The Cosmological Eye

by Henry Miller

This collection, first published by New Directions in 1939, contains a number of Henry Miller's most important shorter prose writings. They are taken from the Paris books Black Spring (1936) and Max and the White Phagocytes (1938) and were for the most part, written at about the satire time as Tropic of Capricorn ―the period of Miller’s and Durrell’s life in the famous Villa Seurat in Paris.

As is usual with Miller, these pieces cannot be tagged with the label of any given literary category. The unforgettable portrait of Max, the Paris drifter, and the probably-autobiographical Tailor Shop , are basically short stories, but even here the irrepressible vitality of Miller’s personality keeps breaking into the narrative. And in the critical and philosophical essays, the prose poems and surrealist fantasies, the travel sketches and scenarios, Miller’s passion for fiction, for telling the endless story of his extraordinary life, cannot be held down. Life, as no other modern author has lived it or can write it, bursts from these pages―the life of the mind and the body; of people, places and things; of ideas and the imagination.

Genres: Fiction, Essays, Literature, 20th Century, Short Stories, Philosophy, American

371 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1939

About the author

Henry Valentine Miller was an American novelist, short story writer and essayist. He broke with existing literary forms and developed a new type of semi-autobiographical novel that blended character study, social criticism, philosophical reflection, stream of consciousness, explicit language, sex, surrealist free association, and mysticism. His most characteristic works of this kind are Tropic of Cancer, Black Spring, Tropic of Capricorn, and the trilogy The Rosy Crucifixion, which are based on his experiences in New York City and Paris (all of which were banned in the United States until 1961). He also wrote travel memoirs and literary criticism, and painted watercolors.

Reviews

[Max Nemtsov · Rating 4 out of 5]

Сборник пламенной публицистики — чем пламенней она, тем лучше. Единственный недостаток — понадергано из разных мест. Но запальчивая риторик Хенри Миллера очень увлекает, и не могу сказать, что не разделяю его взгляда на многое даже теперь, спустя 80 лет. Он в своих текстах об Америке, в частности, — как дон Артуро с его «намерением оскорбить». Иногда Миллер — брюзга и зануда, но даже grumpy old man-ом он искренен, и это отнюдь не поза.

А вот небольшим открытием для меня стал здесь Миллер-кинозритель, -критик и -писатель. Он убежден, что все лучшее снято до 30-х годов, дальше было только хуже (за редкими исключениями, например — Бунюэль). Опять же, хорошо, что он не дожил до многих образцов кинематографа нынешнего времени, которым лучше бы и на свет не рождаться. А кинематографичность его зрения — от сюрреалистов и того же Бунюэля. После же — становится ясно, кому обязан своими текстами Барроуз (среди прочего).

Ну и очень любопытный текст про Д.Х. Лоренса, в котором речь идет только о Прусте и Джойсе. По нему, как раз, очень хорошо видно, насколько сам ХМ принадлежит XIX веку, насколько он традиционен и квадратен. Джойса он замеряет лекалами прошлого — и оттого не понимает, что Джойс весь про будущее, не видит, насколько Джойс опережает свое время (а речь идет о 30-х годах, когда Финнеганы еще не дописаны и называются «Работой в работе»). Это не глупость, как у многих критиков Джойса того времени, — это тотальное биологическое несхождение видов. Джойс, писавший общечеловеские романы (Улисс — для ХХ века, Финнеганов — для далекого будущего), не виден из прошлого, ни в деталях, ни в целом — его следует читать по прошествии времени, даже XXI век еще не вполне готов к Финнеганам. А тут какие-то традиционные ветхие замеры: Пруст-то им соответствует идеально, но Пруст не писал романов в ноосферу. Вот и Миллер, несмотря на всю свою «революционность», иконоборчество, подрыв викторианской этики и прочего (и несомненную свою честность в этом) попался в эту ловушку. Его оценка Джойса читается как хмыканье питекантропа с «айфоном» в руке.

Вообще тема общечеловеческих и вневременных писателей и их проверки временем вполне занимательна, но об этом как-нибудь в следующий раз.

[Gabriel Thy · Rating 5 out of 5]

Book of essays including the seminal "Open Letter To Surrealists Everywhere." Also features a few character sketches. Important Henry Miller writing at its best.

[Black Spring · Rating 5 out of 5]

i don't know what to say. i could probably pass the rest of my days interminably reading Miller. ok, maybe not, but my affinity for his thought (with one or two caveats) is on another level. Miller is one of the only writers of "literature" that i, a reader of mostly history and other non-fiction, have ever gotten into... and the meeting has been fateful. i've read excerpts of his stuff to ex-lovers to have them look up afterward and say only, "... you ARE Henry Miller." While I don't think that that's true, it probably gives you some idea.

Plenty of notable pieces in this collection, including "An Open Letter to Surrealists Everywhere," a wide-ranging meditation on a great many related topics, including the recurrent Miller motifs of Civilization, History, and Progress being bullshit glosses on the alienating and horrific processes of a nightmare world and its keepers. I'm hoping Enemy Combatant publications will reprint this piece in their "anti-civilization classics" series. "Glittering Pie," near the end of the collection, is some of the best shit talking on America and Americans that i have had the pleasure to read.

[Ivo Spigel · Rating 5 out of 5]

Miller at his best. A collection of fascinating works.

[Nicholas DeMasi · Rating 4 out of 5]

Might give this a 5 someday, we'll see. First Miller I've ever read and I was floored, picked this up at his library in Big Sur last summer while on a roadtrip with Sylvia. Was vaguely aware of him through my readings of Kerouac who I knew was a fan but that was about it. I like Kerouac but this is something else entirely, Miller writes with the same vital force as Jack but without all of the mania, he stands tall and powerful as a paragon of what can be achieved when you let your blood run warm and hot through your veins and spill it on the page as you like.

[Paul · Rating 5 out of 5]

In a Cosmological Eye Miller’s broad intellectual scope is on full display. I appreciated his genre hopping. The diverse subjects & styles to which he turns his “transparent eye,” to quote Emerson, reflects the abundance & diversity of the world the writer experienced. He displays a superb skill set of linguistic mastery. His embrace of Surrealism gives the stories the fullness of their breath. In this way, the dream-like states are necessary. The bluntness of his Realism is refreshing. Life is a sobering tool which does not withhold any coarse elements. The writer is a reflection of this. Blunt thoughts seem to rid themselves of any pretentious coating while confirming to his concise eloquence. He presents no wasted word. His cinematic & literary critiques were my personal favorite. Miller divulges secrets-- secrets obtained only by the lifestyle of exposure to the harsher paths of this earth. Miller listens carefully. Observes as a skilled voyeur. Speaks with the bluntness of nature or reality. He refuses to hide. Miller embraces an amoral honesty but not without shrewd intellectual commentary. He is poetic. He is prosaic. He is rhythmic. He syncopates within the rhythms of rejects. Indeed the drummer to his own beat. A beat he is not shy about throttling you with. These things are an inevitability in Miller's gigantic world of confusion & illusion. A few stories took a while to develop but once they did, the experience became too delicious to tear away. Overall, I found this to be a brilliant piece of art. An overlooked one it might seem. Because I feel it has sorely received a below average score, I will give it a 5 star review just to balance out what is an amazing work. In reality it may deserve a 4.7.

[Bookaholic]

În “Ochiul cosmologic” – carte apărută vara aceasta la Polirom – Henry Miller scrie cu o sinceritate violentă despre lucruri care-l incită: de la filme controversate precum “L’Âge d’Or”, al lui Luis Buñuel și Salvador Dalí sau “Extase”, al lui Gustav Machatý și până la “Hamlet”-ul lui Shakespeare, podul Brooklyn, suprarealism, New York. O face permanent în comparație cu lucruri care îl scandalizează, contrast care ghidează cititorul prin aparentul labirint de fraze și idei ce alcătuiesc cartea și care pune mai bine în lumină argumentele scriitorului pentru un lucru sau altul.

Așa cum sugerează și titlul și cum explică și Miller în textul introductiv, “ Pace! E minunat!”, toată cartea stă sub semnul unui limbaj cosmologic, “singurul mod de gândire posibil când ești cu adevărat viu”. Iar ca să fii viu înseamnă, pentru Miller, să trăiești tot mai intens, într-un mod creativ, mereu deasupra vremurilor, să te hrănești din interior, ca orice astru, să suferi transformări radicale care să-ți permită să vezi “timpul în curgere continuă și minunată, fără început și fără sfârșit”, să asculți doar de “conștiința sângelui”; teorie susținută de unul din scriitorii săi preferați, D.H. Lawrence, pe care-l venerează pentru creativitatea lui, conform căreia există un ritm al trupului, un ritm al sângelui ce “ridică hegemonia instinctelor la prestigiul și gloria de odinioară”. (cronică: http://bookaholic.ro/cum-sa-fii-un-om...)

[Brendan · Rating 5 out of 5]

This collection of shorter, stand alone pieces is prime Miller, full of piss and vinegar and indubitably alive.

[Jack Bordignon · Rating 5 out of 5]

"I haven't the slightest fear about the future, because I have learned how to live in the present."

A hundred years ago Miller was writing about his hate for America due to all the reasons I hate them today. He writes about the Paris beggar Max who latches onto him, who he can honestly admit he "doesn't care if he lives or dies" but helps him out, (This being much more supreme to saying you care for them but never budging an inch.) He writes of the artful nature of the diary, of his favourite films of the time, of the most impactful works of literature, he digs into everything with his still bloodied blade. It doesn't matter what the man writes of, what matters is how human he is in telling it. His entire collection of writing just a cornucopia of human trivialities boiled down into art in its finest form. He was a master of the written word, not because of his intellectualism, though he had it, not because of his vocabulary, though it shined, and not even because of his wit, though it defined him, he was a master for the same reason he was anything, because he always knew it was true.

[Preetam Chatterjee · Rating 4 out of 5]

This expository book presents Miller as a critic. In this tome he appreciates the mystic perception akin to insanity that produces visionary paintings. He makes an excellent critique of the visual arts. He has the years of appreciation and understanding of the media and the taste. All these add up to make this an outstanding tome.

[Elizabeth · Rating 5 out of 5]

Great selection of essays and short stories from Miller. "Max" is hilarious and "An Open Letter To Surrealists Everywhere" should be read by each human. Highly recommended.

[gothictrade · Rating 4 out of 5]

My favourite was "An Open Letter to Surrealists Everywhere "

[Luis · Rating 5 out of 5]

my second favorite of his.............