The Name GamenJack Matthews: Sassafras;nHoughton Mifflin; Boston.nThere are certain figures, bothnreal and fictional, whose namesnseem directly related to onendescriptive word or phrase.nVincent Price, after decades ofnplaying the most despicable ofnvillains, has come to personifyn”evil.” Huck Finn means “mischievousness”nand “boyhood.”nAnd John Wayne, of course,nevokes “grit.”nJack Matthews uses a w^ord tondescribe his protagonist: Sassafl:^.nNot to be confused with thenNorth American tree whosendried roots produce an aromaticntea, Matthews’ sassafiras conveysnthe characteristics of youngnThaddeus Burke, aproduct of thenAmerican frontier in the 1840’s.nThad was fuU of “sass”: argimientative,nbull-headed, never able tonsee “the right side of things, nonmatter how hard they were explained.”nThe boy became ProfessornThaddeus Burke, Phrenologist.nUnable to accept responsibilitynfor any misfortune thatnmight befell him or any troublenhe might cause to others, henexcused any situation away asnbeing caused by his self-diagnosedn”Tendency toward Coincidence.”n”1 attract coincidencenas the lofty oak attracts lightning,”nhe explains. This is not tonsuggest that Burke was fraudulentnin either his actions or hisnmotives. He apprenticed undernthe “master” phrenologist of hisntime, learned well, and trulynbelieved in his vocation. It isnfairer to say that while his motivesnmay have been misguided.nCOMMENDABLESnthey were, nonetheless, sincere.nHe is, however, hardly a pillar ofnsociety. His attitudes and actsninclude a passion for large quantitiesnof whiskey, the killing ofnthree men, plotting revengentoward another, and cavortingnwith a prostitute; he flouts notnonly his Quaker background butnany slightiy demanding standardnset by society. The author callsnthis sassafras; most would see itndifl’erently, yet without thesenflaws of character ThaddeusnBurke would cease to exist,nwhich is Mr, Matthews’ literarynaccomplishment—of sorts.n(KW) DnWorking-ClassnWisdomnEric Hofifer: Truth Imagined;nHarper & Row; New York.nIntellectuals crusading fornrevolutionary change typicallynissue their lofty pronouncementsnin the name of “thenpeople,” more specifically “thenworking class” or “the proletariat.”nBecause few of thosenwhom they claim to representnever publicly articulate theirnown feelings, this claim oftenngoes unchallenged. But as annauthor who spent ten years as anmigrant worker and 2 5 years as anlongshoreman, Eric Hoflfer was anworking man who spoke fornhimself and in so speakingnpunctured the pretensions ofnmany political theorists. Indeed,nsuch theorists would prefer tonbind and gag proletarian writersnrather than let them publish thenkind of iconoclastic perceptionsnfound in Truth Imagined, posthumouslynpublished memoirs ofnHoffer’s life up to World War II.nInstead of brooding in bitternalienation over the perfidiousnvalues of capitalist America,nHoffer proudly affirms thenunique preciousness of thenfl-eedoms found in America andnasserts that money and profitmakingnare indispensable safe­nguards for those freedoms. Insteadnof indulging in querulousncomplaints about the workingnman’s lot and shrill demands fornsocialist reform, he refl-eshinglynnotes how “singularly firee of selfpity”nAmericans were beforenFDR and dismisses the doctrinenthat “common people are morenready to share” than aristocrats asnCriminalnMattersnLewis S. Feuer: The Case ofnthe Revolutionist’s Daughter:nSherlock Holmes MeetsnKarl Marx; Prometheus Books;nBuffilo.NY.nAs readers of the Canon know,nthe only place that the namen”Marx” appears in the collectednworks of John H. Watson, M.D., isnin the story “Wisteria Lodge,”nwherein it designates the proprietornof a clothier’s. Given thenfeet that Sherlock Holmes movednthrough the streets of Londonnwhen Karl Marx resided in thatncity, Lewis S. Feuer (the author ofnMarx and the Intellectuals andnnnIN FOCUSna “sentimental notion.” Certainly,nthis blue-collar philosophernfelt no sympathy for communism,narguing that becausenthe Russian Revolution was andefeat for “history made byncommon people” it was “easiernfor a common man to achievenhigh office in czarist than innLenin’s Russia”nIdeologues typically dismissnScripture as irrelevant to modemnconcerns, but Hoffer’s oppositionnto their dogmas is particularlyneffective because even as annunrepentant skeptic he intensivelynstudied the Old Testamentnas a priceless prose model ofnhonest but pimgent simplicity, ofnexpansive creative and moralnreach, of “truth imagined.”nThough not accepting religion’snsalvific or revelatory dimensions,nHoflfer thus gleaned enough fromnits prophets to demonstratenpersuasively what class of peoplenis sky-high on opiates. Dnother books ) decided to have thenconsulting detective take on ancase, presented by Engcls, fornMarx. Feuer’s scholarship isnimpressive w^hen the subject isnMarx or the radical movement ofnthe late 19th century. He showsnthe man to be a pompous hypocritenand most of the so-callednrevolutionaries to be nothingnmore than criminals—and it is anrare stroke of light when Feuernhas Holmes claim that ProfessornMoriarty set out on his life ofncrime after he synthesized “thenideas of a Russian anarchistncommunist, Michael Bakunin,nwith those of Marx.” Moriarty isnsaid to have written “Crime innthe Twentieth Century,” whichnHolmes describes as “the firstnMarxist article on crime that 1n^HH25nMay 1984n