There are good and bad kinds of crazy. This book features both.
The notion of capturing every word of the world’s
dominant language from “aa” (an obsolete term used in the 1400s meaning “stream”
or “watercourse”) to “zyxt” (Old Kentish for “to see”) with little more than a
nib pen and foolscap paper has a germ of madness at its core. But there was
more than sober, willful monomania in the creation of the Oxford English
Dictionary. There was a certified lunatic at work as well.
Simon Winchester details the tragic life story
of one Dr. William Chester Minor, a war veteran from New Haven, Connecticut
committed to an English asylum after shooting to death an unarmed man in
London.
Asked why he shot the man, Dr. Minor’s answer
was brief: “You
do not suppose I would be so cowardly as to shoot a woman!”
While useless to himself, Minor proved diligent
and resourceful as a volunteer researcher for the new Oxford English
Dictionary (or OED for short), an effort led by another man of
learning, James Murray. The Professor And The Madman examines the friendly
partnership between Murray the indefatigable word nerd and Minor the killer who
imagined imps in the ceiling above his cell.
Winchester notes the irony of how Minor’s
imprisonment would provide the OED with one of its most tireless
researchers:
The
agonies that he must have suffered in those terrible asylum nights have granted
us all a benefit, for all time. He was mad, and for that, we have reason to be
glad. A truly savage irony, on which it is discomfiting to dwell.
It’s
an arresting concept for a book, with elements of true crime, highbrow
learning, and a late-Victorian-period setting. “This was Dickensian London writ
large,” Winchester notes. Unfortunately, like Gertrude Stein’s Oakland, there’s
not much there there.
Winchester writes in a frustratingly
roundabout way, as if to conceal the absence of a fleshed-out story at its
core. Little of Dr. Minor’s life has survived the years, he makes clear, whether
it be his service in the American Civil War or for the OED. Winchester employs
some imaginative reconstruction that becomes intrusive. Worse, he tends to
stretch his narrative out, no doubt to fill out his book.
Take the opening. We start with Murray journeying
by landau to this well-appointed residence outside London to meet his prize
researcher for the first time. A door opens, and he is ushered into a room
where an authoritative figure sits behind a desk.
Murray thinks its Dr. Minor, but the authority
explains he is in fact the director of an insane asylum. Minor is his longest-staying
resident.
That’s some kick-off. But it is also revealed
by Winchester to be “an amusing and romantic fiction” a hundred pages on. The
reality is that Murray had time to learn of Minor’s true situation, but when
writing a book about words you get your grabs in where you can. So Winchester gives
you the phony version first. That way he can fill in even more pages when he
gets around to setting the record straight.
A lot of the time, Winchester foregoes facts for
suppositions:
The
invitation seemed a long-sought badge of renewed membership in the society from
which he had been so long estranged…
Grateful
though they might have been, the Oxford team was also becoming, as time went
on, very, very puzzled. And Murray was more puzzled than all of them…
To
some who dined at Queen’s on that glorious autumn evening, Minor’s absence must
have seemed a melancholy footnote to an otherwise glorious literary moment…
When
you read words like “seemed” and “might,” it’s your tip-off Winchester is getting
over his skis in regard to the facts of the story, facts he allows are both
scant and scattered.
Minor’s
military background is hard to ascertain, Winchester agrees. Still, he lays
into the horrors Minor must have witnessed during the Battle of the Wilderness
despite no evidence Minor was there. Minor’s madness may have sprung from that,
he writes, or else from inflicting tattoos on Irish deserters, though this is
also admitted speculation.
Finally
the author throws up his hands: “Can it ever be said that a major psychological
illness like schizophrenia, with its severe disruption of the brain’s
chemistry, appearance, and function, truly has a cause?” Maybe not, but it didn’t
stop Winchester from spending a large part of his book writing about it.
Even
the better parts of the book have a grindstone feel about them. Yes, it’s a
book about murder and madness, but it is clear early on that what excites
Winchester is the lexical stuff. He spends much time on the origin of the
dictionary, how it helped not just define but refine the English language:
The
English language was spoken and written – but at the time of Shakespeare it was
not defined, not fixed. It was like the air – it was taken for granted,
the medium that enveloped and defined all Britons. But as to exactly what it
was, what its components were – who knew?
Winchester
spends a lot of time detailing various attempts at a dictionary, including a
famous one by Samuel Johnson which gave its creator much fame but didn’t really
nail down English the same way the OED would. A sprawling mother tongue
needed something more comprehensive, the work of people who scoured miles of
text for unusual uses of words both common and uncommon.
Dr.
Minor was a good person for this because he had time and energy to burn. “So enormous have been Dr. Minor’s contributions during the past 17
or 18 years, that we could easily illustrate the last 4 centuries [volumes] from his quotations alone,” Murray wrote.
Dr. Minor produced folded sheets, or quires,
with neatly written explanations of multiple uses of a single word. Whereas
other contributors sent in particular words found in their spare time, Dr.
Minor dedicated himself to seeking out varied uses of specific words selected
by Murray. To do this, he called upon his vast library of books, some bought
for him by the widow of the man he murdered.
I know, that caught me short, too.
Unfortunately, this is another of those places where Winchester doesn’t really
have any facts nailed down. He floats instead an idea of some sexual activity
between the lonely woman and the lusty Minor, but this comes off as more
baseless supposition, and rather cheap at that.
The whole approach Winchester takes is a bit
callous and smug. He makes the proper noises about Dr. Minor’s sad condition,
yet when describing how Dr. Minor sliced off his own penis with a knife, he
titles the chapter “The Unkindest Cut.” When he introduces a minister who has
bad knees, he feels the need to tell us his condition was a result of an
accident, and not excessive genuflecting.
The more I read, the more disappointed I became
with this book. By the ending, when Winchester has left his narrative entirely
to talk about an OED printing plate he owns and how it decorates his
home, I was wondering where the editor was, or how this managed to become such
a commercial success.
No comments:
Post a Comment