This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/jun/03/john-horne-burns-gay-war-writer

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Rediscovering John Horne Burns: a gay writer before his time Rediscovering John Horne Burns: a gay writer before his time
(4 months later)
"I'm writing a biography of a famous war writer who you've probably never heard of," said my friend David Margolick not long ago."I'm writing a biography of a famous war writer who you've probably never heard of," said my friend David Margolick not long ago.
"Try me." It wasn't likely that there were many – or any – American writers of big books after the second world war, who I wouldn't know about. These were not just the men of my dreams, but, for several decades (my first several decades), many of them were as famous as pop stars, or, Mark Zuckerberg."Try me." It wasn't likely that there were many – or any – American writers of big books after the second world war, who I wouldn't know about. These were not just the men of my dreams, but, for several decades (my first several decades), many of them were as famous as pop stars, or, Mark Zuckerberg.
"John Horne Burns.""John Horne Burns."
Blank.Blank.
"You see," said David, ruefully."You see," said David, ruefully.
The obvious question is why would anyone in today's unforgiving book market write about somebody who nobody knows. David's clear, and Quixotic, hope was that Burns' story, well told, would be so eccentric and compelling that it could at least carry a book about Burns, if not Burn's own books. But there seemed, too, a second less commercial interest on David's part about the nature of being forgotten.The obvious question is why would anyone in today's unforgiving book market write about somebody who nobody knows. David's clear, and Quixotic, hope was that Burns' story, well told, would be so eccentric and compelling that it could at least carry a book about Burns, if not Burn's own books. But there seemed, too, a second less commercial interest on David's part about the nature of being forgotten.
Not just about the fickle nature of fame, I inferred, but the actual process by which the cultural takes you up or locks you out – or sometimes both. This was as overriding an existential issue for Burns as it obviously is now: why does the media, which raises stars, drop them?Not just about the fickle nature of fame, I inferred, but the actual process by which the cultural takes you up or locks you out – or sometimes both. This was as overriding an existential issue for Burns as it obviously is now: why does the media, which raises stars, drop them?
Burns' big book, The Gallery (available now in an edition from the New York Review of Books) is a story of characters in and about the Galleria Umberto Primo, the soaring 19th Century glass-ceiling arcade in Naples, during the war. The book's publication in 1947 was an immediate event. Every major writer and critic of the time, from John Dos Passos to Edmund Wilson to Hemingway, judged Burns a new literary power. As the great war novels appeared, Burns was alongside or in front of Norman Mailer, James Jones, Gore Vidal, and Irwin Shaw. The Gallery is the certain precursor to Catch-22's take on the absurdities of military life.Burns' big book, The Gallery (available now in an edition from the New York Review of Books) is a story of characters in and about the Galleria Umberto Primo, the soaring 19th Century glass-ceiling arcade in Naples, during the war. The book's publication in 1947 was an immediate event. Every major writer and critic of the time, from John Dos Passos to Edmund Wilson to Hemingway, judged Burns a new literary power. As the great war novels appeared, Burns was alongside or in front of Norman Mailer, James Jones, Gore Vidal, and Irwin Shaw. The Gallery is the certain precursor to Catch-22's take on the absurdities of military life.
In many ways, in my reading of The Gallery over the last few weeks, it holds up better than the other books. It's a more ironic, personal, and unexpected voice. But five years and two more books later, Burns, at 37, was reviled, broken, and dead.In many ways, in my reading of The Gallery over the last few weeks, it holds up better than the other books. It's a more ironic, personal, and unexpected voice. But five years and two more books later, Burns, at 37, was reviled, broken, and dead.
A significant part of Burns' problem and of Margolick's story in Dreadful: The Short Life and Gay Times of John Horne Burns, involves being gay at this point in social and media time. The Gallery is notable both for its gayness and for the fact that the media, at least at first, wholly failed to acknowledge this about the book. As Margolick says:A significant part of Burns' problem and of Margolick's story in Dreadful: The Short Life and Gay Times of John Horne Burns, involves being gay at this point in social and media time. The Gallery is notable both for its gayness and for the fact that the media, at least at first, wholly failed to acknowledge this about the book. As Margolick says:
"Burn's homosexuality was simultaneously unknown to the oblivious and indifferent, and obvious to those inclined to care.""Burn's homosexuality was simultaneously unknown to the oblivious and indifferent, and obvious to those inclined to care."
Being gay, even among war writers, was not necessarily an impediment to literary or culture success: Gore Vidal, beginning one of the great post-war literary careers, saw himself as a direct competitor and sometimes friend of Burns. And yet, Vidal, also saw Burns in a there-but-for-the-grace-of-God martyr's role.Being gay, even among war writers, was not necessarily an impediment to literary or culture success: Gore Vidal, beginning one of the great post-war literary careers, saw himself as a direct competitor and sometimes friend of Burns. And yet, Vidal, also saw Burns in a there-but-for-the-grace-of-God martyr's role.
The price of the media's support was, as Vidal well-learned, savvy media management skills, including finessing, in Vidal's description, "the virulent fagbashers that dominated … book chatland in the USA". Burns was not just gay, but indiscrete and truculent about it. His gayness was, in a sense, just another aspect of a large problem: his absolute unwillingness or inability to conform. And worse, to be charmless about it.

Margolick first became interested in Burns when he was a student at the Loomis School, a boarding school in Connecticut, where Burns taught before the war and where he returned a short time afterwards. Burns' second book is a scathing portrait of Loomis, banned from the school's library, and only whispered about when Margolick arrived there in the late 60s.		The price of the media's support was, as Vidal well-learned, savvy media management skills, including finessing, in Vidal's description, "the virulent fagbashers that dominated … book chatland in the USA". Burns was not just gay, but indiscrete and truculent about it. His gayness was, in a sense, just another aspect of a large problem: his absolute unwillingness or inability to conform. And worse, to be charmless about it.

Margolick first became interested in Burns when he was a student at the Loomis School, a boarding school in Connecticut, where Burns taught before the war and where he returned a short time afterwards. Burns' second book is a scathing portrait of Loomis, banned from the school's library, and only whispered about when Margolick arrived there in the late 60s.
It is the anti-Catcher in the Rye; it makes a mockery of A Separate Peace, two books that romanticized American boarding school life for the non-boarding school class and, as well, cleaned-up or disguised its gay aspects. In its venom, fury, misanthropy, gayness, Lucifer with a Book, was Burn's media undoing. "Wretchedly bad," said the New York Times' book critic, Orville Prescot. "There is all sorts of violence in these rancid pages, violence of material, of emotion and of speech." (Margolick points out that Loomis was a school where members of the Sulzberger family, which owned the Times, went.)It is the anti-Catcher in the Rye; it makes a mockery of A Separate Peace, two books that romanticized American boarding school life for the non-boarding school class and, as well, cleaned-up or disguised its gay aspects. In its venom, fury, misanthropy, gayness, Lucifer with a Book, was Burn's media undoing. "Wretchedly bad," said the New York Times' book critic, Orville Prescot. "There is all sorts of violence in these rancid pages, violence of material, of emotion and of speech." (Margolick points out that Loomis was a school where members of the Sulzberger family, which owned the Times, went.)
Burns, in words he would not have known, is a branding and PR disaster, failing to cater to his fan base, and ever biting the hand that feeds his public reputation (he had almost always uniformly bad things to say about other writers) – and suffering for it. (For press engagements, says Margolick, Burns was "either late or drunk or both".)Burns, in words he would not have known, is a branding and PR disaster, failing to cater to his fan base, and ever biting the hand that feeds his public reputation (he had almost always uniformly bad things to say about other writers) – and suffering for it. (For press engagements, says Margolick, Burns was "either late or drunk or both".)
There is something painfully nostalgic about Dreadful, because it recalls a time when writers could rise up so high that their fall might kill them. Burns may be the most forgotten of the writers of his time, but it was also the age of the self-destructive and, quite often, alcoholic writer. These were epic careers hanging in the balance. The world lined up to watch writers succeed or fail. Book reviewers then were as malevolent, unforgiving, and powerful as the paparazzi and celebrity magazines are now.There is something painfully nostalgic about Dreadful, because it recalls a time when writers could rise up so high that their fall might kill them. Burns may be the most forgotten of the writers of his time, but it was also the age of the self-destructive and, quite often, alcoholic writer. These were epic careers hanging in the balance. The world lined up to watch writers succeed or fail. Book reviewers then were as malevolent, unforgiving, and powerful as the paparazzi and celebrity magazines are now.
Indeed, in order to get a sense of the public drama of Dreadful, for Burns and his compatriots you might substitute names like Amanda Bynes and Lindsey Lohan to get a better sense of his downward cycle and fall from grace. His descent, in Vidal's, description into "petulance and grief". (Vidal who for the rest of his own career remained fascinated with Burns, would also call Burns "an awful man. Envious, bitchy, drunk, bitter". )Indeed, in order to get a sense of the public drama of Dreadful, for Burns and his compatriots you might substitute names like Amanda Bynes and Lindsey Lohan to get a better sense of his downward cycle and fall from grace. His descent, in Vidal's, description into "petulance and grief". (Vidal who for the rest of his own career remained fascinated with Burns, would also call Burns "an awful man. Envious, bitchy, drunk, bitter". )
He was, simply, against the grain, unable in the words of a Chicago book reviewer, to rise above "the slime of neuroticism, homosexuality, and assorted perversions," which would need a few more decades before coming into their own.He was, simply, against the grain, unable in the words of a Chicago book reviewer, to rise above "the slime of neuroticism, homosexuality, and assorted perversions," which would need a few more decades before coming into their own.
Indeed, read against the ever-evolving churn of media culture (it would be fitting if Burns, once rejected because he was gay, might now find a new life, as a gay writer), Dreadful has an even more mournful cast. It is not just Burns who will be forgotten, but, faster and faster, all his contemporaries, indeed, the writing life itself.Indeed, read against the ever-evolving churn of media culture (it would be fitting if Burns, once rejected because he was gay, might now find a new life, as a gay writer), Dreadful has an even more mournful cast. It is not just Burns who will be forgotten, but, faster and faster, all his contemporaries, indeed, the writing life itself.
Our editors' picks for the day's top news and commentary delivered to your inbox each morning.