What is Literature Really? Boris Vian’s Concept of Literature.

          Boris Vian (1920-1959) was a prolific novelist, poet, playwright, screenwriter and actor, jazz trumpeter and jazz critic, singer/songwriter, essayist, pataphysician and Prince of the St. Germain-de-Prés. At his time and day literature in France was heavily philosophized and marked by existentialist philosophy and activities. Anyone writing at that time could impossibly ignore concepts of “commitment” and of “committed literature” [littérature engagée] propagated by the existentialists. Boris Vian frequented Jean-Paul Sartre and Simone de Beauvoir and contributed to Sartre’s journal Les Temps Modernes. At such close quarters Vian necessarily positioned himself with regard to their views. However, he never composed his own Qu’est-ce que la littérature? Rather in his caricatures of Sartre, Beauvoir and their views in some of his novels he denounces what he viewed as the pretence of littérature engagée. In his rantings against critics he names what for him literature is not: it is not censorship and it is not always autobiographical. His attitude toward literature and the literary institution is also implicit in his oeuvre but also in his extraliterary activities: Collège de Pataphysique, jazz, film, etc.
           Vian was mocking Sartrian existentialism and engagement but contributed the Chroniques de Menteur to Les Temps Modernes. In his novel L’Ecume des Jours (1946), the satirical representation of Jean-Sol Partre, of existentialism and the idea of “commitment” is one of the themes of the novel (an existentialist paper, the production of writings on any imaginable subject, the Encyclopedia of Nausea, etc.). Partre is described as someone who knows how to write about everything without saying anything. The fact that his works are all named around Nausea (Vomit etc.) demonstrates that for Vian committed literature would say the same thing without being literature. But Vian turns most of all against the fact that identity be determining for a work of literature and also against any labeling of literature. He ridicules the cult of and a certain commodification of existentialism, when he describes existentialism as being “une nouvelle manière de s’habiller à la mode” (Menteur 51). Vian also ridicules a sort of monolithic leadership of the Temps Modernes, to which he contributed; in his one essay he finds many anagrams for the three leaders: “Merloir de Beauvartre, Pontartre de Merlebeauvy, Sarvoir de Perteaumilon, Beaupont de Sarmertrelepy, Pontbeaumerle de Savoirtre, Merboitre de Ponteausavoir » (Menteur 61-65). In the novel Nicolas the cook, is « Président du Cercle des Gens de Maison de l’arrondissement » ; at their meetings they discuss « l’engagement ».

          « Gens de maison » is already a phonetic anagram of “engagement.” Apart from the mockery the “prise à gage” of the cook implies a certain dependency or submission to a very strong and pervasive doctrine but may also point to an economic dependency, that of Vian contributor to Les Temps Modernes for example.
          In other instances Vian leaves no doubt about his pecuniary interest as an author but also that of any other author. Likewise a publisher is “un marchand de livres” with “l’esprit commercial le plus écœurant.” (183) In his Chronique du Menteur entitled ”Pour une rénovation des ‘Temps Modernes’”, Vian evokes the material aspect of the journal (cover, coloring, etc.), and that of all literature, an aspect Sartre considered irrelevant to the engagement and writing of the author. Sartre said:

          Vian, however, dwells on the financial aspect of literature. As the menteur he says: “Et puis, en plus, les collaborateurs sont très insuffisamment payés. Pratiquement, ils ne sont pas payés.....” 44) He speaks of dividing the money (”Se partager le fric.” 54) and points out details such as price of the journal, subscription fees, fee for contributors. Jean-Sol Partre, the caricature of an existentialist writer in L’Ecume des jours, is oblivious to this aspect. Chick accumulates ever higher debts to be able to afford Partre’s works as well as everything he ever owned. He also turns against any fetishism of art, in the novel personified by Chick who spends all his money to be able to buy all the books and all objects that ever belonged to Partre. Partre is not only unaware of the economic implications of his creation but he even ignores Alise’s explanation on the subject.
          Vian flaunted the idea  that the literary profession was a bread-winning job : “Ça permet de bouffer” ().. As a translator of American detective and mystery, so-called “hard-boiled” novels he probably honed his skills for his own “American” novels. Vian presented himself as the translator of a number of novels he had composed himself directly in French: J’irai cracher sur vos tombes (1946), Les Morts ont tous la même peau (1947), Et on tuera tous les affreux (1948) and Elles se rendent pas compte (1950). The presumed author was an African American who couldn’t get his novels published in the US, due to the content (racism, sex, violence, crime). It is precisely that subject matter, partly known from real novels, and the American style (anglicisms, anglicizing word choices) are effective marketing tools and also create a distancing/alienating effect in the reader. Vian implicitly denied the idea that the identity of the author contributes to the reading. The authenticity of literature is irrelevant because the author is free to assume any identity as an author and as a narrator. For Vian, therefore, every text seems to be a translation inasmuch as it is an interpretation of a source-text, a linguistic and of the ideas implicit in the language. Refusing any commitment, any responsibility for his texts, he effaces himself behind the text as an author.
            Vian published his first novel J’irai cracher sur vos tombes in the American hard-boiled vein the pseudonym of Vernon Sullivan. The book was written under particular external circumstances: it was the result of a wager between the publisher Jean d’Halluin and Vian that the latter would be able to produce an American best-seller—he did so within 10 days. The novel was to earn both of them a much-needed bestseller—for Vian in the wake of him being denied the Prix de la Pléiade for his Ecume des jours. (One can only speculate if and how Vian’s parcours might have been different had he received this prestigious and lucrative award.) Vian posed as the translator of an African American writer who was unable to get his works published in the puritan and racist United States, a novel where the presumed author supposedly turned tables and took revenge on oppressive whites. A novel too, where sex, alcohol and general debauchery were depicted as being part of that same puritan and racist society and where the protagonist, who “passes,” joins the whites in all those activities and uses them against them. This bold imposture was, of course, a clever marketing trick—it also added a political twist to the known theme of the hard-boiled novel, a mixture then of Native Son and Philip Marlowe. The pretence of course had political implications—the idea was to write a black novel that no black person had ever written, one where blacks were not submissive and weak, « de ceux dont les Blancs tapotent affectueusement le dos dans la littérature » (9) [the kind whites affectionately pat on the back in literature]. While this implies another, subtler form of racism, it was meant to draw attention to the plight of blacks still being the victim of lynching in the US.
           The falsely attributed authorship imbued the volume with a certain authenticity Vian couldn’t possibly claim. In fact that very false claim and imposture points to the author’s irreverence toward received notions of literature. The censorship inscribed into the setup of the book, i.e. the pretended implicit or explicit censorship in the US, anticipated the one Vian was to face for this book in France and which, naturally, he strongly opposed. Is the postulate for the engagé writer a kind of censorship?
          For the commercial success of this pastiche, Vian banked on the rapport book buyers and critics draw between the author and the book. However he refuses that there is such a rapport, that the identity of the author is relevant for the book, its content or its meaning. (Postface to Les Morts ont tous la même peau):

            In order to create a distanciation effect in L’Ecume des Jours, Vian uses other means: the plot is grotesque and unbelievable but also touching and tender; objects change but people don’t. On the linguistic level, Vian reinforces this effect through anglicisms and pseudo-anglicisms (”clackson”), technical vocabulary, neologisms and archaic vocabulary as well as a mixture of several of these categories (”varlet-nettoyeur”) or of lexical and morphological elements of different stylistic levels. Language is creative because it creates texts. But he moulds and forms it to create his imaginary world--pianocktail, cats and mice, table-guillotine. Vian uses language as Sartre would only allow for poetry, as an object, from the outside, he demonstrates its own inherent dynamic. He exposes language as the great deceiver that is unable to impart direct truths, that one needs to always be suspicious of. This implies that language is not simply reflective, nor is literature. At the same time as a reader of Korzbyski Vian is familiar with the idea that language influences society. It seems almost criminal that Sartre completely denies the rapport between society and language as well as the dynamics inherent in language.
            In other instances language is also exposed in its hollowness, in the rigidity it has obtained in usage: by aping public discourses and imitating the tenor of technical language (AFNOR): “Sa [de l’histoire] réalisation matérielle proprement dite consiste essentiellement en une projection de la réalité, en atmosphère biaise et chauffée, sur un plan de référence irrégulièrement ondulé et présentant de la distorsion” (Ecume 5)  At the same time Vian creates a language of his own, outside the usage of politics and society (Chénetier 246). This he shares with the surrealists who also set out to liberate expression from the oppression of societal discourse. Literature for Vian also includes  the “merveilleux” of the surrealists, evident in the ”nénupharisation” of reality in L’Ecume, which is really a quite magical universe: a water lily in the lungs, dancing and talking mice, etc. Another common aspect is that of love.

          As Vian indicated in his Chroniques du Menteur: “J’aime mieux être un menteur” (39) [I prefer being a liar]. Paradoxically, it takes a lot of honesty to admit to being a liar, the most honest thing a writer can do. Sartre criticized most of all the surrealists because they, according to him, produced gratuitous works and placed themselves on the margins of society.
           According to Sartre, ”L’écrivain est en situation dans son époque: chaque parole a des retentissements. Chaque silence aussi” (5) [The writer is en situation in his epoch: every word has a resonance. Every silence as well.] For an “ engagé” (committed) writer, ”notre intention is de concourir à produire certains changements dans la Société qui nous entoure.” (7) [Our intention is to contribute to changes in the society around us]. While Sartre insists on the political function of literature, he postualte at the same time on its literary quality: ”Je rappelle, en effet, que dans la ‘litérature engagée’, l’engagement ne doit, en aucun cas, faire oublier la littérature et que notre préoccupation doit être de servir la litérature en lui infusant un sang nouveau, tout autant que de servir la collectivité en essayant de lui donner la littérature qui lui convient.” (Présentation 21). In the following poem Vian tells us that inspiration and talent alone don’t make for a good poet.

          The “people,” would be the readers among others, to whom one cannot simply transmit a message because that wouldn’t really be literature. Literature certainly does not include commitment.
           In his talk “L’« Utilité de la littérature érotique » (1948), Vian lauds erotic literature as a way to interest the reader, to convince the reader. He also regards erotic literature as: « la forme actuelle du mouvement révolutionnaire » (Utilité 36) and continues to say :

          Eroticism is a very personal matter, one related with pleasure and outside the realm plowed by the literature engagée. It is in this individualism, I believe, that Vian saw the revolutionary potential. Ironically this means that the revolution begins on a very personal level, and is removed from anything close to a doctrine or propaganda.
           In a similar vein, the great pacifist song “Le Déserteur,” written in 1954, parts from a personal story, the experience of the narrator as a soldier and as a prisoner of war to then conclude: “Refusez d’obéir/Refusez de la faire/N’allez pas à la guerre/Refusez de partir.“ Vian’s stance is not so much one of mobilizing and rallying but rather one of disobedience and irreverence. This particular song has been a has expressed the pacifistic views of different generations of youths and has inspired them or not to take political action. It is the convincing melding and simplicity of tune and lyrics as well as the urgency and dead-pan pathos of Vian’s presentation that have made this song a success. It doesn’t take away anything from the song that Vian was also the author and singer of songs such as “J’suis Snob”. Vian represents a spirit of youth, a playful, witty and humorous approach that belies a profound concern and anxiety with the world.
          In 1952 Boris Vian joined the Collège de Pataphysique (founded in 1948) and remained a life-long member. According to Alfred Jarry Pataphysique is the “Science des solutions imaginaires” and “une assurance à disserter de omni re scibili, tantôt avec compétence, aussi volontiers avec absurdité, mais dans ce dernier cas suivant une logique d’autant plus irréfutable que c’est celle du fou ou du gateux” (Launoir 21). Pataphysics with or without an apostrophe: difference between the one someone does (with ’) as opposed to the one someone is (without ’). Vian was a Pataphysician before the Collège was ever founded. The Collège represents a group with a strong hierarchy and strict rites, ceremonies seem to take up a lot of room in their meetings. Pataphysique also attaches important to small things in life, ponders about them and tries to improve them. Feeling misunderstood and rejected by literary society, Vian found a warm welcome in the Collège, among like-minded individuals. The “brillant poète-ingénieur” (Lapprand 51) contributed the “gidouillographie,” then a “outil-bijou électrique à tout faire,” some “lettres-manifestes,” “Sur la Sagesse des Nations,” (where he deconstructed old proverbs and invented new ones) and a Mémoire concernant le calcul numérique de Dieu par des méthodes simples et fausses. Much of his recognition and posthumous success is due to the editions and distribution by the Collège (i.e. Les Bâtisseurs de l’Empire [1957, publ. 1959], Le Goûter des généraux [1951, publ. 1962]).
          Translation for Vian is a bread winning job but also a labor of love. Alienating the reader, taking him out of context, where Sartre postulates that the author is en situation, Vian removes himself and the reader by his distancing ruses, introduces metacommentaries and metadescriptions about the workings of the book-selling business in J’irai for example. Where for Sartre committed literature is vastly different from commercial literature, its antithesis, and the one excludes the other, Vian does not agree with this difference in terms; on the contrary in his pastiches of B- or hard-boiled novels, Vian addressed politically sensitive issues. To exploit popular forms, as in J’irai, is legitimate: “ma foi, c’est une façon comme une autre de vendre sa salade…” (J’irai 10).  « On n’écrit pas des best-sellers comme ça » (19).
          Another source of income became Vian’s involvement with jazz, as a musician but especially as a critic for Jazz Hot and other magazines, and also as associate artistic director for jazz and easy listening for Philips. Jazz improvisation was “[t]he epitome of cathartic self-expression… straining against the limits of the human condition and musical tradition.” (Jones 157). In jazz Vian found a “double liberation: from relatively rigid intellectual traditions, and from the fear-inducing moral strictures of his middle-class upbringing” (158). “Through jazz Vian entered into race issues, black literature, the politics of oppression and ultimately, a global appreciation of American social reality (Jones 21). Jazz was a free form, born from free improvisation on existing themes and democratic: “Les problèmes artistiques ne se dirigent pas d’en haut” (Chronique de jazz 128). Truly American, truly democratic, non-conformist, improvisational, free. Democracy of all art forms, among them again what was not considered high art—film, jazz—against elitism.
           Vian’s is a somewhat cynical and ironic vision but also one that does not want to present truths to the reader as is. For Vian art should not know doctrines, it should be independent, serious and political at times and light-hearted and fun at others, or all of them at once. Most of all, it must question itself, be self-conscious, remind the reader that language constructs reality to some extent and that language is fickle.
          The fun in almost all of his works contributes to his success; especially young people have loved his works. As a renaissance talent Vian lives the democracy of arts, meddles with all art forms. Vian’s productivity and creativity, his incessant activity to question convenient ideas, his commitment to almost all forms of art and the fact that he remains an author appreciated by many readers and less by the critics, seems to point to a committed author. The goal of such a littérature totale (which, according to Sartre, can only exist in a socialist society) would be to create ”l’homme total. Totalement engagé et totalement libre (Sartre Présentation 19) [the total human being. Totally committed and totally free…]. Sartre must have known that in 1945 or ‘47 this is reminiscent of the “total war” declared by Hitler. But for him, words change their meaning with how they are used. With regard to Vian Henri Baudin entitled his biography La poursuite de la vie totale and called him a ”total human being”. Boris Vian engaged in many arts and many endeavors with candor and passion. While he denounced the doctrine of commitment and instead opted for being a liar, who doesn’t make a secret about his lying, Vian created an immense oeuvre that managed to be entertaining and engaging, edifying and instructive but also obscure and puzzling, grotesque and hyperbolic.

Von Ina Pfitzner

Works Cited:

Chénetier, Marc. “Harmoniques sur l’irrespect littéraire: Boris Vian et Richard Brautigan.” Stanford French Review. 1,2 (1977): 243-259.

Jones, Christopher M. Boris Vian Transatlantic. Sources, Myths, Dreams. New York, Washington D.C./Baltimore, Boston, Bern, Frankfurt am Main, Berlin, Vienna, Paris: Peter Lang, 1998.

Lapprand, Marc. “Boris Vian l’Équarrisseur de première classe.” Magazine littéraire.

No. 388 (Juin 2000): 50-54.

Launoir, Ruy. “Un siècle de pataphysique.” Magazine littéraire. No. 388 (Juin 2000): 21-29.

Sartre, Jean-Paul. ”L’Ecrivain et sa langue.” Situations, IX. Paris : Gallimard, 1972. 40-82

Sartre, Jean-Paul. ”Présentation.” Les Temps Modernes. no. 1, 1 octobre 1945, 1-21

Sartre, Jean-Paul. Qu’est-ce que la littérature? Paris : Gallimard, 1978.

Vian, Boris. Cantilènes en gelées. Ed. Noël Arnaud. Paris : Union Générale d’Editions, 1972

Vian, Boris. Chroniques du Menteur. Ed. Noël Arnaud. Paris : Christian Bourgois, 1974

Vian, Boris. Je voudrais pas crever: Paris : Jean-Jacques Pauvert, 1962

Vian, Boris. L’Ecume des Jours. Paris : J. J. Pauvert, 1963

Vian, Boris. Les Morts ont Tous La Même Peau. Paris: Christian Bourgois, 1981

Abstract

In his novel L’Ecume des jours, Boris Vian mocks his contemporary Jean-Paul Sartre in the character of the prolific Jean-Sol Partre. Vian’s critique is rarely this explicit, rather he acts out his ideas of literature. Posing as the translator of Vernon Sullivan in his four American crime novels, the author even turns the received notion of original and translation on its head. He refuses any responsibility as an author, when a murder occurs, which was seemingly inspired by the violent descriptions in the volume. As a co-founder of the Collège de Pataphysique, Vian ridicules the literary establishment and the role it has within French society. He also never tires to point out the material aspects of being a writer, of making a living or the desire for fame and of the making and selling of a book, which enter into the equation for literature. And although his ballad “Le Déserteur” was to become the French Anti-War song of all times, literature is never a political tool. The meaning of the text cannot be reduced to a political background or other concrete circumstance. Rather the fictional quality of language makes that all writing is fiction, and so Vian writes about America without ever having been there. On the other hand, literature may question established ideas and society as it is, which Vian does by using humor, clearly not an existential concept. “J’aime mieux être un menteur,” says Vian. His commitment was to life and art in all forms and to the relentless exposure of the workings of literature as an institution and of literature in texts.