On Hagiography
I was born for hagiography.
For the lives of saints. I
recognize that now. The mania that
possesses me for taking notes, for times and dates, and what is overheard. The unparalleled fondness of for hyperbole
and superlatives. What better task could
be found for a writer with first-rate determination and third-rate talent? The fact bears repeating: I was born for
hagiography.
It is a tremendous pity that history, in its collapse, has
deprived me of a saint. There is no
function I could better serve, than trailing after a saint, asking questions
and rarely understanding the answers, but writing absolutely everything down.
Hagiography, it seems to me, affords one of few
opportunities for blinkered people of limited intelligence to create written
works of real beauty and significance. A
beauty and significance which is not theirs, and does not belong to them, but
is available because they did not attempt
judge or interpret, but only took care to write absolutely everything down.
When I speak of great hagiography, I do not mean the
homogenized variety, which assigns, to each holy man or woman, one pious
father, one saintly mother, and one charming village to which their holiness
shone forth even as a toddler.
I speak of great hagiographies like The Gospel of Ramakrishna by “M” (the model of the genre), or Swami
Satchidananda’s Gosp el of Swami Ramdas,
or Suri Nagamma’s Letters from
Ramanasramam. These are works in
which the disciple was so awed by the saint that they did not presume to
condense or interpret, but simply wrote absolutely everything down, convinced
that every action or word of the saint must contain a sacred and important
message.
These books are invariably gigantic and published on Bible
paper with a cloth bookmark. It is to
the creation of such a tome that my life ought to have been devoted. A hagiographer without a saint is a sad bit
of business, forever taking notes to no purpose.
The great hagiographies are paradoxical in several ways. The first surprise is how lovely they are to
read, how engrossing it is to watch the saint go through his morning mail,
suffer from rheumatism, and discuss the local population of squirrels. Page after page, these books are full of
actual life, unlike the official
biographies that are written based upon them, into which what is important
is supposedly extracted, and which are invariably dull and lifeless.
Another paradox: these hagiographies often become integral
to the religious community which forms around a saint, particularly once the
saint has died. (Except saints do not
die. Saints drop the body, attain
mahasamadhi, or merge with Arunachala.
They never simply die.) However,
because these books present a full and unedited picture of the saint, they are
always threatening, to some degree, to the institution which forms around the
saint, and which wishes to present a picture of the saint which is unified,
simplified, and sanitized.
That is why you will NEVER find a full English version of The Gospel of Ramakrishna anywhere near
the Ramakrishna Mission. They’ve removed
the homosexual references, which they’ve decided we can’t handle. That is why it took nearly fifty years for
the publication a full and unified version of Suri Nagamma’s Letters.
(The Gospel of Swami Ramdas is
protected by remaining almost universally unread.)
I understand a little, but only a very little. Not very much. That is why I am forever taking notes to no
purpose. That is why I would make a
first-rate hagiographer, despite being a third-rate everything else.
If you know of other great hagiographies, could you please
share their titles? Sending me an actual
copy would be especially welcome, as they books are often privately printed and
difficult to find.
More importantly, if you by chance should happen to locate a
saint, please let me know immediately.
Perhaps I could throw together a resume.
1 comment:
You're anything but a third-rate talent. The writing on this blog is all I need to refute that particular claim.
Post a Comment