in or commitment to it, their relationshipnis portrayed as redemption throughnsymbohc baptisms, ritual ordeals, repentancenand being true to an inextinguishablenhigher self. It is as thoughnMurdoch recognizes the power and appealnof religious impulses and patternsnand uses them without concern fornwhether God really exists. Whethernthere is a God or not, the enduringnframework of religion—its patterns,nvalues, conflicts—provides the stuffnfor writing engaging novels. Similarly,nGordon, although unable to acceptnmuch of Catholic doctrine (e.g. thenChurch’s positions on birth control,nabortion and ordaining women to thenpriesthood), still recognizes it as ansource of standards, ideals and absolutes.nEven if she does not accept them all,nshe knows their artistic value.nPerhaps these two cases indicate antrend within contemporary fiction. Literaturenmay have moved far enoughnaway from religion that its absence isnbeing felt and its treatment in fictionnhas even a slight air of novelty. Therenare always writers with strong ChrisÂÂnWait a Moment, GeorgenGeorge Gilder: Wealth and Poverty;nBasic Books; New York.nby James J. Thompson, Jr.nJtSefore I had read even the first wordnof George Gilder’s Wealth and PovertynI knew it possessed at least one greatnmerit: it drives leftists into a frenziedndance of rage. An acquaintance of mine,na woman of spotless radical credentialsn(no enemies to the left on every issuenfrom abortion to solar energy), informednme that she knew all about Gilder’snbook, and she had no intention of readingnit after what George Gilder had donento women and blacks in his earlier writ-nDr. Thompson is professor of historynat the College of William and Mary.n10nChronicles of Culturentian concerns, even during periods whennsuch concerns are not fashionable. FlannerynO’Connor comes immediately tonmind in the Catholic tradition. But herncharacters are usually not Catholic, andnthe patterns of redemption are oftenncouched in grotesque secular terms.nGordon and Murdoch deal explicitlynwith Catholicism. Here’s the difference:nO’Connor used fiction to express herndeeply felt religion; Gordon and Murdochnuse the appeals of religion to createnfiction.nFor the reader committed to Judeo-nChristian values, there is somethingnhopeful about these novels that treatnChristian mores, manners and shapesnof experience. But there is somethingnalarming also. While it is reassuringnthat Christianity is still a subject toninterest intelligent authors, and thatnthe patterns of sin, redemption, selfdisciplinenand love still fascinate readers,nit is disturbing to realize that thenChristian elements are to some extentnthere as artistic exploitation—the formnwithout the substance. The salvation isnstill by, of and for the self. Dnings. This display of dispassionate leftistnanalysis piqued my interest: surelynGeorge Gilder must be a racist ogrenwho, when not denigrating blacks, perpetratesnnasty acts upon free womanhood.nWere my acquaintance to read Wealthnand Poverty she would be even more horrifiednthan she suspects. George Gildernhas committed an unmentionable act.nNo, he embarks on no racist tirades,nnor does he venomously assail the armednlegions of feminism. Mr. Gilder standsnaccused of an even bolder atrocity:nWealth and Poverty is the most spiritednand dashing defense of capitalism tonappear on the American publishingnscene in many a day. Leftists will haventheir hands full with this gentleman,nfor with wit, grace and erudition Gildernnnprovides capitalism with a metaphysicalnand moral foundation and infuses thatnmuch-maligned economic system with anhigh sense of drama that will amazeneven the most ardent devotees of thenfree market. Over one hundred yearsnafter Karl Marx tolled the bells of capitalism’sndemise, George Gilder insistsnthat the old girl still thrives—or at leastnwill, if friend and foe alike will stopntrying to hurry her into the grave.nGilder advances a startlingly simplenthesis: “capitalism begins with giving.”nThe adventurous entrepreneur casts hisnassets into the economic arena with nonassurance of return, knowing full wellnthat he may lose all in the venture ofnthe moment. If he succeeds, fine, fornhe reaps financial rewards, society benefitsnthrough the creation of new jobsnand the government rakes in more taxnrevenues which can then be funnelednback into socially beneficial programs.nUnfortunately, though, from Gilder’snperspective, high tax rates and misguidednfederal welfare policies havenstifled initiative, dampened the entrepreneurialnspirit and promoted fecklessnhedonism among the rich and enervatingndependence among the poor. Proponentsnof economic stasis exacerbatenthese problems with their apocalypticnwarnings of a looming disaster that cannbe averted only through economic stagnation.nH the no-growth advocates winnthe field their prophecies will become,nself-fulfilling. Gilder argues: Americanwill slide rapidly into ruin.nGilder sketches skillfully the broadnlineaments of our national malaise; wenhave undeniably worked our way into anmess- of gigantic proportions. To extricatenAmerica from its travail will trynthe mettle of even the most intrepid ofnmen, but Gilder offers a way out: taxnreduction for the wealthy to encouragenentrepreneurial enterprise, a supplysideneconomics that emphasizes productionnrather than demand, a renovationnof public-welfare policies to promotendiligence, thrift and self-respect, and anreaffirmation of the value of work, familynand faith in the future. These solu-n
January 1975April 21, 2022By The Archive
Leave a Reply