Arcturus

I don't think that I can overestimate my admiration for Evan Connell. After reading Mrs. Bridge, I was hooked; and, now, whenever I feel in need of prose that shows an attention to detail that is rare, I turn to a passage of Deus Lo Volt, Mrs. Bridge, The Alychmic Journals, or one of his short stories. Recently, I reread "Arcturus," the first story in The Collected Stories of Evan Connell. I won't ruin the story by summarizing the plot, but I do think it important to address one of the elements that seem characteristic of Connell: the cold, emotionally phlegmatic characterization of Muhlbach, the main character (Mulhbach is a recurrent character in Connell, hence the characteristic nature of his character).

This is a point that is often criticized. I have given this story to friends many times, and, after anxiously awaiting their take on the story, I have been disappointed time and time again to encounter only an impassive appreciation for the story, punctuated by an absolute dislike for Mulhbach the prig.

Now, this is tricky. How can I put this without spoiling the story for those few readers that might feel compelled to actually read "Arcturus" after finishing this post? I'll be careful. In light of the circumstances encountered by Muhlbach, the vicissitudes of life that in Muhlbach's case are not as jocose as that whimsical sounding word might suggest, how else could he possibly act? And now I come to that part of Connell (other than the absolute attention to language, words, sentences) that I find so endearing: his stories involve real life, and his characters are not outrageous and unlikely constructions of an imagination gone wild. Yes Muhlbach is cold and emotionally stunted, but would any of us react any differently? My point is that what is criticized in this story is one of the best aspects of it. We aren't required to like a character or his actions in order to appreciate the characters literary construction.