The Jews of Hawaii in World War Two: The Jewish Exponent, September 10, 1943

Here’s a digression from the focus of most of my posts, which typically pertain to the military service of Jewish soldiers, sailors, and airmen:  Instead, here’s a transcript of an essay that appeared in The Jewish Exponent that is (to engage in a double entendre!) rather pacific, both symbolically and geographically:  It’s a social and cultural study of Jews and Jewish life in the (then) Territory of Hawaii, from almost eight decades ago.

Published on September 10, 1943, the article, by Army Chaplain Harry R. Richmond, mentions prominent Jews (or at least, people known to be Jews!) in Hilo and Kauai, and then moves on to a discussion of Jewish life in Honolulu, the center of Jewish life in the islands, where resided – at the time – fifty known Jewish families.  He describes the community as being stratified into three social and cultural layers, in terms of their sense of identification – or lack thereof – with their heritage, let alone ongoing historical experience of the Jewish people as a whole.

While analytical, the tone of the essay is also critical if not subtly polemical, one of Chaplain Richmond’s assertions being, “These three layers of Honolulu Jewry have not yet found organic unity, or spiritual solidarity.”  (Oh, that’s a mild one.  He has even stronger things to say!)

The Chaplain then segues into a discussion of where (?) and how (?!) the Jews of Hawaii have thus far maintained a sense of community and followed religious observance.  There’s no schul (in 1943, at least) as such, a Congregational Church providing the setting for a Jewish center.  Only with the ironic advent of the Second World War has the J.W.B. (Jewish Welfare Board) become the effective and genuine hub of Jewish life in the islands – renting office space in a corner of the aforementioned Church – due to the simple fact that Jewish servicemen have become the largest group of Jews on the island, especially in the sense of participating in religious services.

This leads to a final question: Does the increasing social and organizational activity of the Jewish Welfare Board’s center portend a stronger, more vibrant Jewish community in the Islands?  Chaplain Richmond seems to think so.

But, there’s more:  The Chaplain’s essay mentions the Seders that were conducted for Jewish military personnel in 1942 and 1943.  Pictures of the latter event were published in the May 9, 1943 issue of the Forverts (erev Pesach having occurred on the evening of Monday, April 19, 1943) and follow Chaplain Richmond’s Exponent essay.  These pictures were featured in the Forverts’ photo section, which appeared as the final page of the newspaper’s weekday edition, but on Sundays – as per the May 9 issue – in the paper’s “Art Section” (Section 3), which typically comprised four or more pages.  

Finally, a passing observation of the WW II-era Forverts…  

An interesting aspect of this newspaper was revealed when I reviewed it for articles and photos of Jewish WW II servicemen, published between 1940 and 1946, of which there are very (very!) many.  It soon became apparent that the Forverts had an intriguing policy – regarding English-language photo captions – of italicizing words pertaining to Jewish holidays, rituals, religious objects, and religious observance.  And not only that.  In many cases, a very short definition of these words – implying that they were unknown to the paper’s readership? – was included in the text. 

I’ve no idea why a newspaper aimed at an Jewish audience – one would assume already intimately familiar with commonly known aspects Jewish religious practice? – would have followed such a policy.  

Unless of course, even as long ago as the early 1940s, such awareness among the Jews of the United States was already waning.

Anyway, on to Chaplain Richmond’s essay…!

WAR WAKES UP HAWAIIAN JEWRY

Although Pearl Harbor is today one of the magic words in the American language, little is known among American Jews about the Jews of the Pacific resident in Hawaii.  Chaplain Harry R. Richmond, only Jewish Chaplain who has served the American Army in two wars, here draws a sharp picture of the Jewish community of Hawaii, etching his background and throwing light on the impact that war has had.

JEWISH TRADITION finds comfort in the legend that the Lord prepares the balm before the bruise.

It can point to the emergence of the academy at Jabneh [Yavneh] before the fall of the Temple at Jerusalem; in the discovery of America before the expulsion from Spain; to the Balfour Declaration preceding the Nuremberg Proclamation for sustaining evidence.  The realists among us might find a striking parallel elsewhere: even though, admittedly, in the reverse order.  The might look at the destruction of Jewish communities in Europe and observe the emergence of Jewish life somewhere on the American Continent.  Mexico, Porto Rico [sic], Santo Domingo are budding promises of new centers of Jewry in the Americas.

The Hawaiian Islands are perhaps another possibility.

The chain of islands in the vast ocean, truly called Pacific Paradise, is still virgin soil for the explorer, pioneer and adventurer, Jew or Gentile.  As one of the new-comers to these islands, I confess, it is terra-incognita to most of us.

What is the outlook for increased Jewish life on these islands?  The same as for any other American group, is the answer.  The islands are not allergic to Jews.  Yet it is strange that so few Jews made their homes here, Honolulu not excluded.  In Hilo, the metropolis of Hawaii, the largest of the islands, only four Jews thus far have made their homes here, Honolulu not excluded:  Mr. Louis Amiel, or Sephardic vintage, stems from Smyrna and is one of the leading merchants of the city.  He is philanthropic, civic minded, orthodox.  In the absence of a J.W.B. worker in that area he acts as their representative voluntarily, faithfully and most generously.  Doctor Archie Orenstein, a fine physician, represents the other Jewish family in that city, in the island.  He hails from San Francisco, he is distinguished in his profession.  He is a credit of his people and country.  Two more:  Miss Fussfeld and Mr. Ziff complete the Jewish quarter at Hawaii.  The Jewish population of Kauai is one-fourth that of Hawaii, there being only one Jew on that island, Mr. Martin Dreyer, who reached these islands from his native Germany.  During the 30 years or more he lived in Kauai, he prospered, occupied offices of trust and honor, including that of postmaster of Lihue, and won a distinguished name in the community.  The last two Seder Services, conducted for the American servicemen there in 1942 and 1943, represented his first contact with Jewish life in his 30 years in Kauai.  Dr. and Mrs. Benjamin Shapiro, Mr. Hyman Meyer, and Mr. Hyman Wachs, of Mauai, complete the roster of Jews for that island.  The islands of Molokau and Lanai have no Jews.

It is the City of Honolulu, in the island of Oahu, that may lay claim to Jewish community life.

Three Layers of Jews

Two years ago and more, when I first came here, Mr. I. Weinstein, then J.W.B. director of this area, for a decade and more, informed me that the Jewish population of Honolulu numbered about 50 families.  Collectively they exhibited a pattern of Jewish life not uncommon to America.  They represented there, as similar groupings elsewhere, three social levels peculiar to the stream of American Jewry: The first and oldest group, properly styled by Prof. Salo Baron perverted Marranos, numbered the few who succeeded to remove consciously every vestige of Jewish consciousness.  By marital ties, economic penetration and social solidarity, they have burned all the bridges of a people behind them, and integrated successfully with the tradition and outlook of their newly found homeland.  That some Jews still consider them their own is the tragic admission of the weakness of a people.  Those who drown will hold fast even to a straw.  The second class represents those Jews who are tradition-bound.  They constitute the bulk of the Jewish community here.  In the main they are American Jews from the Western Coast; they gave up cultural San Francisco for green pastures in Honolulu.  If the first layer of Honolulu Jewry is representative of western Europe, in origin and culture, the second layer is East European, in character and background.  The third layer, a small minority, embraces those Jews completely “emancipated” from traditional ties, from diaspora dreams, from Hebrew heritage.  In that group you will usually find the most productive minds, the most energetic spirits, the most zealous in pursuit and practice of a noble excuse.  They gave a cosmopolitan complexion, a world contour, a universalistic pose.  Nothing human is alien to them – except Jews or Judaism.  The sorrow of every group is their first sorrow; the needs of a people in a far and distant land has urgent claim upon them; for the sovereignty of a submerged race they will sacrifice their lives; but of the dignity of their own people they will have nothing.  They are Israel’s cosmopolitan isolationists.

These three layers of Honolulu Jewry have not yet found organic unity, or spiritual solidarity.  One of the oldest Jewish settlers here, Jules Levy, erstwhile chairman of the J.W.B. Hawaiian area, is still waiting for the emergence of organized Jewish life here, after nearly half a century of residence in Honolulu.  Apparently, the Jewish dead in Honolulu fare better.  Ground was recently acquired and a cemetery consecrated for the burial of Mr. Max Lewis: the first Jewish dead to be buried in a Jewish cemetery in these Hawaiian Islands.  The living, however, still feed on indifference, intermarriage and much ignorance.  Always and everywhere such tendencies threaten the body politic of Israel.  Here they constitute a danger point: because no constructive positive program or conserving agencies exist to offset these undermining influences.  Elsewhere the devastating microbes are dissolved and neutralized by the healthy corpuscles of a vital organism; here the pernicious germs riot on a body empty of life blood.  Negative tendencies inevitably rise to the surface when positive values are in absentia.  Synagogal leadership, congregational organization and community interest are still to come, to Honolulu.

The modicum of Jewish life I met, in my early days here, was associated with the Center group.  Organized primarily to serve the social proclivities of the tired businessman, it acquired a home to serve that purpose.  An unpretentious Congregational Church, house in a very modest wooden frame, raised on a high basement, situated in an isolated spot, neither in the heart of the city, nor in a suburban area, became the home of the Jewish center.  The Bnai-B’rith, the only fraternal Jewish organization in Honolulu, began to meet there.  The J.W.B., through its representative, rented office space in one corner of the building, used the hall for religious services and the basement for social functions for the Jewish servicemen in the department.  The military personnel being the largest group of Jewish men on the island, naturally became the life of the party at the center, especially during festivals and holy days.

In the course of time, obviously, the J.W.B. premises became the hub of Jewish life in Honolulu, and its director, the official Jewish leader in the community.  Jewish life in Honolulu, before December 7th, was a minus quantity rather than a positive influence.  The Jewish community had its proportionate share of physicians, lawyers and merchants, men of repute and achievement, but little of inspiring leadership.  And the absence of it, admit it or not, had a telling effect upon Honolulu Jewry.

Honolulu Jews

It is natural to ask for the circumstances that so shaped Honolulu Jewry.  The newcomer, with all deference to the old settlers in the community, is tempted to ask why Honolulu Jewry has achieved less organically than similar groups elsewhere.  Negative and positive factors contributed to its singular position.  First among the negative influences is the insularity of Honolulu.  The metropolis of the Hawaiian Islands is virtually isolated and cut off from the Mainland by five days’ distance to San Francisco.  Honolulu, by its geographical position, has no contact with the many turbulent, tortuous and mercurial aspects of Jewish life in America or Europe.  It is not linked with the main streams of Jewish life anywhere.  What American Jewry feared would overtake it, should immigration of East European Jewry be restricted, is already a fait accompli in Honolulu.  Honolulu Jewry, not because of exclusion acts, but chiefly because of natural barriers, is completely isolated from world Jewry.  A spiritual self-sufficiency Honolulu has not.  Next to insularity I would consider the insufficiency of numbers.  At a recent J.W.B. meeting it was disclosed that the directorate of the Jewish community center has not met in the past 12 months.  But even that seemed quite plausible in the light of the fact that the entire membership of the Center is exactly one dozen.  When plans for the high holy days were considered a few days ago, 25 seats were considered enough for the Honolulu Jewish community.  Obviously, when the numbers are so thin, so widespread and scattered, organized mass community work is well-nigh prohibitive.  Perhaps the strongest factor militating against Jewish life in Honolulu is the absence of the irritating itch of anti-Semitism.  There is no anti-Semitism in Hawaii.  There being no scorpions in Honolulu to remind us that we are Jews, we are tempted to forget that we are children of a martyr race.  The sum of it explains the absence of the positive factor supremely essential in organized Jewish life.  It is the will to live organically as a Jewish community.  Where that is present all else follows.  For where there is a will there is a way.

War Brings Changes

Much has changed since December 7th, and the status of the Jewish community changed correspondingly.  In the exodus that followed that day there were many of the Jewish community.  War workers and civilian defense projects have no doubt increased the Jewish population here, but the evacuees have not been replaced.  They were the residents; the new arrivals are transients.  They are here for the duration, or emergency.  Jewish servicemen, too, in all branches of the armed services, have increased proportionately.  But facilities to serve them fittingly are still to come.  The only evidence of Jewish communal effort is still only at the Jewish community center, on Sunday, at 11 o’clock in the morning.  At that time the Jewish Center groups plays host to the Jewish servicemen attending religious services in the center.  The services are conducted jointly by Jewish chaplains of the Army and Navy.  After the services, the men meet downstairs, in the assembly room, where refreshments are served by the hostesses of the Jewish community and the J.W.B.

The efforts of the Jewish community, however, must not be limited by the Sunday morning service.  There is a promising change that augurs well for greater effort in the future.  With the recent arrival of Mr. Maurice Schneirov, Director, J.W.B., Hawaiian Area, a spirit of cooperation has begun to make itself manifest in Jewish circles here.  It became fully evident in the recent Jewish Welfare Drive here.  The quota sought was over-subscribed most generously.

To predict the post-bellum nature of the Jewish community here, not even a prophet would dare.  It is no more safe to hazard the nature of the Jewish community in post-war Honolulu than that of post-war Junction City, Kans.  Many midwestern towns that were empty of Jews five years ago, now that their seams have burst because of the influx of defense workers, are housing many Jews.  Will the Jews take root in those town and prosper, as Jewish communities, long after the hectic days are over?

No one knows!

But the odds are in favor of Honolulu.

______________________________

Leaving the Exponent and moving forward to the Forverts, here’s the first page of the paper’s Art Section in the May 9, 1943, issue, with the five photos of the April, 1943 Pesach service appearing below the fold…

_________________________

…and, the composite of the photos.

_________________________

The photos, one by one, with the English-language caption appearing below each image…

PRAYER FOR FREEDOM AT THE CELEBRATION OF A JEWISH FREEDOM FESTIVAL. – Chaplain Norman Siegel, USA, pictured during Passover services in the auditorium of McKinley High School.  A ceremonial dinner, known as the Seder, climaxed the services marking the anniversary of our ancestors’ deliverance from servitude in Egypt.

_________________________

“ELI, ELI.” – A singing sailor renders a popular Hebrew melody at the Passover feast held in Honolulu’s McKinley High School.  This was one of the twelve Sedorim conducted in the Hawaiian Department.  About 850 persons attended.

_________________________

PASSOVER EVE IN HONOLULU. – A solemn moment at the star of the Seder for Jewish servicemen in the Hawaiian capital, as Mrs. Linczer, prominent welfare worker, lit the festival candles.  Standing behind Mrs. Linczer are Chaplains Siegel and Straus of U.S. Army and Navy, respectively.

_________________________

“KIDDUSH.” – Chaplain Norman Siegel, Asst. Dept. Chaplain Hawaiian Department, pronouncing the benediction over a cup of wine at the servicemen’s Seder in Honolulu.  Arranged by the Jewish Welfare Board, the traditional Passover feast was attended by high ranking Christian officers.  Left to right: Col. R.E. Fraile, Adjutant-General, Hq. Hawaiian Dept.; Col. G.F. Unmacht, Chemical Officer; Chaplain Siegel, Chaplain H. Cerf Straus, USNR; 2nd Lieutenant Gladys Franklyn, ANC.; Mrs. Linczer, Chaplain Alvin Katt, Asst. Dept. Chaplain and Chaplain Pietrek, Post Chaplain, Hickham Field.

_________________________

AMERICAN SOLDIERS AND SAILORS of the Jewish faith, attending Passover services at the McKinley High School auditorium in Honolulu.

_________________________

_________________________

Some Links of Note (contemporary Jewish life in Hawaii)

Chabad of Hawaii

Chabad Jewish Center of the Big Island

The Jewish Community of Maui, Hawaii

Jewish Community Services in Hawaii

Jewish Life In An island Paradise, at YNetNews

Synagogues in Hawaii

Hawaii-Israel Cooperation, at Jewish Virtual Library

A Tale of a Tail Gunner: Louis Falstein and “Face of a Hero” – X: “Catch-22” In The Perspective of History

Some opinions; some beliefs, just beg for an explanation, such as the following two comments.  They’re from the pair of book reviews that taken together were the impetus for the eventual literary success and continuing cultural influence of Joseph Heller’s 1961 novel Catch-22:

Catch-22 is the strongest repudiation of our civilization, in fiction, to come out of World War II.

this novel is not merely the best American novel to come out of World War II;
it is the best American novel that has come out of anywhere in years.

– Nelson Algren

__________

Yossarian’s obsessive concern for survival makes him not only not morally dead,
but one of the most morally vibrant figures in recent literature –
and a giant of the will beside those weary, wise and wistful prodigals in contemporary novels
who always accommodate sadly to American life.

– Robert S. Brustein

Catch-22’s “fate” was in stark contrast to the that of its inadvertent and earlier counterpart, Louis Falstein’s Face of a Hero, which largely vanished from the literary and cultural limelight subsequent to its 1950 publication until its reissue by Steerforth Press 1999 Steerforth Press. 

Having touched upon that topic previously, I want to delve into it a little more deeply. 

First, though we’re talking about words, the disparity in the fates of the two novels can be better understood through math.  Let’s run some numbers, and then run by those numbers.  (Don’t worry, I’ll be light with the math!)  

First, we’ll look at ratings and reviews for Catch-22

At GoodReads as of August 31, 2022, Catch-22 had received 786,151 ratings and 20,930 reviews, the latter ranging from 1-star (lowest) to 5-stars (highest).  The totals for the ratings are:

5 stars – 40% – 316,266 ratings
4 stars – 31% – 249,301 ratings
3 stars – 17% – 141,240 ratings
2 stars – 6% – 51,171 ratings
1 star – 3% – 28,173 ratings

At Mr.Bezos’Store (a.k.a. Amazon.com) on the same date, the 50th Anniversary Edition Paperback (April 5, 2011) edition of Catch 22 had received 7,733 reviews, again using a 1-star to 5-star system.  The totals for ratings, and reviews within ratings, are:

5 stars – 72% – 5,148 ratings (1,429 with reviews)
4 stars – 14% 1,277 ratings (410 with reviews)
3 stars – 6% – 564 ratings (184 with reviews)
2 stars – 3% – 303 ratings (139 with reviews)
1 star – 5% – 404 ratings (236 with reviews)

Notice especially the marked difference in 5-star reviews between the two platforms, with GoodReads at 40% to Mr.Bezos’Store at 72% (nearly twice as many) while 1- and 2-star reviews are roughly similar, at 3% to 5%, and 6% to 3%, respectively.  Well, the purpose and ethos of the two sites is (I suppose?) a little antithetical.  One wants to tell you about stuff (as an impetus for getting you to buy or borrow stuff), and the other wants you just to buy.  (Stuff.)  I think explains the huge disparity in positive ratings between these two sites.  

Next, we’ll look at the ratings and reviews for Face of a Hero.

At GoodReads as of August 31, 2022, Face of a Hero had received 16 (yeah, sixteen) ratings and 4 (yep, four) reviews, ranging from 2-star (lowest) to 5-stars (highest).  The totals for the ratings are:

5 stars – 18% – 3 ratings
4 stars – 43% – 7 ratings
3 stars – 31% – 5 ratings
2 stars – 6% – 1 rating

At Mr.Bezos-land on the same date, the Steerforth edition of Face of a Hero had received 7 (uh-huh, seven) 1-star to 5-star ratings, with a parallel number of reviews.  The totals are:

5 stars – 44% – 3 ratings (3 reviews)
4 stars – 24% – 2 ratings (2 reviews)
3 stars – 22% – 1 rating (1 review)
1 star – 10% – 1 rating (1 review)

The difference in the total number of ratings and reviews for the two books – by four to five orders of magnitude – is staggering.

__________

Next, we’ll look at the number of Oogle “hits” on August 11, 2022, for phrases relevant for the two authors and their books.  In each case, I’ll list the text phrase with the smaller number of hits at the bottom of each pair.  As you can see, in each case, that smaller number pertains to Louis Falstein or Face of a Hero.  Here are the numbers:    

__________

First, title of book and author’s surname:

““Catch-22” Heller”: 5,640,000
“”Face of a Hero” Falstein”: 79,000

That’s a ratio of 71 to 1, in favor of ““Catch-22” Heller” (Oh my!)

__________

Second, “author” and authors’ names:

Author “Joseph Heller””: 2,920,000
Author “Louis Falstein””: 39,400

Another ultra-lopsided ratio: 74 to 1, in favor of Author “Joseph Heller”” (What gives?!)

__________

Third, “novelist” and authors’ names:

Novelist “Joseph Heller””: 5,840,000
Novelist “Louis Falstein””: 54,800

A ratio of 100 to 1, in favor or “Novelist “Joseph Heller”” (Gadzooks!!)

__________

Next, let’s use Oogle’s n-gram viewer, which “…charts the frequencies of any set of search strings using a yearly count of n-grams found in printed sources published between 1500 and 2019 in Google’s text corpora in English, Chinese (simplified), French, German, Hebrew, Italian, Russian, or Spanish.”

For this, I used the phrases “catch-22” and “face of a hero”

Here’s the ngram for “catch-22”.  The viewer doesn’t distinguish between the phrase as used as the book title, or, the phrase as a figure of speech or writing entirely unrelated to the novel.  Here’s the graph:

Taking a look, some things here just “pop out”.  

First, keep in mind that though Heller’s novel was published on November 10, 1961, the ngram curve for catch-22, already stable and “flat” as far back as 1950, remains stable, until it rises commencing in 1967. 

It remains at a small plateau until 1970.  Then, the curve shows a steeper rise, which I think reflects the release of Mike Nichols’ film Catch-22 on June 24 of that year. 

The curve rose at this same rate until 1974. 

Then, a year or more before the Vietnam War’s end on April 30, 1975, the curve absolutely skyrockets.  It continues at the same rate for about a decade, plateauing from 1984 through 1985, after which – starting in 1986 – it jumps even higher. 

The curve fluctuates from that year through 2015, but it’s nevertheless remained at the same general level.  I think this post-1985 part of the curve shows how the phrase “catch-22”, whether as a book title or phrase, or both (but probably simply the phrase) had by then become irrevocably cemented into the English language as a concept derived from but now separate from the novel.  

By 2020, the curve had levelled off at about 0.0000070.  And there we are.  

What about “face of a hero”? 

The ngram curve, commencing in 1945, sharply peaks in 1950 at about 0.000000120, and by 1952 or 1953 drops just as abruptly.  There appears to be a plateau in 1999, but this is probably a random fluctuation, and as such, is unrelated to the book’s reissue by Steerforth.

If we’re comparing numbers, mimicking the ratios in the above three Oogle text searches, the ratio of the high values in the two ngram curves, 0.00000800 (“catch-22”) to 0.000000120 (“face of a hero”), is about 66 to 1, in favor of “catch-22”  (Yoiks!)

Stepping back from this melange of mathematics, what these ratios and graphs do is validate a conclusion that’s as intuitive as it is obvious; apparent from the fleeting Catch-22 / Face of a Hero “controversy” of 1998, and even the most cursory observations of literature, film, and popular culture: Catch-22 had an absolutely enormous impact, one which has persisted since the mid-1970s, while Face of a Hero faded into literary obscurity (as do the overwhelming majority of books) all too quickly. 

What Catch-22 was, then, was not simply “a book”, though it is a book. 

It was; it represented, an idea.

But, what first catapulted Heller’s novel into literary, and then cultural, fame?  The answer to that question can be found in the opening paragraph of Alec Solomita’s March, 2008 article in The New Criterion (“Yossarian Section“).  Namely, “…after an initial smattering of mostly negative notices, the novel – helped by a canonizing New Republic piece by Robert Brustein, a fawning review by Nelson Algren in The Nation, and an expensive advertising campaign – became a success and then a phenomenon, eventually selling millions of copies around the world.” 

In that light, here are the full texts of Algren’s and Brustein’s reviews, the former published just before, and the latter appearing only a few days after, the novel’s 1961 release.  

You can “jump” to them directly via:

November 4, 1961, The Nation, Nelson Algren, “The Catch

November 13, 1961, The New Republic, Robert Brustein, “The Logic of Survival in a Lunatic World

________________________________________

Algren’s review – if one can deem it such – follows.  What’s more startling than its brevity, lack of substance, and absence of any genuine criticism of the novel as literature, is the nature of his endorsement of the book:  For Algren, Heller’s novel is to be praised not for its merits as a written work, but for purely ideological purposes: It serves as “the strongest repudiation of our civilization,” to emerge from the Second World War, concluding with the astonishing assertion that, “…it is the best American novel that has come out of anywhere in years.”  

For the purposes of this post, my familiarity with Nelson Algren (actually, Nelson A. Abraham) is limited to his biography in Wikipedia, and, contemporary newspaper articles available via FultonHistory.  From these sources, I can’t help but wonder how much the turbulent nature of the man’s life, given his general affinity for outcasts, the downtrodden (regardless of the origin of their situation), and transgressors of conventionality (the demimonde) – with his effectively lifelong near-adolescent opposition to most any prevailing political and social norm – affected his judgement of Catch-22, even as it molded his own works of fiction, and, the course of his life.  In this, one is reminded of Émile Augier’s phrase “nostalgie de la boue“, roughly translating as “yearning for the mud” … a drive not unprecedented in human nature to deliberately subject oneself to a degree of self-degradation and transgression, characteristic of the protagonists of Algren’s novels.  Intentionally or not, Catch-22, because of its unconventionality and very opposition to the conventional, may have simply been a literary prism through which Algren perceived and found validation for his way of seeing and living in the world

____________________

The Catch

There was only one catch and that was Catch-22, which specified that a concern for one’s own safety in the face of dangers that were real and immediate was the process of a rational mind.

*****

Below its hilarity, so wild that it hurts,
Catch-22 is the strongest repudiation of our civilization, in fiction, to come out of World War II.
The Naked and the Dead and From Here to Eternity are lost within it.
That the horror and the hypocrisy, the greed and the complacency,
the endless cunning and the endless stupidity which now go to constitute what we term Christianity
are dealt with here in absolutes,
does not lessen the truth of its repudiation.

*****

To compare Catch-22 favorably with The Good Soldier Schweik would be an injustice,
because this novel is not merely the best American novel to come out of World War II;
it is the best American novel that has come out of anywhere in years.

The Nation
Nelson Algren

November 4, 1961

(MARCH 30, 2010)

There was only one catch and that was Catch-22, which specified that a concern for one’s own safety in the face of dangers that were real and immediate was the process of a rational mind.  Orr was crazy and could be grounded.  All he had to do was ask; and as soon as he did, he would no longer be crazy and would have to fly more missions.  He would be crazy to fly more missions and sane if he didn’t, but if he was sane he had to fly them.  Yossarian was moved very deeply by the absolute simplicity of this clause and let out a respectful whistle:

“That’s some catch, that Catch-22,” he observed.
“It’s the best there is,” Doc Daneeka agreed.

Yossarian was moved deeply day and night and what moved him more deeply than anything else was the fact that they were trying to murder him.

“Who’s ‘they’?” Clevenger wanted to know.  “Who, specifically, is trying to murder you?”
“Every one of them,” Yossarian told him.
“Every one of whom?”
“Every one of whom do you think?”
“I haven’t any idea.”
“Then how do you know they aren’t?”

Yossarian had proof, because strangers he didn’t know shot at him with cannons every time he flew up into the air to drop bombs on them, so it was of no use for Clevenger to say “No one is trying to kill you.”

“Then why are they shooting at me?”
“They’re shooting at everyone.”
“And what difference does that make?”
“I’m not going to argue with you,” Clevenger decided, “you don’t know who you hate.”
“Whoever is trying to poison me.”
“Nobody is trying to poison you.”
“They poisoned my food twice, didn’t they? Didn’t they put poison in my food at Ferrara and during the Great Big Siege of Bologna?”
“They put poison in everybody’s food,” Clevenger explained.
“And what difference does that make?”

There was no established procedure for evasive action.  All you needed was fear, and Yossarian had plenty of that.  He bolted wildly for his life on each mission the instant his bombs were away.  When he fufilled the thirty-five missions required of each man of his group, he asked to be sent home.

Colonel Cathcart had by then raised the missions required to forty.  When Yossarian had flown forty he asked to be sent home.  Colonel Cathcart had raised the missions required to forty-five – there did seem to be a catch somewhere.  Yossarian went into the hospital with a pain in his liver that fell just short of being jaundice.  If it became jaundice the doctors could treat it.  If it didn’t become jaundice and went away they could discharge him.  Yossarian decided to spend the rest of the war in bed by running a daily temperature of 101.  He had found a catch of his own.

To preserve his sanity against the formalized lunacy of the military mind in action, Yossarian had to turn madman.  Yet even Yossarian is more the patriot than Sgt. Minderbinder, the business mind in action.  Even Yossarian has to protest when Minderbinder arranges with the Germans to let them knock American planes down at a thousand dollars per plane.  Minderbinder is horrified – “Have you no respect for the sanctity of a business contract?” he demands of Yossarian, and Yossarian feels ashamed of himself.

Below its hilarity, so wild that it hurts, Catch-22 is the strongest repudiation of our civilization, in fiction, to come out of World War II.  The Naked and the Dead and From Here to Eternity are lost within it.  That the horror and the hypocrisy, the greed and the complacency, the endless cunning and the endless stupidity which now go to constitute what we term Christianity are dealt with here in absolutes, does not lessen the truth of its repudiation.  Those happy few who hit upon Terry Southern’s The Magic Christian will find that, what Southern said with some self-doubt, Heller says with no doubt whatsoever.  To compare Catch-22 favorably with The Good Soldier Schweik would be an injustice, because this novel is not merely the best American novel to come out of World War II; it is the best American novel that has come out of anywhere in years. – Nelson Algren

Nelson Algren (1909-1981) won the first National Book Award for fiction in 1950 for The Man With the Golden Arm.

________________________________________

Well, you’ve got to hand it to The New Republic:  Whatever was lacking – in terms of length and substance – in Nelson Algren’s Nation review is more than abundant in that of Robert Brustein.  This comprises laying down the novel’s plot, thoroughly recapitulating the events of the story, presenting the characters therein, and, making a comparison of Heller’s work to luminaries in the worlds of entertainment, cinema, and literature such as the Marx Brothers, Max Schulman, Kingsley Amis, Al Capp, S.J. Perelman, and Nathanael West.  Brustein concludes by juxtaposing Heller’s literary skill against that of his contemporaries – Norman Mailer, Saul Bellow, and J.D. Salinger – albeit the reviewer illustrates how Heller’s work manifests the very best of each of that trio’s talents, even while transcending lacuna in the skills of Mailer and Salinger.  Here, Alec Solomita is correct in deeming Brustein’s review as “canonizing”, for it is entirely, unreservedly, uniformly – nay, eagerly; nay, exultantly? – positive, reveling in more than reviewing Catch-22.  

As you read Brustein’s review, one passage here; another there; even another elsewhere and so on throughout, it becomes apparent that his review of Heller’s book is as ideologically loaded and divorced from contemplating Heller’s novel as literature, per se, than is Algren’s.  Taking all aspects of his review into consideration (there’s lots of sycophancy running around here!) it seems that the animating aspects of Catch-22 most admired by Brustein are the novel’s indictment and condemnation of the accepted norms of conventionality, logic, and moral discernment that undergird society (any society), and, the book’s corresponding exaltation of irrationality in the service of moral solipsism, cutely deemed “Falstaffian irresponsibility.”  This is best exemplified by the following quotes:

“… the most lunatic are the most logical …”  

“… Yossarian is surrounded on all sides by hostile forces: his enemies are distinguished less by their nationality than by their ability to get him killed.”

Certainly I can’t venture as to specifically why Brustein would have viewed Heller’s novel so positively, unless he saw (and rightly so) that it reflected currents of dionysian thought that had by then – the early 1960s, if not in reality many decades earlier – come to permeate, be accepted in, and promulgated by the worlds of academia, publishing, media, and entertainment.  (Why?  I have an idea, but that answer’s beyond the scope of this post.)  Again, quoting Brustein, “For the author … has been nourishing his grudges for so long that they have expanded to include the post-war American world.  Through the agency of grotesque comedy, Heller has found a way to confront the humbug, hypocrisy, cruelty, and sheer stupidity of our mass society.”  Through this, and the remark about the, “…whole mystique of corporation capitalism,” one gets the impression that his review reveals far less about the novel then it does about his view of contemporary society, if not any society.  

And so:

____________________

The Logic of Survival in a Lunatic World

For the author (apparently sharing the Italian belief that vengeance is a dish which tastes best cold)
has been nourishing his grudges for so long that they have expanded to include the post-war American world.

*****

Considering his indifference to surface reality,
it is absurd to judge Heller by standards of psychological realism
(or, for that matter, by conventional artistic standards at all, since his book is as formless as any picaresque epic).
He is concerned entirely with that thin boundary of the surreal, the borderline between hilarity and horror,
which, much like the apparent formlessness of the unconscious, has its own special integrity and coherence.
Thus, Heller will never use comedy for its own sake;
each joke has a wider significance in the intricate pattern,
so that laughter becomes a prologue for some grotesque revelation.
This gives the reader an effect of surrealistic dislocation,
intensified by a weird, rather flat, impersonal style,
full of complicated reversals, swift transitions, abrupt shifts in chronological time, and manipulated identities
(e.g. if a private named Major Major Major is promoted to Major by a faulty IBM machine,
or if a malingerer, sitting out a doomed mission, is declared dead through a bureaucratic error,
then this remains their permanent fate),
as if all mankind was determined by a mad and merciless mechanism.

*****

Yossarian’s expedient is not very flattering to our national ideals, being defeatist, selfish, cowardly, and unheroic.
On the other hand, it is one of those sublime expressions of anarchic individualism
without which all national ideals are pretty hollow anyway.
Since the mass State, whether totalitarian or democratic,
has grown increasingly hostile to Falstaffian irresponsibility,
Yossarian’s anti-heroism is, in fact, a kind of inverted heroism which we would do well to ponder.
For, contrary to the armchair pronouncements of patriotic ideologues,
Yossarian’s obsessive concern for survival makes him not only not morally dead,
but one of the most morally vibrant figures in recent literature—
and a giant of the will beside those weary, wise and wistful prodigals in contemporary novels
who always accommodate sadly to American life.

The New Republic
Robert Brustein

November 13, 1961

(September 23, 2013)

(In honor of Banned Books Week, we’ll be publishing our original reviews of frequently banned books.  First up is Robert Brustein on Joseph Heller’s Catch 22, “a bitter, brilliant, subversive book.”)

Like all superlative works of comedy—and I am ready to argue that this is one of the most bitterly funny works in the language—Catch-22 is based on an unconventional but utterly convincing internal logic.  In the very opening pages, when we come upon a number of Air Force officers malingering in a hospital—one censoring all the modifiers out of enlisted men’s letters and signing the censor’s name “Washington Irving,” another pursuing tedious conversations with boring Texans in order to increase his life span by making time pass slowly, still another storing horse chestnuts in his cheeks to give himself a look of innocence—it seems obvious that an inordinate number of Joseph Heller’s characters are, by all conventional standards, mad.  It is a triumph of Mr.  Heller’s skill that he is so quickly able to persuade us 1) that the most lunatic are the most logical, and 2) that it is our conventional standards which lack any logical consistency.  The sanest looney of them all is the apparently harebrained central character, an American bombardier of Syrian extraction named Captain John Yossarian, who is based on a mythical Italian island (Pianosa) during World War II.  For while many of his fellow officers seem indifferent to their own survival, and most of his superior officers are overtly hostile to his, Yossarian is animated solely by a desperate determination to stay alive:

“It was a vile and muddy war, and Yossarian could have lived without it—lived forever, perhaps.  Only a fraction of his countrymen would give up their lives to win it, and it was not his ambition to be among them…That men would die was a matter of necessity; which men would die, though, was a matter of circumstance, and Yossarian was willing to be the victim of anything but circumstance.”

The single narrative thread in this crazy patchwork of anecdotes, episodes, and character portraits traces Yossarian’s herculean efforts—through caution, cowardice, defiance, subterfuge, strategem, and subversion, through feigning illness, goofing off, and poisoning the company’s food with laundry soap—to avoid being victimized by circumstance, a force represented in the book as Catch-22.  For Catch-22 is the unwritten loophole in every written law which empowers the authorities to revoke your rights whenever it suits their cruel whims; it is, in short, the principle of absolute evil in a malevolent, mechanical, and incompetent world.  Because of Catch-22, justice is mocked, the innocent are victimized, and Yossarian’s squadron is forced to fly more than double the number of missions prescribed by Air Force code.  Dogged by Catch-22, Yossarian becomes the anguished witness to the ghoulish slaughter of his crew members and the destruction of all his closest friends, until finally his fear of death becomes so intense that he refuses to wear a uniform, after his own has been besplattered with the guts of his dying gunner, and receives a medal standing naked in formation.  From this point on, Yossarian’s logic becomes so pure that everyone thinks him mad, for it is the logic of sheer survival, dedicated to keeping him alive in a world noisily clamoring for his annihilation.

According to this logic, Yossarian is surrounded on all sides by hostile forces: his enemies are distinguished less by their nationality than by their ability to get him killed.  Thus, Yossarian feels a blind, electric rage against the Germans whenever they hurl flak at his easily penetrated plane; but he feels an equally profound hatred for those of his own countrymen who exercise an arbitrary power over his life and well-being.  Heller’s huge cast of characters, therefore, is dominated by a large number of comic malignities, genus Americanus, drawn with a grotesqueness so audacious that they somehow transcend caricature entirely and become vividly authentic.  These include: Colonel Cathcart, Yossarian’s commanding officer, whose consuming ambition to get his picture in the Saturday Evening Post motivates him to volunteer his command for every dangerous command, and to initiate prayers during briefing sessions (“I don’t want any of this Kingdom of God or Valley of Death stuff.  That’s all too negative… Couldn’t we pray for a tighter bomb pattern?”), an idea he abandons only when he learns enlisted men pray to the same God; General Peckem, head of Special Services, whose strategic objective is to replace General Dreedle, the wing commander, capturing every bomber group in the US Air Force (“If dropping bombs on the enemy isn’t a special service, I wonder what in the world is”); Captain Black, the squadron intelligence officer, who inaugurates the Glorious Loyalty Oath Crusade in order to discomfort a rival, forcing all officers (except the rival, who is thereupon declared a Communist) to sign a new oath whenever they get their flak suits, their pay checks, or their haircuts; Lieutenant Scheisskopf, paragon of the parade ground, whose admiration for efficient formations makes him scheme to screw nickel-alloy swivels into every cadet’s back for perfect ninety degree turns; and cadres of sadistic officers, club-happy MPs, and muddleheaded agents of the CID, two of whom, popping in and out of rooms like farcical private eyes, look for Washington Irving throughout the action, finally pinning the rap on the innocent chaplain.

These are Yossarian’s antagonists, all of them reduced to a single exaggerated humor, and all identified by their totally mechanical attitude toward human life.  Heller has a profound hatred for this kind of military mind, further anatomized in a wacky scene before the Action Board which displays his (and their) animosity in a manner both hilarious and scarifying.  But Heller, at war with much larger forces than the army, has provided his book with much wider implications than a war novel.  For the author (apparently sharing the Italian belief that vengeance is a dish which tastes best cold) has been nourishing his grudges for so long that they have expanded to include the post-war American world.  Through the agency of grotesque comedy, Heller has found a way to confront the humbug, hypocrisy, cruelty, and sheer stupidity of our mass society—qualities which have made the few other Americans who care almost speechless with baffled rage and through some miracle of prestidigitation, Pianosa has become a satirical microcosm for many of the macrocosmic idiocies of our time.  Thus, the author flourishes his Juvenalian scourge at government-subsidized agriculture (and farmers, one of whom “spent every penny he didn’t earn on new land to increase the amount of alfalfa he did not grow”); at the exploitation of American Indians, evicted from their oil-rich land; at smug psychiatrists; at bureaucrats and patriots; at acquisitive war widows; at high-spirited American boys; and especially, and most vindictively, at war profiteers.

This last satirical flourish, aimed at the whole mystique of corporation capitalism, is embodied in the fantastic adventures of Milo Minderbinder, the company mess officer, and a paradigm of good natured Jonsonian cupidity.  Anxious to put the war on a business-like basis, Milo has formed a syndicate designed to corner the world market on all available foodstuffs, which he then sells to army mess halls at huge profits.  Heady with success (his deals have made him Mayor of every town in Sicily, Vice-Shah of Oran, Caliph of Baghdad, Imam of Damascus, and the Sheik of Araby), Milo soon expands his activities, forming a private army which he hires out to the highest bidder.  The climax of Milo’s career comes when he fulfills a contract with the Germans to bomb and strafe his own outfit, directing his planes from the Pianosa control tower and justifying the action with the stirring war cry: “What’s good for the syndicate is good for the country.” Milo has almost succeeded in his ambition to pre-empt the field of war for private enterprise when he makes a fatal mistake: he has cornered the entire Egyptian cotton market and is unable to unload it anywhere.  Having failed to pass it off to his own mess hall in the form of chocolate-covered cotton, Milo is finally persuaded by Yossarian to bribe the American government to take it off his hands: “If you run into trouble, just tell everybody that the security of the country requires a strong domestic Egyptian cotton speculating industry.” The Minderbinder sections—in showing the basic incompatibility of idealism and economics by satirizing the patriotic cant which usually accompanies American greed—illustrate the procedure of the entire book: the ruthless ridicule of hypocrisy through a technique of farce-fantasy, beneath which the demon of satire lurks, prodding fat behinds with a red-hot pitchfork.

It should be abundantly clear, then, that Catch-22, despite some of the most outrageous sequences since A Night at the Opera, is an intensely serious work.  Heller has certain technical similarities to the Marx Brothers, Max Schulman, Kingsley Amis, Al Capp, and S.J. Perelman, but his mordant intelligence, closer to that of Nathanael West, penetrates the surface of the merely funny to expose a world of ruthless self-advancement, gruesome cruelty, and flagrant disregard for human life—a world, in short, very much like our own as seen through a magnifying glass, distorted for more perfect accuracy.  Considering his indifference to surface reality, it is absurd to judge Heller by standards of psychological realism (or, for that matter, by conventional artistic standards at all, since his book is as formless as any picaresque epic).  He is concerned entirely with that thin boundary of the surreal, the borderline between hilarity and horror, which, much like the apparent formlessness of the unconscious, has its own special integrity and coherence.  Thus, Heller will never use comedy for its own sake; each joke has a wider significance in the intricate pattern, so that laughter becomes a prologue for some grotesque revelation.  This gives the reader an effect of surrealistic dislocation, intensified by a weird, rather flat, impersonal style, full of complicated reversals, swift transitions, abrupt shifts in chronological time, and manipulated identities (e.g.  if a private named Major Major Major is promoted to Major by a faulty IBM machine, or if a malingerer, sitting out a doomed mission, is declared dead through a bureaucratic error, then this remains their permanent fate), as if all mankind was determined by a mad and merciless mechanism.

Thus, Heller often manages to heighten the macabre obscenity of total war much more effectively through its gruesome comic aspects than if he had written realistic descriptions.  And thus, the most delicate pressure is enough to send us over the line from farce into phantasmagoria.  In the climactic chapter, in fact, the book leaves comedy altogether and becomes an eerie nightmare of terror.  Here, Yossarian, walking through the streets of Rome as though through an Inferno, observes soldiers molesting drunken women, fathers beating ragged children, policemen clubbing innocent bystanders until the whole world seems swallowed up in the maw of evil:

“The night was filled with horrors, and he thought he knew how Christ must have felt as he walked through the world, like a psychiatrist through a ward of nuts, like a victim through a prison of thieves… Mobs… mobs of policemen… Mobs with clubs were in control everywhere.”

Here, as the book leaves the war behind, it is finally apparent that Heller’s comedy is his artistic response to his vision of transcendent evil, as if the escape route of laughter were the only recourse from a malignant world.

It is this world, which cannot be divided into boundaries or ideologies, that Yossarian has determined to resist.  And so when his fear and disgust have reached the breaking point, he simply refuses to fly another mission.  Asked by a superior what would happen if everybody felt the same way, Yossarian exercises his definitive logic, and answers, “Then I’d be a damned fool to feel any other way.” Having concluded a separate peace, Yossarian maintains it in the face of derision, ostracism, psychological pressure, and the threat of court martial.  When he is finally permitted to go home if he will only agree to a shabby deal white- washing Colonel Cathcart, however, he finds himself impaled on two impossible alternatives.  But his unique logic, helped along by the precedent of an even more logical friend, makes him conclude that desertion is the better part of valor; and so (after an inspirational sequence which is the weakest thing in the book) he takes off for neutral Sweden – the only place left in the world, outside of England, where “mobs with clubs” are not in control.

Yossarian’s expedient is not very flattering to our national ideals, being defeatist, selfish, cowardly, and unheroic.  On the other hand, it is one of those sublime expressions of anarchic individualism without which all national ideals are pretty hollow anyway.  Since the mass State, whether totalitarian or democratic, has grown increasingly hostile to Falstaffian irresponsibility, Yossarian’s anti-heroism is, in fact, a kind of inverted heroism which we would do well to ponder.  For, contrary to the armchair pronouncements of patriotic ideologues, Yossarian’s obsessive concern for survival makes him not only not morally dead, but one of the most morally vibrant figures in recent literature—and a giant of the will beside those weary, wise and wistful prodigals in contemporary novels who always accommodate sadly to American life.  I believe that Joseph Heller is one of the most extraordinary talents now among us.  He has Mailer’s combustible radicalism without his passion for violence and self-glorification; he has Bellow’s gusto with his compulsion to affirm the unaffirmable; and he has Salinger’s wit without his coquettish self-consciousness.  Finding his absolutes in the freedom to be, in a world dominated by cruelty, carnage, inhumanity, and a rage to destroy itself, Heller has come upon a new morality based on an old ideal, the morality of refusal.  Perhaps—now that Catch-22 has found its most deadly nuclear form—we have reached the point where even the logic of survival is unworkable.  But at least we can still contemplate the influence of its liberating honesty on a free, rebellious spirit in this explosive, bitter, subversive, brilliant book.

For Further Thought

Books

Falstein, Louis, Face of a Hero, Steerforth Press, South Royalton, Vt., 1999

Heller, Joseph, Catch-22, Dell Publishing, New York, N.Y., 1968

Articles

Hollander, Paul, The Resilience of the Adversary Culture, The National Interest, Summer, 2002, 101-112

Iannone, Carol, Lionel Trilling and the Barbarians at the Gate, Academic Questions, Winter, 2001-2002, 7-17

Kersten, Katherine, Adversary Culture in 2020, First Things, February, 2021, 41-46

Magnet, Myron, Defounding America, The New Criterion, May, 2021, 4-12

A Tale of a Tail Gunner: Louis Falstein and “Face of a Hero” – IX: When Parallels Diverge – “Catch 22” and “Face of a Hero”

In late April of 1998, Face of a Hero became an object of literary attention as a result of an inquiry to the London Times by Lewis Pollock, concerning the provenance of Catch-22, Pollock correctly noting parallels between the main protagonist, secondary characters, setting, plot, and events of both novels.  His letter became the impetus for articles in the Washington Post and New York Times which, accompanied by comments by Joseph Heller himself, delineated these similarities in detail, yet highlighted the marked difference between the two novels in terms of style, structure, and especially – if I can use the word in a literary sense? – the books’ very ethos.

As discussed by Michael Mewshaw and Mel Gussow, there was a genuine commonality of historical and life experience between Falstein and Heller.  However, regardless of one’s opinion of the two works as literature, I believe that Joseph Heller was entirely honest in his description of the influences upon and originality of his novel, specifically mentioning being influenced by Louis-Ferdinand Céline (Ironically, “…His bigotry is not incidental to his writing but explicit within it…” an unrepentant Jew-hater.  So I ask: Was Joseph Heller aware of this?; So, I also ask: If he had known, would it have mattered?), Evelyn Waugh and Vladimir Nabokov.  Even if he had read Face of a Hero in the early 1950s; even if that novel was a spark for the eventual creation of Catch-22, any such spark would only have been as incipient as it was tiny, given what emerged from Heller’s desk eleven years later.  In the end, all the parallels between the two novels are far more superficial than structural, just as were the parallels in the lives of their two authors.  Though there were parallels in the worlds of Falstein, I believe looked upon “the world” – the world of history; the world of fiction – through vastly different understandings, and thus emerged with literary visions perhaps irreconcilable.

Ten months after the appearance of Mewshaw and Gussow’s articles, The Forward published an essay by Dr. Sanford Pinsker, Professor of English at Franklin and Marshall College, delving into the similarities and differences between the two novels in an effort to establish why Face of a Hero, “…quickly slid down the memory hole.”, in light of the novel’s, “…reissue in paperback by the Steerforth Press.” 

One reason attributed to the novel’s reemergence was the late twentieth-century (retrospectively ephemeral) upsurge of interest in the Second World War, through history, fiction, and cinema.  In this context, Pinsker cited Steven Spielberg’s Saving Private Ryan, Terrence Malik’s The Thin Red Line, and Roberto Benigni’s “bold experiment” Life Is Beautiful (“bold experiment”? – seriously?! – my God, the mind boggles), the latter dubbed by David Denby in his New Yorker film review “Roberto Benigni’s Holocaust Fantasy” as, “…a benign form of Holocaust Denial”. 

The other, primary reason, was the above-mentioned controversy generated by Louis Pollock’s letter to the London Times

More importantly, in his discussion of why Face of a Hero rapidly fell from public and literary consciousness, Pinsker focuses on the novels’ differing approaches to storytelling in the context of the history of the Second World War, and, the experience of Jewish servicemen within that conflict.  At heart, Face of a Hero is directly descriptive while Catch-22 is, …built on the scaffolding of the paradoxical,” and thus, far more stylistically vivid, focusing on the absurdities of war and the military, particularly with resonance to the (ahhhh, let’s have a drum roll for the mantra-like incantation of the 60s generation) “war in Vietnam”.  While Pinsker appreciated Sergeant Ben Isaacs’ (Louis Falstein’s) empathy with the Jews of Europe, he felt that the direct and explicit treatment of this subject – in terms of dialogue and interior monologue – was an overdone form of “telling”, rather than “showing”, the emphasis upon which left vacant a fuller, deeper treatment of the airman’s experience of war.  This is the same point of critique – and yes, it could be argued, a valid one – as mentioned by William DuBois in his New York Times’ “Books of the Times” review of August 17, 1950.  “…he has chosen to wander too far from his air-strip.  At times (when Ben is sympathizing with refugees in an Italian concentration camp, or cursing discrimination within his own army) one feels that the author is trying to write two novels at once, and muddling his effects.  Finally, it’s plain too bad that “Face of a Hero” is bound to suffer from the law of diminishing returns – which operates in the literary market-place even more predictably than in other markets. There have been few war novels that were more deeply felt than this.  There have been many that were better planned, many that identified the reader more closely with both cast and background.”

Well, I did not (do not) agree with Pinsker, but I did want to present his viewpoint, especially in light of my own thoughts about Falstein’s novel, some of which were presented in a letter published in The Forward three weeks later.  Further insight into Pinsker’s thought about Joseph Heller can be found in his 1991 (republished in 2009) study, Understanding Joseph Heller.

Basically, I suggested that the tenor of the 1950s – the Second World War having ended a half-decade before, the Korean War having just begun, the (first) Cold War in full swing, plus the simple wheel of chance that governs the material success of all literary works, were the principle influences that decided the fate of Face of a Hero.  In light of the book’s many positive reviews, “telling” and “aesthetic shaping” had absolutely nothing to do with it.  

____________________

Joseph Heller died on December 12, 1999, and more than nominal obituaries was the subject of retrospectives about his literary career and life, two of which follow below.  One article is by Peter Carlson (in the Washington Post) and the other (in The Jerusalem Post), is by Michael Mewshaw, who wrote about the Catch-22 / Face of a Hero controversy in mid-1998. 

The common element of the reviews, as hinted at by Pinsker in his “war in Vietnam” comment, is the realization that a significant reason for Catch-22’s success was a matter of timing:  As related to Carlson by Heller, “At a reading the previous night, a man stood up and publicly thanked Heller for “Calch-22.”  “I read your book the day before I got called up for Vietnam,” he said, “and I have to tell you, it helped.”  And, as noted by Mewshaw, “…Heller’s book generated popularity and sales by word-of-mouth, eventually tapped into the anti-Vietnam war Zeitgeist of the ‘60s, and now occupies a secure place in the contemporary canon.”  It was this, rather than by virtue of its literary quality (or more accurately put, in spite of its literary quality), that it emerged into and has persisted in literary and public consciousness, whether as the book Catch-22, or, the phrase “catch-22”.  

So, on to the articles, letters, and retrospectives.  These comprise:

April 27, 1998, The Washington Post, Michael Mewshaw, “New Questions Dog ‘Catch-22’ – Joseph Heller Defends Originality of ‘61 Classic

April 29, 1998, The New York Times, Mel Gussow, “Questioning the Provenance of the Iconic ‘Catch-22’

February 19, 1999, The Forward, Sanford Pinsker, “Making War Seem Real

March 5, 1999, The Forward, Michael Moskow, “War Novel Suffered in 1950s

December 14, 1999, The Washington Post, Peter Carlson, “The Heights of Absurdity – Joseph Heller Drove a World Stark Raving Sane With ‘Catch-22’

December 31, 1999, The Jerusalem Post, Mike Mewshaw, “Too easy to catch Heller out?

________________________________________

New Questions Dog ‘Catch-22’
Joseph Heller Defends Originality of ‘61 Classic

Because [Lewis] Pollock must have been one of the few people on the planet who had read both books,
he was especially interested to learn that Heller mentioned in his recent autobiography,
“Now and Then,” that he had occasionally “borrowed” the scenes and settings of his early fiction from other authors.
“I did not intend to cause trouble, Mr. Heller,” Pollock told the London Times.
He just wondered whether Heller might have read and been influenced by “The Sky Is a Lonely Place.”
Or, as he mused in his letter, “is this a remarkable example of synchronicity?”

Michael Mewshaw
The Washington Post
April 27, 1998

The inquiry to the London Sunday Times was politely phrased.  “Can anyone out there account for the amazing similarity of characters, personality traits, eccentricities, physical descriptions, personnel injuries and incidents in `Catch-22’ (by Joseph Heller) and a novel by Louis Falstein, `The Sky Is a Lonely Place,’ published in 1951?”

The letter to the editor, published two weeks ago, caused ripples throughout literary London and led to an extensive report in today’s London Times.  Could one of the 20th century’s best-selling novels — a book whose title became a synonym for paradox, the very hallmark of absurdity and a masterpiece of contemporary black humor — not have been as “wildly original” and “fantastically unique” as critics hailed it?

A reading of Louis Falstein’s novel suggests that somebody from the same background as Heller (the son of a Russian Jewish family), from the same borough of New York City (Brooklyn), from the same branch of the service (an airman on an American bomber squadron) and from the same combat theater (Italy, 1943-45) did write a book tantalizingly like the one Joseph Heller published more than a decade later.

Reached at his home on Long Island today, Heller denied that he ever read “The Sky Is a Lonely Place,” or heard of Louis Falstein, or of Lewis Pollock, the professional artist and amateur bibliophile who queried the London Times.  “The similarities come from a common wartime experience,” he said.

“My book came out in 1961,” he added.  “I find it funny that nobody else has noticed any similarities, including Falstein himself, who died just last year.”

Although he concedes some surprise at the bits and pieces the novels have in common, Heller pointed out how much war fiction depends on the same elementary variations on themes and characters.

In his book, Falstein described a hospitalized pilot lying in bed “in a white cast, like an Egyptian mummy.  His arms were broken; and where his legs had been, there were cotton swathed stumps.  Only his face showed out of the cast, and there were openings at the bottom for bodily functions.  An orderly or nurse held the cigarette for him when he smoked.”

Heller wrote, “The soldier in white was encased from head to toe in plaster and gauze.  He had two useless arms and two useless legs.” A nurse is described inserting a thermometer into his mouth, and he’s subsequently called “a stuffed and sterilized mummy.”

Toward the end of his novel, Falstein dramatized a grotesque Christmas Eve party that dissolves into a bacchanal of singing, screaming, sobbing and lamenting and ends with an outbreak of gunfire that the soldiers mistake for an enemy attack.  “There were several more carbine pings, and somebody answered fire with a forty-five pistol.”

Late in “Catch-22,” Heller wrote that a Thanksgiving “celebration lasted long into the night, and the stillness was fractured often by wild, exultant shouts and by cries of people who were merry or sick.  There was the recurring sound of retching and moaning, of laughter, greetings, threats and swearing, and of bottles shattering against rock.  There were dirty songs in the distance.” It, too, ends with gunfire, and the protagonist Yossarian charges out of his tent with his .45.

“Catch-22” and “The Sky Is a Lonely Place” share another vaguely similar scene in which an Italian woman, who doesn’t understand English and has kept herself apart from the soldiers, is raped.

Asked today about those and other similarities, Heller cited personal experience.  “I don’t know how many airmen brought along extra flak jackets, but I did,” he said.  “That Thanksgiving scene actually happened — guys got drunk and started shooting.  There was a case of rape in Rome.  I heard of it.  A maid got thrown out a window.  I read about it in the military newspaper.” Which, he said, may mean Falstein read the same story.

As for the patient in a full-body cast, “That goes all the way back to Dalton Trumbo’s `Johnny Got His Gun.’ Trumbo’s novel came out not just before `Catch-22,’ but long before Falstein’s.  If there’s a literary reference or allusion I’m a bit embarrassed about, it’s the similarity between the first chapter of `Catch-22’ and Celine’s `Journey to the End of Night.’ “

Because Pollock must have been one of the few people on the planet who had read both books, he was especially interested to learn that Heller mentioned in his recent autobiography, “Now and Then,” that he had occasionally “borrowed” the scenes and settings of his early fiction from other authors.  “I did not intend to cause trouble, Mr.  Heller,” Pollock told the London Times.  He just wondered whether Heller might have read and been influenced by “The Sky Is a Lonely Place.” Or, as he mused in his letter, “is this a remarkable example of synchronicity?”

Duff Hart-Davis, son of Falstein’s late British publisher, says his father never met the author, and has raised the possibility that Falstein and Heller are the same person, that “The Sky Is a Lonely Place” was “a practice run for `Catch-22.’ “

But Heller squelched that theory.

“The Sky Is a Lonely Place” is narrated in the first person by a Jewish gunner in a B-24, Ben “Pop” Isaacs; “Catch-22” has an omniscient narrator who recounts the antics of the crew of a B-25.

Just as Heller’s celebrated novel contains a jamboree of characters — Colonel Cathcart, Colonel Korn, Major Major Major Major, Milo Minderbinder, Captain Aarfy Aardvark and, of course, Yossarian — so does Falstein’s, with Mel Ginn, Cosmo Fidanza, Chester Kowalski, Charles Couch, Billy Poat and Jack Doolie Dula.

While “Catch-22” is much longer, more ambitious and more relentlessly comic, Heller is correct that much of what they have in common comes out of the context of World War II, when airmen were eager to fly their 50 missions and get back to the United States.

When not airborne and on the brink of death, characters in both books kill time in scenes familiar to any reader of war fiction.  They paint tiny bombs on their flight jackets to mark each mission.  They drink, complain, cry, lie, play cruel jokes, fight, frequent brothels and encounter locals who are depicted as childlike and cunning, full of equal measures of Old World wisdom and venality.  Children pimp for their sisters.  Nurses are ice cold or volcanically hot.  Rain plays havoc with the flight schedule, keeping the men safe on the ground, but exposing them to flu, fever, jaundice, hepatitis and fraying nerves.

Like Falstein, Heller focuses on the underbelly of the campaign — on PR officers more interested in publicity and medals than on men, on black marketeers who skim off supplies, leaving troops hungry and in the lurch.

Where Falstein heightens the tension in a conventional, realistic manner with near-misses, crash landings, midair dogfights and fatal miscalculations of fuel, Heller ratchets up the stakes and darkens the laughter by having the high command constantly raise the required number of missions.

Yet Falstein displays a Hellerean fascination for Grand Guignol violence, quirky gags and virulent humor that verves from the slapstick to the surrealistic and sometimes the satanic.  Scabrous jokes, racial epithets, savage sexual ribaldry and hair-raising craziness pour out of people.  At times, Falstein achieves a sort of demonic poetry, as when a soldier says “Grazie Nazi,” and his friend replies “Prego, dago” — Heller does the same in “Catch-22,” where an exchange runs: “Pass the salt, Walt / Pass the bread, Fred / Shoot me a beet, Pete.”

Paralyzed with fear, Falstein’s characters become preternaturally alert to the absurdity of their situation, the logical lunacy of rules and regulations, the arbitrariness of authority and the emptiness of words.  Early in “The Sky Is a Lonely Place,” the narrator learns a lesson in “airwar language” when he’s instructed “never use the word KILLED .  .  .  we say a guy WENT DOWN” — a scene reminiscent of the chaplain in “Catch-22” being ordered to compose a prayer that eliminates God and death.

In both books, a red ribbon on a map marks the advance of American troops and the bomb line.  As the ribbon approaches Vienna, a Falstein character comes down with diarrhea.  When in “Catch-22” it closes in on Bologna, an epidemic of diarrhea breaks out on Heller’s air base.

Even as the similarities grow more frequent, it’s possible to see them as shards from the same general mosaic.  True, Falstein’s bombardier “shrieks,” just as Yossarian does after he drops a bomb.  True, there’s a cat that crawls onto a sleeping soldier and has to be peeled away when the man wakes up.  True, both books have characters who shuffle and deal cards in a snappy explosive fashion.  True, Ben Isaacs, like Yossarian, drags extra flak jackets along on each mission and drapes them all over his body.  True, there are common comic scenes involving the idiocies of letter censors and the self-serving circumlocutions of military doctors who sense that the flyboys are sick and/or insane, yet keep sending them on missions.

But several similarities seem to transcend any question of shared experience or literary archetypes.  “Catch-22” opens with a chapter titled “The Texan.” In the first chapter of “The Sky Is a Lonely Place,” the narrator introduces a character referred to as “the stringy young Texan.”

Still, the current imbroglio has not reduced Joseph Heller’s pride of authorship and he closes by stressing, “Given the amount of invention in `Catch-22,’ it would be an amazing coincidence if there were fundamental similarities with Falstein’s novel.”

________________________________________

Questioning the Provenance of the Iconic ‘Catch-22’

‘‘Face of a Hero,’’ told in the first person by a gunner named Ben Isaacs,
is a harrowing but relatively straightforward dramatic account of one man’s wartime experiences.
Isaacs, nicknamed Pops because he is older than the other members of the crew,
is obsessed by his hatred of Hitler and Fascism.

‘‘Catch-22’’ is a Dantesque vision, a darkly comic surrealistic portrait of men caught up in the madness of war.
Mr. Heller’s protagonist, Yossarian, is a bombardier who comes to believe –
with some justification –
that everyone is trying to kill him.
With an increasing desperation, he wants to complete his 50 missions so he can go home,
but keeps finding the number of missions needed raised by his commanding officer.

Mel Gussow
The New York Times
April 29, 1998

When Louis Falstein’s ‘‘Face of a Hero’’ was published in 1950, Herbert F. West reviewed it favorably in The New York Times Book Review, calling it ‘‘the most mature novel about the Air Force that has yet appeared. . . . a book that is both exciting and important.’’ Still, the book and its author faded into obscurity.

When Joseph Heller’s ‘‘Catch-22’’ was published 11 years later, Richard G. Stern gave it a negative review in the Times Book Review. He said that it ‘‘gasps for want of craft and sensibility’’ and called it ‘‘an emotional hodgepodge.’’ Despite that indictment, ‘‘Catch-22’’ eventually became a phenomenal success — a best seller, a film and the cornerstone of a major literary career.

Now, in a strange twist, the two books have come together, and their meeting has led to a provocative debate. In a recent letter to The Times of London, Lewis Pollock, a London bibliophile, wondered if anyone could ‘‘account for the amazing similarity of characters, personality traits, eccentricities, physical descriptions, personnel injuries and incidents’’ in the two books.

He asked if this were ‘‘a remarkable example of synchronicity.’’ That letter has sparked conjecture in both Britain and the United States about the origins of ‘‘Catch-22.’’ An article appeared this week in The Sunday Times of London, followed by one the next day on the front page of The Washington Post suggesting that Mr. Heller may have appropriated material from Falstein’s book.

On the telephone from his home on Long Island, Mr. Heller issued a categorical denial. He said he was influenced in his writing by Celine, Waugh and Nabokov, but not by Falstein. ‘‘I never read the book,’’ he said. ‘‘I never heard of the book or the author. To the extent that there are similarities, they are coincidences, and if the similarities are striking then they are striking coincidences.’’

He added, ‘‘If I went through the ‘Iliad’ I would probably find as many similarities to ‘Catch-22’ as other people seem to be finding between Falstein’s book and mine.’’

Robert Gottlieb, who edited ‘‘Catch-22’’ for Simon & Schuster, was astonished at the suggestion that Mr. Heller might have borrowed anything from Falstein or any other writer. ‘‘I’ve never seen, heard or felt Joe Heller doing anything remotely less than honest during our 40-year relationship,’’ he said. ‘‘It is inconceivable that he used any other writer’s work. For one thing, he’s too shrewd to do something so blatant. It’s easier for me to believe that Falstein anticipated ‘Catch-22.’ ‘‘

Both authors were in the Army Air Force in Europe during World War II as members of combat crews on bombers. Falstein was stationed in southern Italy, Mr. Heller in Corsica (called Pianosa in his book). For each, this was a first novel. Mr. Falstein died in 1995 at 86.

While it was easy enough for Mr. Heller to be unaware of Mr. Falstein’s book, it is implausible that Falstein was unaware of ‘‘Catch-22,’’ a highly celebrated book that dealt with a closely related subject. ‘‘Where was Mr. Falstein between 1961 and his death?’’ asked Mr. Gottlieb. ‘‘If he felt his book was misused, he should have said something about it.’’ Falstein’s son, Joshua, who is a court stenographer, said this week that his father never mentioned ‘‘Catch-22’’ to him.

From a reading of ‘‘Face of a Hero’’ (published by Harcourt Brace and long out of print), it is clear that each novel stands on its own. Despite the common background in the military and some similar incidents, the books are widely disparate in approach, ambition, style and content.

‘‘Face of a Hero,’’ told in the first person by a gunner named Ben Isaacs, is a harrowing but relatively straightforward dramatic account of one man’s wartime experiences. Isaacs, nicknamed Pops because he is older than the other members of the crew, is obsessed by his hatred of Hitler and Fascism.

‘‘Catch-22’’ is a Dantesque vision, a darkly comic surrealistic portrait of men caught up in the madness of war. Mr. Heller’s protagonist, Yossarian, is a bombardier who comes to believe — with some justification — that everyone is trying to kill him. With an increasing desperation, he wants to complete his 50 missions so he can go home, but keeps finding the number of missions needed raised by his commanding officer.

An examination of the two books leads this reader to conclude that the similarities between the two can easily be attributed to the shared wartime experiences of the authors. In his first chapter, for instance, Falstein introduces his flight crew, one of whom is identified as ‘‘the stringy young Texan.’’ Coincidentally, Mr. Heller’s first chapter is called ‘‘The Texan’’ and one of the characters is from Texas, but the scene is entirely different. Yossarian is in a hospital. ‘‘It was love at first sight,’’ Mr. Heller begins. ‘‘The first time Yossarian saw the chaplain he fell madly in love with him.’’

In that chapter, Mr. Heller introduces ‘‘the soldier in white’’ who ‘‘was encased from head to toe in plaster and gauze.’’ He continues, ‘‘He had two useless legs and two useless arms’’ and had been smuggled into the ward at night. Later in his book, Falstein also has a soldier in white who ‘‘looked entombed in the cast, like an Egyptian mummy.’’ This invalid is the crew’s new pilot, wounded in action. In ‘‘Catch-22,’’ the figure is as mysterious and as metaphorical as the Unknown Soldier.

In Falstein’s book there is an animal lover who sleeps with five cats. In Mr. Heller’s book, there is Hungry Joe, who ‘‘dreamed that Huple’s cat was sleeping on his face, suffocating him, and when he woke up, Huple’s cat was sleeping on his face.’’ Both Isaacs and Yossarian take extra flak jackets into combat as protection — as apparently did Falstein, Mr. Heller and other members of flight crews in combat. In each book, there is a holiday party that ends in gunfire and there is a rape scene with some similarity.

While ‘‘Face of a Hero’’ holds firmly to a realistic base, ‘‘Catch-22’’ is a transforming act of the imagination, populated by fiercely original characters like Milo Minderbinder, the flamboyant opportunist who bombs his own air base for profit (Falstein has a black marketeer in his company, far smaller in scope than Milo). From Mr. Heller, there is also Major Major Major Major, whose fate is to look like Henry Fonda but not act anything like him. Then there is Doc Daneeka with his theory of ‘‘Catch-22.’’ A man has to be declared crazy to be relieved from combat duty, but ‘‘anyone who wants to get out of combat duty isn’t really crazy.’’

Falstein, who was born in Ukraine and came to the United States in 1925, wrote several other novels, including ‘‘Slaughter Street’’ and ‘‘Sole Survivor,’’ as well as a biography of Sholom Aleichem for young readers. After the war, he attended New York University and later taught there and at City College.  He continued to write late in life but his work was not published, his son said.

In his recent memoir, ‘‘Now and Then,’’ Mr. Heller discusses in detail the models for some of his characters. Reviewing the book in The Times of London, J. G. Ballard reflected on the importance of ‘‘Catch-22,’’ calling it ‘‘the last great novel written in English.’’ Paradoxically, it was Mr. Ballard’s piece that led to that questioning letter to the editor and the subsequent controversy.

________________________________________

Making War Seem Real

At the same time, however, a part of me knows
that there is far too much telling rather than showing in Falstein’s novel. 
By fastening his imagination to the “facts” of what being a Jewish airman was really like,
he neglects telling details and aesthetic shaping. 
As such his novel, admirable though it is in spots,
fails to make a convincing case for the direction in which “Face of a Hero” merely points. 
My hunch is that the literary jury has long ago rendered its verdict,
and that nothing in “Face of a Hero” is likely to change it.

Sanford Pinsker
The Forward
February 19, 1999

Louis Falstein’s autobiographical World War II novel, “Face of a Hero,” was published in 1950.  Despite some good notices in The New York Times and The New Republic, it quickly slid down the memory hole.  What, then, accounts for its reissue in paperback by the Steerforth Press?  Two answers suggest themselves.

One has to do with speculation about the similarities between Falstein’s account of the war and Joseph Heller’s comic masterpiece, “Catch-22,” which was published 10 years after “Face of a Hero” and covered roughly the same material.  The airmen at the center of both novels share their worries about survival in the face of enemy flak and the number of missions they are required to fly, and they watch their fellow squadron members’ increasingly desperate quests for comic or sexual relief as the shadow of death creeps closer.  Although the case for Mr. Heller’s unacknowledged appropriation of Falstein’s material seems to have little if any merit, once certain questions have been raised, reprinting a novel such as “Face of a Hero” will follow as the night follows the day.  Sadly, Falstein, who died in 1995, is not available for comment or questioning.

The other reason for the reappearance of the book is a renewed interest in seeing World War II through a realistic lens.  Steven Spielberg’s “Saving Private Ryan” and Terrence Malick’s “The Thin Red Line,” are part of this trend.  Admirers of “Saving Private Ryan” insist that the film is Hollywood storytelling at its best; by capturing essential truths in striking images and a straightforward narrative, it does for World War II cinema, they say, what “Schindler’s List” had done for the Holocaust.

The difference between “Saving Private Ryan,” “The Thin Red Line” and “Face of a Hero” on one hand and “Catch-22” on the other are part of a larger, ongoing debate about hyper-realism and the more inventive – some would say, wackier – possibilities of postmodernist experimentation.  A recent example of the latter is Italian comedian Roberto Benigni’s bold experiment, “Life Is Beautiful,” which uses farce to illustrate the horrors of concentration camps.  Mr. Benigni’s film is squaring off against “Saving Private Ryan” and “The Thin Red Line” for the Academy Award for Best Picture, and the choice among them is in part a referendum on the relative merits of grim realism and absurd humor.

Which method gets us closer to the truth – the rigorous attention in “Face of a Hero” to the details as they really were, or the dark comedy of “Catch-22,” a book that turns the horrors of war into a funhouse mirror? Mr. Heller’s novel is built on the scaffolding of the paradoxical Catch-22: “If he flew them he was crazy and didn’t have to; but if he didn’t want to he was sane and had to.” The dark joke at the heart of Mr. Heller’s carpet allows him to raise arbitrarily the number of required missions (by contrast, in Falstein’s treatment, the number never inches higher than 50), or to etch a slapstick world in which language can do more damage than enemy fire.  The result is that when the two novels are read side by side, Mr. Heller is not only the more vivid stylist by far, but he also has a deeper, more penetrating grasp of war’s central absurdities.  Surrealism, in short, seems a better cultural fit, especially when readers apply Mr. Heller’s deadly logic to the war in Vietnam.

“Catch-22” may contain multitudes, but one figure conspicuously missing is the Jew.  John Yossarian, Mr. Heller’s protagonist and wisecracking mouthpiece, prides himself on being an Assyrian, even more foreign and estranged than was Falstein’s literary alter ego, 34-year-old Ben Isaacs.  Those of us who have long hectored Mr. Heller about erasing his Jewishness from his war novel will find “Face of a Hero” something of a mixed – and troubling – bag.  On one hand, there are passages in which Ben Isaacs not only makes his Jewish identification clear, but also links it to a wider sense of history:

I was here because I hated Hitler, hated fascism, and feared they would come to America.  I was here because Hitler made me conscious, again, that as a Jew I must assume the role of scapegoat.  I had almost forgotten that being Jewish carried any stigma with it, though I had known anti-Semitism and pogroms as a child [in the Ukraine].  From the age of fifteen when I arrived in America, being Jewish had not stood in the way of my becoming a teacher, of being happily married, of leading the kind of existence that would let me attain my limited aspirations.  Only in 1933, with Hitler riding into power, was the old wound reopened.

On the other hand, in novels such as “Face of a Hero” and perhaps even more so in films, the wartime squadron becomes a microcosm of America itself, with its requisite Texas blowhard, apple-cheeked farm boy from Iowa, lone black, and secular Brooklyn Jew.  In this sense, “Saving Private Ryan” is so many musty cinematic conventions poured into a visually shocking new treatment – including its Jewish character, who dies as a result of a fellow’s soldier’s paralyzing cowardice in the face of the German army.  For better or worse, Mr. Heller’s novel changed the formula, and in the process lifted realism to a new surrealistic level, one where any whiff of the Holocaust had to be consciously edited out.  By contrast, Falstein’s Ben Isaacs drags the nights of fog and death onto center stage.

Small wonder, then, that a part of me wants to give Falstein the credit that is his due, not as the unacknowledged model for “Catch22” but rather as a novelistic exploration of its author’s identity that includes passages such as this one: “My guns had spoken for the pogroms I had lived through …  for the anguished screams of people, my people, who were this very moment burning in Hitler’s extermination ovens.”

At the same time, however, a part of me knows that there is far too much telling rather than showing in Falstein’s novel.  By fastening his imagination to the “facts” of what being a Jewish airman was really like, he neglects telling details and aesthetic shaping.  As such his novel, admirable though it is in spots, fails to make a convincing case for the direction in which “Face of a Hero” merely points.  My hunch is that the literary jury has long ago rendered its verdict, and that nothing in “Face of a Hero” is likely to change it.

Mr: Pinsker is Shadek professor of humanities at Franklin and Marshall College.

________________________________________

War Novel Suffered in 1950s

Here’s a letter I wrote to The Forward, in response to Pinsker’s essay:

The novel’s lack of success may have had far more to do with the tenor of the 50s than its quality as literature. 

*****

Falstein may have felt no desire to engage in experiments in form and style. 
Rather, he simply wanted to tell a story…
no more, no less…
about the experiences of a Jewish aerial gunner and his fellow crewmen,
during a time when the 15th Air Force was incurring its heaviest losses of planes and crews. 
What Pinsker sees “a lack of aesthetic shaping” is actually simplicity, clarity, and above all, honesty. 

The Forward
March 5, 1999

I was happily surprised’ to see The Forward accord Louis Falstein’s “Face of a Hero”‘ attention the novel has long merited (“Making War Seem Real,” February 29).  Sadly, though, Sanford Pinsker’s review and comparison of Mr. Falstein’s novel to Joseph Heller’s “Catch 22” does the former a great injustice.  It is an injustice in terms of the clarity of Falstein’s depiction of the experiences and thoughts of a Jewish aviator flying missions over German-occupied Europe, the literary style of “Face of a Hero” and the book’s place in the literature of World War II.

Mr. Pinsker seems to categorize Falstein’s depiction of a multi-ethnic bomber crew as an exarnple of a hackneyed plot device used by writers and filmmakers since World War II.  But a serious look at the composition of most World War II Air Corps bomber crews shows that the air crew of Falstein’s fictional B-24 bomber, the “Flying Foxhole,” has more basis in fact than fiction.  As discussed in detail by Gerald Astor in “The Mighty Eighth,” American bomber crews often indeed were random and varied combinations of ethnicities and religions.  A look at the historical records of any-odd World War II fighter or bomber group will suffice to prove this.  As such, these men naturally experiencecI the gamut off feelings found among people from disparate locales and backgrounds, thrown together at random, in situations of life and death.

In more general terms, Mr. Pinsker takes issue with the way “Face of a Hero” spends too much time “telling, rather than showing,” being enmeshed in details and facts at the expense of style and aesthetics.  This, combined with the novel’s allegedly stereotypical and shallow characters, may have contributed to its rapid disappearance from the literary spotlight.

I think the actual reasons for the novel’s lack of recognition are vastly different.

Remember, the story was published in 1950, only five years after the end of World War II and coincident with the start of the Korean War.  The American public was psychologically fatigued from a costly victory only five years earlier, yet it found itself at war again, dashing hopes for an era of peace.  The novel depicted the psychological effects of war on soldiers, and on aviators, and it presented these men in what some may see as unflattering, but ultimately sympathetic, candor.  Finally, the praise given to the novel by The New York Times and The New Republic was by no means universal.  For example, an anonymous reviewer in Time magazine blasted Falstein for emphasizing Ben Isaacs’s Jewish identity and perspective of the war, characterizing the book’s hero as a “congenital soul-searcher” and “neurotic.” The novel’s lack of success may have had far more to do with the tenor of the 1950s than its quality as literature.

Falstein may have felt no desire to engage in experiments, in form and style.  Rather, he simply wanted to tell a story – no more, no less – about the experiences of a Jewish aerial gunner and his fellow crewmen, during a time when the 15th Air Force was incurring its heaviest losses of planes and crews.  What Mr. Pinsker sees as “a lack of aesthetic shaping” is actually simplicity, clarity and, above all, honesty.

[My letter concluded with the following two sentences, which The Forward did not deign to publish:  “If anything, Face of a Hero’s release was premature.  The verdict of Pinsker’s “literary jury”, as forgetful as it is fickle, may have been equally premature.”]

________________________________________

The Heights of Absurdity
Joseph Heller Drove a World Stark Raving Sane With ‘Catch-22’

I was supposed to be interviewing Heller about his latest book, “Now and Then,”
 a chatty, charming memoir of his boyhood in Coney Island and his adventures as a bombardier in World War II. 
But I spent most of the time asking him about “Catch-22,”
which is my favorite novel of all time. 
It’s a strange, convoluted, grim, hilarious war novel that seems to suggest that the whole world is completely insane. 
This message confirmed suspicions I held when I first read it in 1958,
and it has been corroborated countless times since then.

I told Heller that his crazy book had helped keep me sane. 
He smiled. 
He heard similar comments nearly every lime he ventured out in public. 
At a reading the previous night, a man stood up and publicly thanked Heller for “Calch-22.”
“I read your book the day before I got called up for Vietnam,” he said, “and I have to tell you, it helped.”

Peter Carlson
The Washington Post
December 14, 1999

The first time I saw Joseph Heller, back in the late ‘60s, he was delivering a speech at New York University.  That night, he revealed his plans for the future. “I’m going to live forever,” he said, “or die trying.”

On Sunday night, he died trying.  A heart attack did what Nazi antiaircraft gunners failed to do back in World War II.  The author of “Catch-22” and seven other books was 76.

The first and only time I had lunch with Heller was last year.  It was the early days of the Monica Lewinsky scandal, which be was enjoying tremendously.

“I love it,” he said, smiling broadly beneath a fluffy halo of bright while hair.  “The fact that it’s so ridiculous is what makes it so exquisitely entertaining to me.”

Heller was a connoisseur of the absurd.  The scandal was providing delicious new realms of ludicrousness that not even he could have imagined.  A few days earlier, Lewinsky’s soon-to be-fired attorney, William Ginsburg, had complained that his client’s life was ruined, that nobody would ever again want to date her or hire her.

“I wanted to call and say, “I’ll date you!  I’ll hire you!” he cackled uproariously.  Then he went back to his crab cakes.  The man loved to eat.

I was supposed to be interviewing Heller about his latest book, “Now and Then,” a chatty, charming memoir of his boyhood in Coney Island and his adventures as a bombardier in World War II.  But I spent most of the time asking him about “Catch-22,” which is my favorite novel of all time.  It’s a strange, convoluted, grim, hilarious war novel that seems to suggest that the whole world is completely insane.  This message confirmed suspicions I held when I first read it in 1958, and it has been corroborated countless times since then.

I told Heller that his crazy book had helped keep me sane.  He smiled.  He heard similar comments nearly every lime he ventured out in public.  At a reading the previous night, a man stood up and publicly thanked Heller for “Calch-22.”  “I read your book the day before I got called up for Vietnam,” he said, “and I have to tell you, it helped.”

A year earlier, in Prague, people kept buttonholing Heller to tell him that bootlegged copies of “Catch-22” had served as an antidote to the absurdities of life under communism.

Translated into nearly every written language, “Catch-22” has sold well over 20 million copies.  It still sells briskly wherever human beings feel tormented by crazed bosses and mindless bureaucracies – which is to say, just about everywhere on the planet.

It is ostensibly the story of a U.S. bomb squadron In the Mediterranean during World War II and a bombardier named Yossarian who is driven crazy by the Germans, who keep shooting at him when he drops bombs on them, and by his American superiors, who seem less concerned about winning the war than they are about parades, loyalty oaths and getting promoted.

Yossarian is so crazy that he should be excused from combat but, alas, there’s a catch, Catch-22: You can’t be excused unless you ask to be excused, and anybody who asks to get out of combat is obviously sane and therefore ineligible to be excused.

“That’s some catch, that Catch-22,” Yossarian said.

“It’s the best there is,” said his buddy Doc Daneeka.

They were right.  The term entered common language and earned a place in the dictionary.  I read Heller the official definition from Webster’s: “a paradox in a law, regulation or practice that makes one a victim of its provisions no matter what one does.”

“That’s a better definition than I could give,” he said, smiling.

“Catch-22” begat several of its own Catch-22s.  When it was published in 1961, critics complained that it was plotless, repetitive and incomprehensible.  When the rest of his novels appeared, critics complained that he had again failed to write a book as good as “Catch-22.”  Heller always had an answer for that “Who has?”

In 1998, a letter printed in the London Sunday Times kicked up a brief literary controversy by suggesting that many of the scenes in “Catch-22” were similar to scenes in an earlier war novel.  The Sky Is a Lonely Place,” by Louis Falstein.  The insinuation was absurd.  It wasn’t the depiction of life in a bomber squadron that made Heller’s novel a classic; it was its grand comic vision of the absurdity of modem life.

Heller said he’d never read Falstein’s novel.  “I find it funny,” he added, “that nobody else noticed any similarities, including Falstein himself.”

Heller never spent much time in Washington, but his writing revealed that he understood the culture of the federal city as well as any reporter.  In “Closing Time,” his 1994 sequel to “Catch-22,” he captured the life of a hotshot K Street lawyer in the fictitious firm of Atwater, Fitzwater, Dishwater, Brown, Jordan, Quack and Capone: “He served often on governmental commissions to exonerate and as coauthor of reports to vindicate.”  That novel also provided the most accurate extant definition of the Freedom of Information Act: “a federal regulation obliging government agencies to release all information they had to anyone who made application for it except information they had that they did not want to release.”

Life had a way of tarring Heller’s most outrageous satire into banal realities.  In I979”s “Good as Gold,” he invented a president who spent his first year in office writing a book about his first year in office.  This seemed far-fetched until New York Mayor Ed Koch and Minnesota Gov. Jesse Ventura spent their time m office writing books.  In “Catch-22,” Milo Minderbinder, the wheeler-dealer supply officer, actually contracts with his enemies to bomb his own squadron.  Critics considered this ridiculous until Oliver North, a Marine working for the United States government sold missiles to the same Iranian government that had earlier supported the terrorists who bombed a Marine barracks in Lebanon.

Joe Heller is dead but “Catch-22” will live forever.  He would have preferred the opposite, but what can you do?  Death is the ultimate Catch-22.

________________________________________

Too easy to catch Heller out?

Initially published in 1961 to mixed reviews,
Catch-22 might well have met the fate of most novels which,
regardless of literary merit, soon go out of print and disappear.
But Heller’s book generated popularity and sales by word-of-mouth,
eventually tapped into the anti-Vietnam war Zeitgeist of the ‘60s,
and now occupies a secure place in the contemporary canon.
It has sold more than 10 million copies in the US and has, from the start,
been popular in the UK where even its satirical anti-establishment tone
didn’t prevent the Financial Times from declaring:
“No one has ever written a book like this.”
As a critical assessment, however, claims concerning Catch-22’s originality have
always smacked of amnesia or ignorance.
And-war novels,
plenty of them coruscatingly funny and witheringly iconoclastic,
have appeared in every language,
and Heller himself has acknowledged his debt to
Evelyn Waugh
Celine’s Journey to the End of the Night
and Dalton Trumbo’s And Johnny Got His Gun.

Mike Mewshaw
The Jerusalem Post
December 31, 1999

Joseph Heller’s death at the age of 76 earlier this month naturally refocused attention on his literary legacy, especially his first novel, Catch-22.  Hailed as “wildly original,” “fantastically unique,” and one of the finest works of American fiction this century, Catch-22 quickly became more than a literary title.  The phrase entered the modern lexicon as the hallmark of paradox, existential absurdity and black humor.  As a comic exploration of logical lunacy on a cosmic scale, the novel presented its protagonist, Yossarian, as an Everyman trapped by a nightmarish “catch” or legal loophole.  While officially a World War II airman who went insane could be grounded for medical reasons, anyone who asked to be scratched from bombing missions was automatically considered sane and forced to keep flying.

Initially published in 1961 to mixed reviews, Catch-22 might well have met the fate of most novels which, regardless of literary merit, soon go out of print and disappear.  But Heller’s book generated popularity and sales by word-of-mouth, eventually tapped into the anti-Vietnam war Zeitgeist of the ‘60s, and now occupies a secure place in the contemporary canon.  It has sold more than 10 million copies in the US and has, from the start, been popular in the UK where even its satirical anti-establishment tone didn’t prevent the Financial Times from declaring: “No one has ever written a book like this.”  As a critical assessment, however, claims concerning Catch-22’s originality have always smacked of amnesia or ignorance.  And-war novels, plenty of them corruscatingly funny and witheringly iconoclastic, have appeared in every language, and Heller himself has acknowledged his debt to Evelyn Waugh, Celine’s Journey to the End of the Night and Dalton Trumbo’s And Johnny Got His Gun.

Then almost two years ago a British bibliophile wrote to the London Sunday Times: “Can anyone out there account for the amazing similarity of characters, personality traits, eccentricities, physical descriptions, personnel injuries and incidents in Catch-22 and a novel by Louis Falstein, The Sky Is a Lonely Place [published a decade earlier]?”  In a subsequent article, the Times noted a passage in both books that describes a bedridden, badly injured pilot.  In Falstein’s book, the pilot lies “in a white cast.  He looked entombed … like an Egyptian mummy.  His arms were broken, and where his legs had been, there were cotton-swathed stumps.  Only his face showed out of the cast, and there were openings at the bottom for bodily functions…  An orderly, or nurse, held a cigarette for him when he smoked.”  In Heller’s novel.  “The soldier in white was encased from head to toe in plaster and gauze…  A silent zinc pipe rose from the cement on his groin and was coupled to a slim rubber hose that carried waste from his kidneys.”  Twice a day a nurse inserts a thermometer into the mouth of this “stuffed and sterilized mummy.”

Apparently dumbstruck by the correspondences, the Times attributed the Falstein passage to Heller, and vice versa.  It did, however, provide accurate biographical information about the deceased and long forgotten Falstein who, it turns out, came from the same background as Heller.  Both were sons of Russian Jewish emigre parents, came from the same borough of New York, Brooklyn, and served in Italy as airmen in American bomber squadrons.  Duff Hart-Davis, son of Rupert Hart-Davis who published Falstein in England, speculated that Falstein and Heller were the same person, and The Sky Is a Lonely Place was “a practice run for Catch-22.”

Heller dismissed this as ridiculous and denied having heard of Louis Falstein or having read his work.  “The similarities,” he explained to the Tunes, “come from a common wartime experience.”  But then Heller turned around and questioned whether Falstein truly experienced what he wrote about.  “Born in 1909, he would have been too old to fly [in WWII].  I don’t know what he was up to.  There were a lot of strange people around.”

Days later, in an interview with the Washington Post, Heller insisted, “Given the amount of invention in Catch-22 it would be an amazing coincidence if there were fundamental similarities with Falstein’s novel.”

There the matter rested.  No one appears to have read the two books closely and analyzed the comparisons.  But in fact, whether through “amazing coincidence” or “common wartime experience,” there are indeed fundamental similarities between Catch-22 and The Sky Is a Lonely Place.  While they don’t rise to the level of plagiarism, they do suggest that Heller might have been aware of Falstein’s work and that his fellow Brooklynite was as influential as the internationally renowned authors Heller cited as his sources of inspiration.  Far from diminishing the achievement of Catch-22, this places it in its proper context as a distinctly American expression of New York Jewish sensibility, with an emphasis on manic exuberance, verbal pyrotechnics and slapstick comedy.

Falstein’s first person narrator, Ben “Pop” Isaacs, a gunner aboard a B-24, is Jewish, Heller’s central character, Yossarian, is an “Assyrian” crewman on a B-25.  While Isaacs is far more earnest and less flamboyant than Yossarian – essentially he’s realistic rather than surrealistic – he is just as determined not to die, just as eager to finish 50 missions and go home – or, alternatively, convince a doctor that he’s too ill and emotionally unstable to go back into the air again.  But just as Doc Daneeka bluntly tells Yossarian, “It’s not my business to save lives,” Doc Brown tells Isaacs, “My job is to keep the men in fighting shape, not on ground status.”

So weather and decrepit planes permitting, the two men continue to fly off to bomb unseen enemies for unknown reasons.  Like Isaacs, Yossarian doesn’t wear a single flak jacket to protect his chest.  He swaddles his whole body in flak jackets.  Whenever they’re not airborne and on the brink of death, the characters in both books pass their time drinking, complaining, fretting, crying, playing cards, playing cruel jokes, fighting, visiting brothels and meeting Italians who are either childlike or cunning, venal or full of old world wisdom.  Rain occasionally plays havoc with the flight schedule, keeping airmen safe on the ground, but this exposes them to the dangers of jaundice, hepatitis, deadly fevers and the fraying nerves of barracks mates who throw knives and fire off guns.

Focusing on the underbelly of war, Falstein, no less than Heller, populates his fictional world with bizarrely named characters.  Mel Ginn, Cosmo Fidanza, Chester Kowalski, Charles Couch, Billy Poat and Jack “Doolie” Dula might have been transformed by Heller into Colonel Cathcart, Colonel Korn, Major Major Major Major and Captain “Aarfy” Aardvark.  Falstein’s Master Sergeant Sawyer, like Heller’s Milo Minderbinder, skims off military supplies and foodstuffs to sell them on the black market, while at the same time hustling pornographic photographs.  Men in both books have pet cats that sleep on their faces and have to be peeled off each morning.  One of Falstein’s characters drives everybody crazy by tinkering with a broken radio, just as a Heller character puts Yossarian into a homicidal rage by disassembling and reassembling a stove.  On the first page, Ben Isaacs meets a “stringy young Texan” who never misses an opportunity to fulminate about “niggers.”  The title of Heller’s first chapter is “The Texan” and this character exhibits the same savage vocal racism.  In both books, a man shrieks every time a bomb drops from the plane, another deals cards in a snappy explosive fashion, and yet another paints a bomb on his flight jacket to mark each successful mission.  Everybody watches the red ribbon on the map that marks the advance of American troops and the bomb-line.  As the ribbon approaches Vienna, a Falstein character comes down with diarrhea that keeps him from flying.  When the ribbon in Catch-22 closes in on Bologna, an epidemic of diarrhea breaks out on the airbase.

In a sense, this best exemplifies the difference between The Sky Is a Lonely Place and Catch-22.  In every instance, Heller pushes things further.

Taking as its motto, Whatever is worth doing is worth doing to excess, his novel is three times longer, more ambitious and relendessly comic, but also more repetitive and, in its weaker sections, sophomoric.  Where Falstein heightens tension and sustains the narrative momentum in a conventional manner with crash landings, mid-air dogfights and fatal miscalculations, Heller raises the stakes and darkens the laughter in phantasmagorical scenes.  Yet it must be remarked that compared to almost any author except Heller, Falstein displays an unparalleled gift for grand guignol violence and subversive humor.  He describes military censors who delete words and reduce every letter, even the most banal love note, to gibberish (Heller does the same).  He writes of a sergeant who is broken “to the rank of private for being apprehended in a House of Prostitution…without his identification tags” – not unlike Heller’s Yossarian, who is arrested in a brothel for being off base without a pass.

In The Sky Is a Lonely Place, a Christmas party dissolves into a bacchanal of singing, screaming and sobbing, and ends with an outbreak of gunfire that the men mistake for an enemy attack.  “There were several more carbine pings, and somebody answered fire with a forty-five pistol.”  Late in Catch-22, there’s a Thanksgiving “celebration [that] lasted long into the night, and the stillness was fractured often by wild, exultant shouts and by cries of people who were merry or sick.  There was the recurring sound of retching and moaning, of laughter, greetings, threats and swearing, and of bottles shattering against rock.”  Heller ends his scene, too, in gunfire as Yossarian charges out of his tent with a forty-five.

Finally, for fans of the X-Files, on page 128 of the British edition of Falstein’s novel, a plane carrying 10 men crashes onto the runway, disappearing so completely medics “couldn’t even find dog tags.”  On the same page in the British paperback of Catch-22, a plane flies into a cloud, “disappearing … mysteriously into thin air with every member of the crew.”  Coincidence?  Or imitation as the sincerest form of flattery?

Granted, Heller had a point when he responded to questions about these similarities by observing that a great deal of war fiction depends on variations on the same themes and archetypes.  But a careful reader of both texts could be forgiven for concluding that even at the level of language and linguistic play Heller has written an oblique homage to Falstein.  Both authors chronicle the absurdity of existence, the capriciousness of authority and the emptiness of words leeched of meaning by constant abuse.  Like the chaplain in Catch-22 who is ordered to compose a funeral prayer that doesn’t mention God or death, the narrator in The Sky Is a Lonely Place learns an early lesson in “airwar language” when he is warned, “never use the word Killed … we say a guy Went Down.”

On every page, the books uncannily echo one another as scabrous jokes, racial epithets, sexual ribaldry and sheer hair-curling craziness pour out of people.  Again, Heller pushes it over the top, taking each trope to its limit.  But both authors achieve a kind of demotic poetry, as when Falstein writes, “Grazie, Nazi,” and another soldier replies, “Prego, dago.”  In Heller there’s rhyming dinner table dialogue, ‘Pass the salt, Walt/ Pass the bread, Fred/ Shoot me a beet, Pete.”

Of course, in a universe of pure contingency where chaos reigns and wars are won or lost by accident, not design, and soldiers survive or perish despite their courage or cowardice, it’s perhaps perfectly possible that two men, neighbors no less, would write hauntingly similar novels, would never meet or read one another and would then slip under the lid of the earth at the far ends of a spectrum that runs from utter obscurity to universal recognition.  Talk about Catch-22!

[One of the principal characters in The Thin Red Line, Captain “Bugger” Stein, a career infantry officer and company commander, in an event clearly motivated by antisemitism, is unfairly relieved of his command and sent back to the “Zone of the Interior”, his military career effectively ruined.  He vanishes from the story well prior to the novel’s end.  Throughout James Jones’ novel, in his depiction of Stein’s personality, character, and confrontation with antisemitism, the author displayed a remarkable degree of perception, if not empathy, with the Captain’s predicament.  How does this relate to Malick’s film?  Well, though I haven’t viewed it (and have no plans to do so), it’s my understanding that Stein’s identity as a Jew – not entirely central to, but nonetheless a critical part of the novel’s plot and intentionally so – was entirely eliminated from the film, something remarked upon in only a few 1998 reviews.  Just sayin’.]

Mentioned Above…

Falstein, Louis, Face of a Hero, Harcourt, Brace & Company, New York, N.Y., 1950

Falstein, Louis, Face of a Hero, Steerforth Press, South Royalton, Vt., 1999

Heller, Joseph, Catch-22, Dell Publishing, New York, N.Y., 1968

A Tale of a Tail Gunner: Louis Falstein and “Face of a Hero” – VIII: After The Hero: Later Books

Subsequent to Face of a Hero, Louis Falstein authored five additional books – all novels.  Listed here in order of publication, they are Slaughter Street (1953), Sole Survivor (1954), Spring of Desire (1959), Laughter on a Weekday (1965), and, The Man Who Loved Laughter (1968).  He was also the main author of a sixth book: The Martyrdom of Jewish Physicians in Poland (1964).  Only one of the novels – Sole Survivor – has any similarity to Face of a Hero, but that similarity is very slight. 

But first, a major caveat: Of these six works, I’ve only read The Man Who Loved Laughter.  So, my comments about the other four novels are based on intuition – I hope correct! – given their paperback format, cover art, and descriptive blurbs.   

Assuming that all these books came to the attention of the literary world, only Sole Survivor and The Martyrdom of Jewish Physicians in Poland ever received reviews, the former almost perfunctory.

______________________________

To start, the cover blurb of the 1953 Lion Books’ edition of Slaughter Street states, “Mr. Falstein takes you down the dark back alleys of Slaughter Street, leads you past the prowling criminals and city scum, shows you the bleeding heart of people engaged in the everyday battle with evil and lust,” while the line atop the cover of Spring of Desire, “She loved both the men she was married to,” suggests that the two books  – fast-paced, popular literature? – might be urban variations on themes of the socially marginal, violent, or damaged characters exemplified by the works of Flannery O’Connor.  Maybe there was something “to” Slaughter Street after all, for the book went through five printings.

Here are images of covers of Slaughter Street

This is Lion Books’ first edition from June, 1953, with cover art by Robert Maguire.  You can view the digitized novel at Hathi Trust, where, though it’s downloadable, it can only be downloaded on an individual page by individual page basis.  (Verily, “Aaaaargh!”)

Republished twice by Lion Books in 1957, this edition features cover art by Lou Marchetti:

With cover art by Victor Kalin, this edition was published by Pyramid in 1959.  This edition isn’t listed at Worldcat.

According to WorldCat, the book was also published in Sydney, Australia, in the 1950s.  Its last printing was by Hamilton, & Co., in 1961.  

______________________________

Sole Survivor – simply going by the book’s cover art and descriptive blurb – takes a very different turn.  The novel’s resonance with Face of a Hero lies in the persisting impact and legacy of the Second World War.  Protagonist Antek Prinz, a survivor of the Shoah living in postwar New York City, seeks justice against the former concentration camp guard who murdered his family, a theme that’s long been explored in other books, on television, and in the cinema.  An immediately obvious commonality (is it the only one?) between the two novels’ main characters – Sergeant Ben Isaacs, and Prinz – is that they are both Jews whose formative years have compelled them to seek, in however different the manner, a form of justice that is both personal and transcendent.  Published four years after Face of a Hero gained nationwide attention and positive reviews, Sole Survivor garnered a mere two-sentence review by Anthony Boucher (at the time, primary editor of The Magazine of Fantasy and Science Fiction) in the “Criminals at Large” section of The New York Times Book Review.

Criminals at Large

Anthony Boucher
The New York Times Book Review
October 10, 1954

A Polish-Jewish DP recognizes, in New York, a vicious Nazi prison-camp guard who has escaped war-crime prosecution; the Jew’s newly established American life must count for nothing as he sets out, partly for personal revenge, but chiefly to strike at the conscience of a world which has lightly and easily forgotten Buchenwald.  This is the theme of Louis Falstein’s SOLE SURVIVOR (Dell, 25 c) – a theme so powerful and so deeply felt that one can overlook awkwardness of style and construction.

Here’s Dell’s sole printing of Sole Survivor, with evocative cover art by John McDermott:

______________________________

Now we come to Monarch Books’ 1959 edition of Spring of Desire, illustrated by Jim Bentley.  The book was republished by World Distributors in 1960. 

______________________________

Laughter on a Weekday, published by I. Obolensky, appeared in 1965, I believe only in hardback.  To the best of my knowledge, the book takes a markedly different turn from Lou Falstein’s previous efforts, in presenting an upbeat, humorous view of the Americanization of a Jewish family with roots in Eastern Europe.   

______________________________

The Martyrdom of Jewish Physicians in Poland, of 1963, for which Lou Falstein was the main – not only – author, marked a complete turn from his previous books in terms of genre, purpose, and content.  By nature a work of non-fiction, the 500 page book is a work of history, and, a memorial album.  Not presently having access to it I don’t know if the book contains any statement as to how, and why, Louis Falstein became its main author.  Perhaps this was via his social and intellectual circle, in light of the awareness and sensitivity he displayed regarding the fate of East European Jewry in Face of a Hero, and, Sole Survivor

A pithy review of the book by Polish-American writer Antoni Gronowicz was published in book review section of The Militant – why not a mainstream Jewish publication? – in December of 1966.  

The book is presently (August, 2022) available through Mr. Bezos’ monopoly.  Its list of martyred Jewish physicians has been digitized, access to this information being available through JewishGen.  

REVIEWS and REPORTS

The Militant
December 26, 1966

THE MARTYRDOM OF JEWISH PHYSICIANS IN POLAND.  Studies by Dr. Leon Wulman and Dr. Joseph Tenenbaum.  Research and Documentation by Dr. Leopold Lazarowitz and Dr. Simon Malowist.  Edited by Louis Falstein.  Published by Medical Alliance-Association of Jewish Physicians From Poland by Exposition Press [1964, c1963].  Illustrated.  500 pp.  $10.00.

The history of Jewish physicians in Poland extends almost to the birth of the Polish state.  One of the first descriptions of life in that country (963-965) belongs to Dr. Ibrahim-Ibn-Jacob, special representative of the Calif of Cordoba, who stayed for some time in Poland treating nobility.  Years later, from Spain, Italy and Germany other Jewish physicians were arriving and settling in Warsaw, Cracow, Lwow, Wilno, Poznan and other cities.

This book, divided into three parts, give the reader an abundance of well-organized material on all aspects of the lives of Jewish doctors in towns and cities through the ages.  Part one entitled “A History of Jewish Physicians in Poland” is written by Dr. Leon Wulman and has three subdivisions: “From Earliest Times to World War II,” “Outstanding Jewish Physicians During the Nineteenth and Twentieth Centuries,” and “Jewish Medical Institutions and the Role of Jewish Physicians in Their Development”

Part two, “Nazi Role in Poland and the Jewish Medical Professions” written by Dr. Joseph Tenenbaum brings to full view the tragedy of the extermination of the Jewish population in that country together with the complete destruction of the medical profession and medical institutions.  It is difficult in a short review to describe Nazi cruelty, but the author who spent many years on the Investigation of Nazis in his native country, is probably the best equipped man to deal with such subjects as life in a ghetto, starvation, Nazi doctors experiments in freezing the human body, wound infections, transplant surgery and poison gas experiments.

The third and final part of this huge book is written and documented by Dr. Leopold Lazarowitz and Dr. Simon Malowist and gives 2,500 biographical sketches of Jewish physicians killed by the Nazis.

-Antoni Gronowicz

______________________________

The Man Who Loved Laughter – The Story of Sholom Aleichem, Louis Falstein’s last published book, was released by the Jewish Publication Society of America, in Philadelphia, in 1968.  For a writer whose fiction manifested a grim and dark urban realism, or, focused on issues of life, death, and the meaning of course, the book marks an abrupt turn in tone, style, and pace.  Let alone, subject matter.  The book’s cover and interior illustrations by  Adrienne Onderdonk Dudden.  

Having had little prior knowledge about Sholom Aleichem (except for the 2011 documentary Sholem Aleichem: Laughing in the Darkness), on reading the book I had the immediate impression that it was oriented towards an adolescent to young adult audience, albeit more in the sense of pace and writing style than content, which, for a book of its nature, is substantive.  Given that the book is completely absent of features typical of scholarly or academic works (footnotes, bibliographic references, and the like), perhaps Louis Falstein collected tales, anecdotes, and information from archives and newspapers, both contemporary and historical.  Then, by imagining and constructing dialogue, mood, and setting, he created a smoothly flowing, unified tale.

Well, I felt so.  I enjoyed the story, and through it, gained an appreciation for Sholom Aleichem, and his fiction.  

Mentioned Above…

Falstein, Louis, Face of a Hero, Harcourt, Brace & Company, New York, N.Y., 1950

Falstein, Louis, Face of a Hero, Steerforth Press, South Royalton, Vt., 1999

Falstein, Louis, The Man Who Loved Laughter – The Story of Sholom Aleichem, The Jewish Publication Society of America, Philadelphia, Pa., 5728 / 1968