First-and this is something that needs to be emphasised-Callaghan at his best knew how to create interest in his characters and their stories.Until now, most of us wanting to explore Morley Callaghans short fiction have relied upon Morley Callaghans Stories, a collection of 57 short stories which first appeared in 1959.Subsequently, Callaghan and his son Barry unearthed a cache of forgotten stories that were duly published in 1985; 26 stories were thus added to the total, but they have generally been regarded as a modest addendum to the main collection.
Very Special Shoes Morley Callaghan Editor How To Create InterestNow, however, we have what is offered as The Complete Stories, attractively produced in four volumes, each introduced by a contemporary Canadian writer, and each containing Editors Endnotes. Very Special Shoes Morley Callaghan Editor Plus Two NovellasSix more stories are printed (seven, if one counts a short sketch printed in the endnotes to volume 4 but not listed in the contents), plus two novellas and The Man With a Coat, a story later expanded into The Many Colored Coat but itself longer than some novels. ![]() First and foremost, how good are these stories And, a related but additional query, what do they have to offer readers in the early twenty-first century These issues will form the main focus of this review. Yet a further question (that may sound brutal or even snide, but is not intended as such) also needs to be addressed: who needs them More of that later. When the 1959 collection appeared, the main contemporary figures in Canadian fiction were, indisputably, Callaghan and Hugh MacLennan. And since MacLennan displayed no interest in the short story, Callaghan had no immediate rivals in the genre. While MacLennan was obviously in mid-career (having just published what many, including myself, consider his finest novel, The Watch That Ends the Night), Callaghan, highly active in the early twenties and throughout the thirties, had thereafter produced little of note, with the exception of The Loved and the Lost (1951). Only four of the 57 stories in the 1959 book were less than twenty years old (though these were not identified as such). He was, at this time, concentrating on journalism and broadcasting. It seemed as if his artistic career might be coming-or had come-to a halt. In November of 1960, however, Canadian readers of The New Yorker were surprised to find no less a critic than Edmund Wilson hailing Callaghan as a figure worthy of major international attention, a judgment repeated in his controversial O Canada in 1964. Ironically, it was just at that time that, unrecognized by most of us, talented younger writers of short fiction were beginning to flex their muscles. Mavis Gallant had published her first collection (though her expatriate residence in Paris meant that she made little personal impact), Margaret Laurence and Alice Munro had begun publishing their early stories, and Hugh Hood took the form to new heights (so far as Canada was concerned) with the publication of Flying a Red Kite in 1962. Callaghan regained his creative energies in the 1960s, though he subsequently focused his attention on novels and novellas. But a new Canada was emerging, with new ideas and ideals, and since then his writing has produced wildly divergent reactions on the part of critics and readers alike. For most of us he was a primarily realist writer concentrating on ordinary settings and ordinary people facing everyday problems; yet some have questioned this, confidently classifying his writings as moralist rTcits. Many, influenced perhaps by reports of their famous boxing match in Paris, have stressed his links with Ernest Hemingway, while others have denied any close resemblance. As Fraser Sutherland noted, his prose style has been praised as clear-cut and direct, condemned as prolix and clumsy. Wilson considered that his work could be mentioned without absurdity in association with Chekhovs and Turgenevs, while John Metcalf described his short stories as badly written and mawkish in 1982 and his prose as pedestrian and boring in 1993. How do we account for these totally opposed evaluations Reading (more often, re-reading) these stories half a century after they were written, I find it desirable, as a matter of procedure, to separate what Callaghan has to say from how he says it. I realize that this is a dubious action, going as it does firmly against the current of literary-critical wisdom, but it is necessary, I think, in order to explain the contrasting responses to Callaghans work.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |