Legend of the Holy Drinker [Englisch] [Taschenbuch]

People get used to miracles if they experience 2 or 3 in a row. Miracles will be expected as a norm. And so it goes for Andreas Kartak, an illegal immigrant in Paris, 1934, from Poland. He came as a coal miner, ran into trouble, did jail time. Now his papers have expired, he lives under the bridges, drinks. A stranger gives him 200 Francs and asks him to repay, if he can, to Sainte Therese at a specified church. Andreas is an honorable bum and tries his best, running from miracle to miracle until he miraculously drops dead in the saint's church with the right amount of money for her.

This was Joseph Roth's last piece of writing and what a miracle job it is. I apologize for disclosing the conclusion, but in a 40 pages text, suspense can hardly be the motive for reading.

... the Medieval 'Lives of the Saints.' This 40-page story, not even long enough to be called a novella, was Joseph Roth's last work, written in his last unhealthy and despairing year of life. Roth died in exile and anomy, in Paris in 1939, at the age of 44. Translator Michael Hoffman declares that the alcoholic and prematurely decrepit Roth worked on this story with unusual care and deliberation, polishing it painstakingly in a manner he'd seldom had time for during his journalistic career. It is indeed a diamantine piece of writing-craft. Though it has the surface simplicity of a hagiography, its depths are anything but naive. Some readers may find it reminiscent of Leo Tolstoy's late tales of sanctity, but Roth's concept of Holiness is far subtler, and thus more interesting than Tolstoy's.

The Drinker of the title is a 'clochard', a derelict who sleeps under the bridges of the Seine. One night, chance encounters begin to attend him, money comes his way, not any fortune but enough to get him fed and clothed and rested... and drunk more often and more utterly than his routine of poverty had allowed. In his damaged consciousness, the encounters are 'miraculous' and require him to confront his conscience, to redress his own worthlessness. In the end, he dies in a state of delirious sanctity, convinced that a little girl he encountered in a bar is Saint Therese. Whether the author, Roth, supposed that we the readers would unquestioningly accept the Drinker's epiphany as real ... ah well, the the elusive genius of this story. Did Roth himself die in a state of blissful religious certainty? Ah well, I rather think he hoped to die as well as his drunkard; whether he did or not, he concluded his writing career with a miracle.

[The same translation is available in another edition, together with Roth's "Left and Right" -- a better buy.]

"The Legend of the Holy Drinker" is a translated title of Joseph Roth's last piece of writing. How accurate is this translation? Keenly so, barely? This is just one of so many questions I have about this little (40 pages) book, yet here I am, attempting to write a review--blindly, metaphorically speaking-- of the last written work of what I now know as a significant writer of the twentieth century.

First, why choose the last writing of a significant writer? As a 30-year veteran of the classroom--and an English teacher at that, I tried to teach that a piece of literature does not come from a vacuum--that it has context. It helps the reader to be acquainted with that context--writer's life, times, and circumstances, historical era and its influences politically, philosophically, economically, and so on--if he/she plans to critique accurately. I don't know the context of "The Holy Drinker," except that Roth died the same year he wrote this--at age 44. Just as the main character, Roth drank himself to death. So that's all the context I have.

In addition to context, two other ways of approaching a work of literature (but certainly not the only methods) are work as a thing in itself and reader response, the second relying on the reader's personal reaction to the work regardless of any context.

What I bring to this review is an extensive prior knowledge pool built from both formal education and extensive reading on my own. Add to that basis a vivid imagination. I am approaching Holy Drinker as a thing in itself. So? Let's see how accurate my interpretation of meaning is--keenly so, barely?

1. Title--legend: a historically-based, psychologically-informed story of a person who represents the culture from which he comes. Legends can hold miracles only if the miracles are actually possible. (Definition is paraphrased from Wikipedia.)

Holy drinker--now there's quite an oxymoron!

While a title can provide clues to meaning, I surely will wait until the end of the review to make my comments.

2. Andreas is the title character who has been living under bridges for some time, lost in the world of drink and dissipation. In fact, when he sees his reflection in a mirror, he is shocked. He looks awful! He decides to get a shave before he has breakfast in this nice restaurant.

3. Where does he get his money? It's a miracle, albeit one of those believable ones. An elderly, apparently wealthy man gives him 200 francs after approaching Andreas in the area of the bridges where both sleep. The older gentleman has become a Christian and vowed a life of poverty--thus is giving away his money--a bit at a time. He asks only one favor in return. Because the Saint Therese of Lisieux is the catalyst for his conversion, he wants Andreas to return his money to the priest of the little church where the statue of Therese stands. So far this part of the story is believable--far-fetched, yes, but believable.

4. A number of "miraculous" things occur during the story, each more unbelievable, yet definitely possible. One is a chance (remember there is a controller in this story and it is the author) meeting with Caroline, his former girlfriend who led him to ruin.

5. Ruin. Thus we get to the crux of the story. Dissipation, dissolution, ruin. <Dissolution: 1 : the act or process of dissolving: as a : separation into component parts b (1) : decay, disintegration (2) : death c : termination or destruction by breaking down, disrupting, or dispersing>

Some would say Andreas caused his own ruin--life as a homeless man sleeping under bridges--because of alcoholism.

6. Addiction: <An addiction is a persistent behavioral pattern marked by physical and/or psychological dependency that causes significant disruption and negatively impacts the quality of life of an organism>--from Wikipedia.

Bottom line: Without acknowledging or even knowing that he has an addiction, despite all these miracles that come to him that could help change his life for the better, Andreas cannot act positively. He has an addiction, but one that the author does not acknowledge at any time in the story. Not once. Context: Roth was an alcoholic. Nay, he was a drinker. The term "alcoholic" is not introduced in the story. Without admitting to having a problem, a person cannot change it.

7. Title: Holy Drinker. Andreas is given the opportunity to repay the saint Therese of Lisieux. He promises but something always happens to prevent the repayment until the very end when payment--of sorts--is finally made. Holy Drinker.

8. Blame. There is none. My sister introduced an expression, now frequently spoken in my family: It is what it is. That seems to be Roth's take on drinking. It is what it is and nothing more.

As for my review, is it keenly accurate or barely? It is what it is.