literature, and on the other of
plagiarizing the great novels, Proust picks out some literary ancestors but scrupulously avoids
the novelists.
Proust, we know, lived only for his work. Léon-Pierre Quint has demonstrated the forces he
could marshal in the art of literary strategy. This final "idolatry" does not blemish the
perfection of The Past Recaptured , but it somewhat limits its universality. The author of
Remembrance of Things Past is not interested in indicating similarities of structure among the great novels. He is afraid of putting his critics on a track that would lead to too many
discoveries. He knows the importance given to originality in his time, and he is afraid of
having some of his literary glory taken from him. He emphasizes and brings into relief the most "original" elements of his novel's revelation, especially the affective memory which we discover upon examination to play a much less central role in the works which precede The
Past Recaptured than that assigned to it in this final novel . 1.
What explanation other than "literary strategy" can be given for Proust's silence? How are we to explain the omission, in his reflections of the art of the novel, of Stendhal's conclusion
whose every characteristic we had pointed out in his Contre Sainte-Beuve , characteristics
which can be found in The Past Recaptured : "An exclusive taste for sensations of the soul, revivification of the past, detachment from ambition and lack of interest in intrigue." How
can we not be impressed by the fact that Proust is the only one to have seen the part played by
memory in
____________________
1. We are far from seeing in that central position given to the affective memory a "fault" of the novelist or a betrayal of the original experience. This position is justified by reasons of
economy in the novel. We wish only to note that Proust managed to combine very cleverly
the superior demands of revelation in the novel with the practical demands of "literary
strategy."
-54-
Julien's death, and that he perceived this role at the very moment he was preparing to write
The Past Recaptured ?
Proust was also very interested, at the same time and in that same conclusion, in the visit paid
to Julien by the Abbé Chélan, very much weakened by age. "The weakening of a
Similar Books
