FIRiriG Line Guest: Jorge Luis Borges, author

Subject: "BORGES: SOUTH AMERICA'S TITAN"

SOUTHERN E D U C A T I O N A L C O M M U N I C A T I O N S A S S O C I A T I O N

The F I R I N G L I N E television series is a p roduct ion of the Southern Educat ional C o m m u n i c a t i o n s Assoc ia t ion, 9 2 8 W o o d r o w St. , P.O. B o x 5966, Co lumb ia , S.C., 29250 and is transmitted through the facilities of the Publ ic Broadcast ing Service. Product ion of these programs is made possible through a grant f rom the Corporat ion for Publ ic Broadcasting. F I R I N G L I N E can be seen and heard each week through publ ic television and radio stations throughout the country. Check your local newspapers for channel and time in your area.

© Board Of

SECA PRESENTS

FIRinG Line

HOST: WILLIAM F. BUCKLEY, JR.

Guest: Jorge Luis Borges, author

Subject: "BORGES: SOUTH AMERICA'S TITAN"

FIRING LINE is produced and directed by WARREN STEIBEL

This is a transcript of the FIRING LINE program taped in Buenos Aires, Argentina, on February 1 , 1977, and or ig ina l ly telecast on PBS on February 18, 1977.

S O U T H E R N E D U C A T I O N A L C O M M U N I C A T I O N S A S S O C I A T I O N

© 1977 SOUTHERN EDUCATIONAL COMMUNICATIONS ASSOCIATION

MR. BUCKLEY: About h imse l f he s a id recent l y , "As fo r a message, w e l l , I have no message." MR. BORGES: Tha t ' s r i g h t . There ' s no message whatever. MR. BUCKLEY: "Some th ing s simply occur to me and I wr i te them down with no aim to hurt anyone or to convert anyone. This i s a l l I can say. I make t h i s pub­l i c confess ion of my poverty before everybody. Be s i de s , had I not done s o , you would have known i t was t r u e . "

About him others have wr i t ten that he i s the g reates t l i v i n g wr i t e r . S t i l l o the r s , that he has inf luenced the l i t e r a t u r e o f the world more than anyone a l i v e . Jorge Lu i s Borges l i v e s here in Buenos A i r e s , although he has t raveled ex ten s i ve l y , e s p e c i a l l y in the United S ta te s , and taught most recent ly at Harvard fo r a year . He i s b l i n d , s i n ce the l a te f i f t i e s . He does not mind i t , he s a y s , "because now he can l i v e h i s dreams with l e s s d i s t r a c t i o n . " He took ea r l y to h i s c r a f t , t r a n s l a t i n g i n to Spanish from the Eng l i sh Oscar W i l de ' s The Happy Prince when he was s i x years o l d . The t r a n s l a t i o n , thought to have been the work o f h i s f a the r , was used as a school text . He began to pub l i sh in the twenties--poems, e s s a y s , shor t works of f i c t i o n . In the l a te Th i r t i e s he go t - h i s f i r s t job as a menial a s s i s t a n t in a l i b r a r y , but even t h i s he l o s t fo r the offense of having s igned a dec la rat ion in oppos i t ion to General Peron in 1946. When Peron was ous ted, Mr. Borges was made d i r e c t o r o f the National L i b r a r y , h i s l i t e r a r y work cont inu ing at an ext raord inary rate and inc lud ing now t r a n s l a t i o n s i n to Spanish o f major American w r i t e r s . He took to l ec tu r i ng w ide l y , acquaint ing many Americans with h i s w r i t i n g s and with h imse l f . Con­cerning h i s work, h i s c r i t i c s d i sagree except on the p ropos i t i on that i t w i l l s u r v i ve the century. Mr. Borges i s s u b s t a n t i a l l y but not e n t i r e l y a p o l i t i c a l . S ince Argent ina i s having i t s problems, I thought to begin by a s k i ng : I s there anyth ing , Mr. Borges , d i s t i n c t i v e l y Argent in ian about those problems? MR. BORGES: We l l , I wonder. I know very l i t t l e about p o l i t i c s , but I th ink we have the r i g h t government now, a government of gentlemen, not of hoodlums. I d on ' t th ink we ' re r ipe fo r democracy as yet--maybe in a hundred years or so . But now I th ink we have the r i g h t government. I th ink that the government means w e l l , and the government i s a c t i n g , and as I s a i d , we are governed by gentlemen and not by the scum of the ea r th , as happened, w e l l , but a short time ago. MR. BUCKLEY: When you say that i t might be a hundred years be fo re - -MR. BORGES: We l l , or l e t ' s say 500, no? I f the world l a s t s . MR. BUCKLEY: A f te r our time? MR. BORGES: Yes. MR. BUCKLEY: Why i s that ? I s i t something d i s t i n c t i v e to A rgen t i n i an s ? D i s ­t i n c t i v e to the hemisphere? D i s t i n c t i v e to what? MR. BORGES: I c a n ' t t e l l you , s i nce I know my own country and am very puzzled by my country. I wish I understood my country. I can only love i t . I can do what I can f o r i t . But I don ' t pretend to understand i t . I 'm no h i s t o r i a n . MR. BUCKLEY: We l l , when you say that you don ' t understand i t , do you mean that you are con t i nua l l y s u rp r i s ed by what happens? MR. BORGES: Yes, I am con t i nua l l y s u r p r i s e d , but I t r y to l i v e in my own p r i ­vate, sec luded- - in my own p r i v a t e , l i t e r a r y wor ld. MR. BUCKLEY: We l l , do you recognize an ob l i g a t i on o f the man of l e t t e r s to invo lve h imsel f in p o l i t i c s to the extent of say ing no to the barbar ians ? MR. BORGES: Yes. To that extent I do. Not more than that . I th ink that i f I do my l i t e r a r y work hones t l y , then in a sense I am doing something f o r my country. I can do nothing e l s e , being o l d , b l i n d , and l one l y . I can t r y to do my work as be s t , as well as I can. Tha t ' s a l l I can do. I could never i n ­volve myself i n p o l i t i c s . I could never al low myself to be br ibed. I haven ' t even t r i ed to be famous, though I have become qu i te famous. But I have done nothing whatever t o , i n that sense. I ' v e merely kept on w r i t i n g , never th ink ­ing o f t ha t , o f the p u b l i c , or o f the readers. I wr i te to please myself. I mean, i f I were Robinson Crusoe on a desert i s l a n d I would go on w r i t i n g , and

I suppose I would wr i te more or l e s s the same kind of s t u f f I 'm turn ing out now. MR. BUCKLEY: We l l , you were c r i t i c i z e d to be sure in a l e f t journal in America f o r , f o r i n s tance , advocating the execution of Regis Debray in B o l i v i a , i s that cor rect ? MR. BORGES: Yes , t h i s was co r rec t . But a f te r a l l , I th ink execut ion , I th ink that cap i ta l punishment i s k inder than p r i s on . I 'm not aga in s t cap i ta l pun­ishment. I wou ldn ' t mind being executed, but I wou ldn ' t l i k e spending f i v e years in j a i l . A c t u a l l y , I wou ldn ' t mind being executed. In f a c t , I th ink I would welcome i t , s i nce I 'm rather t i r ed of l i f e , s ince l i f e has few pleasures l e f t to me. MR. BUCKLEY: We l l , i f you i n s i s t on being executed, l e t me know, and I ' l l sug ­gest a provocat ion, MR. BORGES: You are th i nk i ng o f the genera l ? But why not? Maybe you are r i g h t . He wasn ' t being sentimental about h imse l f or f ee l i n g so r ry fo r h imse l f , or abounding, as K i p l i n g had i t , in a l o t of s e l f - p i t y . I don ' t th ink a man should abound in a l o t o f s e l f - p i t y . They say I have t r i e d my best not to de so. MR. BUCKLEY: Wel l , do you f i nd t h i s cha l lenge, t h i s i n c l i n a t i o n to s e l f - p i t y , a c h a r a c t e r i s t i c o f the age? MR. BORGES: I wonder what i s c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of the age. I know very l i t t l e about the age. But maybe i t i s rather common here, in t h i s country. . People go in f o r being s o r r y fo r themselves, which i s a p i t y , I th ink . Of cour se , i f you go in f o r being s o r r y f o r y o u r s e l f , then you keep on being sadder and s a d ­der, no? MR. BUCKLEY: You mean because t h e r e ' s so much to be so r ry f o r ? MR. BORGES: Oh ye s . Sometimes walking down the s t r ee t I sometimes feel un­accountably happy, and then I welcome that happiness because I d on ' t know where that happiness comes from, but s t i l l i t should be welcomed. I th ink happiness should always be welcomed. MR. BUCKLEY: I s i t a happiness that comes as a r e s u l t of the s a t i s f a c t i o n you take in your work? MR. BORGES: No, pe r sona l l y I d i s l i k e my work. I p re fer the work of any other wr i te r . I th ink that every time I have not been g iven the Nobel P r i z e , I th ink that the Swedish Academy has acted j u s t l y . I don ' t deserve that p r i z e . When I t h i n k — MR. BUCKLEY: We l l , you c e r t a i n l y don ' t deserve to be put in the same c l a s s with Quasimodo. MR. BORGES: But I don ' t deserve to be put in the same c l a s s as K i p l i n g or Faulkner or Bernard Shaw. MR. BUCKLEY: We l l , they c a n ' t miss a l l the time. MR. BORGES: No. MR. BUCKLEY: Do you mean you have o f f i c i a l l y abandoned any in tent ion o f r e ­ce i v ing the Nobel P r i ze ? MR. BORGES: No. I th ink i t i s a k ind of game that i s played every year. You know, every year I am to be given the Nobel P r i ze and then i t turns out to be next year . I t ' s a kind of hab i t I have, or a k ind o f habit the Scandinavians have. In f a c t , i t might be ca l l ed an o ld Norse t r a d i t i o n , you know, not to g i ve me the Nobel P r i ze . Tha t ' s a part o f Norse mythology. I 'm very fond of Norse, a l l th ings Scandinav ian. I love a l l t h ing s Scand inav ian. MR. BUCKLEY: I s i t your point that you would lo se respect in the Nobel Com­mittee i f they awarded you the p r i z e ? MR. BORGES: I would th ink i t was a very generous mis take, but I w i l l accept i t g r eed i l y . MR. BUCKLEY: What are you at work on now, Mr. Borges? MR. BORGES: Wel l , p r e c i s e l y , I am working on a book with a f r i end of mine, Mario Corama, on Sno r r i S t u r l u s o n , the I ce land i c h i s t o r i a n , and then I 'm a l s o wr i t i n g a book of poems to be publ i shed by Emece in Buenos A i r e s , and then a

book of shor t s t o r i e s to be publ i shed by Emece in Buenos A i r e s . And I 'm w r i t i n g o f f and oh a l l the time s ince I have nothing e l se to do. I l i v e by myself. MR. BUCKLEY: You say that you d i s l i k e your work. Do you a l s o d i s l i k e working? MR. BORGES: No, I enjoy working but I don ' t l i k e the work. As Car l y le s a i d , " A l l work i s contemptible, but that doing that work i s not contemptible. " I t may be the only j u s t i f i c a t i o n fo r a man. And I th ink he was r i g h t . Because a f te r a l l , when I am working I am f u l f i l l i n g my des t i ny . What e l se can I do but work? What e l se can a b l i nd man do but work? As to the r e su l t of the work, I leave that to o t he r s , and I never reread what I have w r i t t e n , except when I have to cor rect the proof sheets . But I enjoy work ing, and not only work ing, but I enjoy planning my work, perhaps more than the actual w r i t i n g , or the raw d i c t a t i n g of i t , s ince w r i t i n g , of course, has been forbidden to me. MR. BUCKLEY: You have been compared to both M i l t on and Homer. MR. BORGES: We l l , y e s , i n the sense o f being b l i n d , y e s . MR. BUCKLEY: Yes , but in other senses too , you ' ve been compared to them. I know that you make i t a p ract i ce not to read anything about y o u r s e l f . MR. BORGES: No, I ' v e on ly read one book, a book publ i shed by a B o l i v i a n - - h i s name was Tamayo, and an Argentine w r i t e r , Ru i z -D iaz . T h a t ' s the only book I ' v e read about me, and they t e l l me there are some 300 books that have been wr i t ten about me. But I th ink the wr i te r s should choose a better subject . MR. BUCKLEY: We l l , i n that case I 'm in a po s i t i o n to i n s t r u c t you about your ­s e l f . MR. BORGES: I suppose you are. MR. BUCKLEY: You have been compared to both M i l t on and Homer in terms of a h i gh l y i l luminated in terna l v i s i o n . I s t h i s a cor rect judgment as f a r as y ou ' r e concerned? MR. BORGES: We l l , I do my best to th ink i t a correct judgment. At l e a s t I t r y to put up with b l i ndne s s . Of course, when you are b l i n d , time f lows in a d i f f e r en t way. I t f l ows , l e t ' s s a y , on an easy s lope. I have sometimes spent s l eep le s s n i g h t s — n i g h t before l a s t , f o r example—but I d i d n ' t r e a l l y feel e s ­p e c i a l l y unhappy about i t , because time was s l i d i n g down that—was f lowing down that easy s lope. MR. BUCKLEY: You mean you ' d have f e l t more unhappy i f you had been able to see? MR. BORGES: Oh y e s , of course I would. MR. BUCKLEY: Why? MR. BORGES: I c a n ' t very well exp la in i t . These are the thoughts o f yea r s . When I f i r s t went b l i n d , I mean fo r reading purposes, I f e l t very unhappy. But now I feel that being b l i nd i s , l e t ' s s a y , part o f my wor ld . I suppose that happens. One ' s heard about i t . When one i s i n j a i l , one th inks of being in j a i l as being a part o f one ' s wo r l d ; when one i s s i c k , a l s o . MR. BUCKLEY: How do you re f re sh y o u r s e l f as someone who i s b l i nd ? MR. BORGES: I 'm reading a l l the time. I 'm having books reread to me. I do very l i t t l e contemporary reading. But I 'm only going back to ce r ta in w r i t e r s , and among those wr i t e r s I would l i k e to mention an American w r i t e r . I would l i k e to mention Emerson. I th ink o f Emerson not only as a great prose w r i t e r — everybody knows t h a t — b u t a very f i ne i n te l l e c tua l poet, as the only i n t e l l e c ­tual poet who had any ideas . Emerson was brimming over with ideas . MR. BUCKLEY: We l l , you d id a great deal to s o r t of re introduce Americans to many American w r i t e r s , i nc lud ing Emerson, i s n ' t that co r rec t ? MR. BORGES: Yes , y e s . I ' v e done my best. Emerson and a l s o another wr i t e r I g rea t l y love. MR. BUCKLEY: Hawthorne? MR. BORGES: We l l , but i n Hawthorne— What I d i s l i k e about Hawthorne—he was always w r i t i n g f ab l e s . But in the case of Poe, w e l l , you get t a l e s , but there was no moral tagged on to them. But in the case of Hawthorne th ing s are always becoming le s sons or parab les . But I would th ink o f M e l v i l l e , one of the great

wr i te r s o f the wor ld , no? MR. BUCKLEY; How do you account for the f a i l u r e of M e l v i l l e to achieve any recogn i t ion dur ing h i s 1 i fe t ime- -any s i g n i f i c a n t recogn i t i on ? MR. BORGES: Because people thought o f him as w r i t i n g t rave l books. I have the 1911 ed i t i on o f the Encyclopedia Britannica. There ' s an a r t i c l e about M e l v i l l e , and they speak o f him much in the same way as they might speak about Captain Marryat , f o r example, or other w r i t e r s . He wrote many t rave l books; people thought o f him as w r i t i n g in that way, so they c ou l dn ' t see a l l that Moby Dick or the white whale meant. MR. BUCKLEY: What part d id you play in the red i scovery o f M e l v i l l e ? MR. BORGES: We l l , i n t h i s country I ' v e done what I c ou l d , I suppose. MR. BUCKLEY: Had i t a l ready been t ran s l a ted when you were a student? MR. BORGES: No, when I was a student i t hadn ' t been t r an s l a t ed . I t was t rans la ted a f terwards , and I t r an s l a ted a very f i ne s to r y of M e l v i l l e ' s ; you know i t of course, " B a r t l eby . " MR. BUCKLEY: Yes. You t rans la ted that f o r the f i r s t time? MR. BORGES: Yes , f o r the f i r s t time. Then I a l so th ink we did the f i r s t t r a n s ­l a t i on of Hawthorne's Wakefield, a very f i ne s to ry a f t e r the manner o f Kafka, or rather Kafka came a f t e r him, no? But Kafka enables us to read Hawthorne bet te r , which i s what a great wr i t e r does. In a sense he graces the f o r e ­runners. He makes people read them in a d i f f e ren t way. But maybe I s hou l dn ' t have read Hawthorne's Wakefield as well as I d i d , or as I should have done, had I not read Kafka before. I th ink t h a t ' s one o f the f unc t i o n s , one o f the g i f t s o f a great w r i t e r , i s to make people read in a d i f f e r en t way, go over the o ld texts in a d i f f e r en t f a s h i o n , so the past has been con t i nua l l y modif ied. MR. BUCKLEY: Yes. Well now, you say that you spend most of your time reading the o lder wr i t e r s now. I s i t because you re ject the new w r i t e r s , or because you choose to continue to be un fami l i a r with them? MR. BORGES: I am a f r a i d that I ' d f i nd the new wr i t e r s more or l e s s l i k e myself. MR. BUCKLEY: You won ' t . MR. BORGES: I suppose I w i l l . I suppose a l l contemporaries are more or l e s s a l i k e , no? S ince I d i s l i k e what I w r i t e , I prefer going back to the 19th , to the 18th century, and then, of course, a l s o going back to the Romans, s ince I have no Greek, but I had L a t i n . Of course, my Lat in i s very r u s t y , but s t i l l , as I once wrote, to have forgotten Lat in i s a l r eady , i s i n i t s e l f a g i f t . To have known Lat in and to have forgotten i t i s something that s t i c k s to you some­how. I have done most o f my reading in E n g l i s h . I read very l i t t l e i n Span i sh . I was educated p r a c t i c a l l y i n my f a t h e r ' s l i b r a r y , and that was compounded of Eng l i sh books. So that when I th ink o f the B i b l e , I th ink o f the King James B ib l e . When I th ink o f the Arabian Nights I th ink o f Lane ' s t r a n s l a t i o n or of Captain Bu r ton ' s t r a n s l a t i o n . When I th ink of course o f Pers ian l i t e r a t u r e , I th ink i n terms o f Browne's Literary History_ of Persia, and of course o f F i t z g e r a l d ' s . And f r a n k l y , I remember the f i r s t book I read on the h i s t o r y of South America was P r e s c o t t ' s The Conquest of Peru. MR. BUCKLEY: I s that r i g h t ? MR. BORGES: Yes, and then I f e l l back on Spanish w r i t e r s , but I have done most of my reading i n E n g l i s h . I f i nd Eng l i sh a f a r f i n e r language than Span i sh . MR. BUCKLEY: Why? MR. BORGES: There are many reasons. F i r s t l y , Eng l i s h i s both a Germanic and a Lat in language, those two r e g i s t e r s . For example, f o r any idea you take you have two words. Those words do not mean exact ly the same. For example, i f I say " r e g a l , " i t ' s not exact ly the same th ing as say ing " k i n g l y . " Or i f I say " f r a t e r n a l , " i t ' s not say ing the same as " b r o t h e r l y , " or "dark " and "obscure . " Those words are d i f f e r e n t . I t would make a l l the d i f f e r ence , speak ing, f o r example, o f the Holy S p i r i t — i t would make a l l the d i f fe rence in the world i n a poem i f I wrote about the Holy S p i r i t or I wrote " the Holy Ghost, " s i nce " gho s t " i s a f i n e , dark Saxon word, when " s p i r i t " i s a l i g h t La t i n word. And then there i s another reason. The reason i s that I th ink that

of a l l languages, Eng l i s h i s the most phys ica l o f a l l languages. You can, f o r example, say , "He loomed over . " You c a n ' t very well say that in Span i sh . MR. BUCKLEY: Asomo? MR. BORGES: No, t h e y ' r e not exact l y the same. And then, i n Eng l i s h you can do almost anything with verbs and p repo s i t i on s . For example, to " laugh o f f , " to "dream away." Those th i ng s c a n ' t be sa id i n Span i sh . To " l i v e down" something, to " l i v e up t o " something. You c a n ' t say those t h i n g s i n Span i sh . They c a n ' t be s a i d ; i t ' s a Romance language. I suppose they can be s a i d i n German, a l ­though my German r e a l l y i s n ' t too good. I taught myself German f o r the sake o f reading Schopenhauer i n the t ex t . That was way back i n 1916. I had read Schopenhauer i n E n g l i s h ; I was g rea t l y att racted to Schopenhauer, and then I thought I would t r y and read him in the text and then I taught myself German. And at long l a s t I read Die Welt als mile und Vorstellung i n the t ex t , and Pavevga und Paralipomena a l s o . MR. BUCKLEY: We l l , do you wr i te your poetry in Eng l i s h or i n Span i sh? MR. BORGES: No, I respect Eng l i s h too much. I wr i te i t in Span i sh . MR. BUCKLEY: We l l , do you pass on the t r a n s l a t i o n s ? Do you per sona l l y pass on the t r an s l a t i on s or do you s imply entrust them to people l i k e Kerr igan or di Giovanni? MR. BORGES: No, I have people l i k e A l i s t a i r Re id , di G iovann i , and Ke r r i gan , who are g reat l y better at my t e x t s . They are g r ea t l y better than that i n the t r a n s l a t i o n . And then o f course i n Spanish words are f a r too cumbersome. They ' re f a r too long. We l l , I go to one o f my hobbies. For example, i f you take an Eng l i sh adverb, or two Eng l i s h adverbs, you say f o r instance " q u i c k l y , " " s l o w l y , " and then the s t r e s s f a l l s on the s i g n i f i c a n t part of the word. Quickly. Slowly. But i f you say i t i n Span i sh , you say lentamente, rapidamente. And then the s t r e s s f a l l s on the non s i g n i f i c an t part . MR. BUCKLEY: R i ght . R i gh t . MR. BORGES: And a l l that makes a very cumbersome language. MR. BUCKLEY: Yes. MR. BORGES: But s t i l l , Spanish i s my de s t i ny , i t ' s my f a t e , and I have to do what I can with Span i sh . MR. BUCKLEY: We l l , does the fac t that the Spanish language i s l e s s resource­ful than the Eng l i s h language nece s s a r i l y make i t l e s s complete as poetry? MR. BORGES: No, I th ink that when poetry i s achieved i t can be achieved in any language. I t ' s more than a f i n e Spanish ve r se ; that could hardly be t r a n s ­la ted to another language. I t would turn to something e l s e . But when beauty happens, w e l l , there i t i s . No? What Wh i s t le r sa id - -peop le were d i s cu s s i n g a r t i n Pa r i s . People spoke about, w e l l , the in f luence o f he red i t y , t r a d i t i o n , environment, and so on, and then Wh i s t le r s a i d i n h i s lazy way, "A r t happens." MR. BUCKLEY: Art happens. MR. BORGES: " A r t happens," he s a i d . And I th ink t h a t ' s t rue . I should say that beauty happens. Sometimes I th ink that beauty i s not something ra re . I th ink beauty i s happening a l l the time. Art i s happening a l l the time. At some conversat ion a man may say a very f i ne t h i n g , not being aware of i t . I am hearing f i ne sentences a l l the time from the man in the s t r e e t , fo r exam­p le . From anybody. MR. BUCKLEY: So you cons ider y o u r s e l f a t r a n s c r i b e r , to a cer ta in extent. MR. BORGES: Yes , in a sense I do, and I th ink that I have wr i t ten some f i ne l i n e s , o f course. Everybody has wr i t ten some f i n e l i n e s . Tha t ' s not my p r i v i l e g e . I f y o u ' r e a wr i te r y o u ' r e bound to wr i te something f i n e , at l ea s t now and then, o f f and on. MR. BUCKLEY: Even Longfel low? MR. BORGES: Longfel low has some very beaut i fu l l i n e s . I 'm very o l d - f a sh i oned , but I l i k e "Th i s i s the f o r e s t pr imeva l , the murmuring pines and the hemlock." Tha t ' s a very f i ne l i n e . MR. BUCKLEY: Yes , ye s . MR. BORGES: I d on ' t know why people look down on Longfel low. Maybe he was

too much of a l i t e r a r y man, no? He was much the same kind of poet as Ezra Pound. I mean he took mostly from books and not from h i s own experience. But h i s t r a n s l a t i o n o f the Divine Comedy i s a very f i ne t r a n s l a t i o n . In f a c t , I read i t i n Eng l i sh before I read i t i n I t a l i a n . MR. BUCKLEY: You d id ? Whose t r a n s l a t i o n ? MR. BORGES: Long fe l l ow ' s t r a n s l a t i o n . MR. BUCKLEY: Oh, I see. MR. BORGES: And I began—because I ' v e always been a b i t of a p r i g - - b y reading f i r s t l y the notes and then the tex t . The f i r s t th ing I read was the notes , as a boy. Then I went on to the text . Then I took up the text . That must have been more than 30 years ago. Then I found out that I had no neces s i t y o f knowing I t a l i a n , that i f I had Spanish I had I t a l i a n , and that the Divine Comedy could be read by anybody who had Span i sh . Af ter a l l , the languages are much the same. The I t a l i a n ed i t i on s o f the Commedia are very f i n e , the Momigl iano, f o r example, or the Grabher. There ' s a note to almost every l i n e . I f you don ' t understand the verse i t s e l f you can always f a l l back on the notes. They ' re very i n t e r e s t i n g . I th ink I ' v e read the Divine Comedy some 11 or 12 times over, and I have no I t a l i a n . I c ou l dn ' t t a l k to an I t a l i a n , or see an I t a l i a n f i l m , or hear an I t a l i a n f i lm . I c ou l dn ' t understand i t . I have no I t a l i a n blood. But somehow I t a l i a n and Span i sh , w e l l , t hey ' r e so a l i k e . MR. BUCKLEY: We l l , would you understand i t i f i t were read to you? MR. BORGES: I d on ' t th ink so . I f i t were read to me i t would be read too qu i ck l y . MR. BUCKLEY: Yes. MR. BORGES: When I am t r y i n g to understand a l i n e in I t a l i a n , then of course I can reread i t . MR. BUCKLEY: These thoughts go through your mind that you t r an s c r i be , as you put i t , i n to prose and poetry. MR. BORGES: I wonder i f t h e r e ' s an e s sen t i a l d i f f e rence . I don ' t th ink so . I th ink the g i s t i s the same. I f an idea comes to me I don ' t know whether i t w i l l become a t a l e , become a short s t o r y , or a sonnet, or maybe an example of f ree verse. That comes afterwards. F i r s t I see the whole thing from a fa r . Then somehow i t has to be l i cked in to shape. MR. BUCKLEY: Now, t h i s was as much true when you could see, as s i n ce ? MR. BORGES: Oh y e s , always. Yes. MR. BUCKLEY: The technique was always the same? MR. BORGES: The technique was always the same. The technique i s the tech­nique of be ing , l e t ' s s a y , an on looker, of seeing t h i n g s , but seeing them at f i r s t in a very misty way, and then af terwards, w e l l , ge t t ing nearer them, seeing them c l o se r . But in the case of a s t o r y — i n the case of a s to r y or in the case o f a poem, I always know the beginning and the end. General ly I know the f i r s t l i n e and the l a s t l i n e , or at l e a s t what w i l l happen. But then I have to f i nd out what happens in between, no? Then of course I have to grope and maybe lose my way and maybe go back. MR. BUCKLEY: Oh, you do have to s t rugg le in between, do you? MR. BORGES: Oh, of course I do. But the s t r ugg l e i s part of the game. MR. BUCKLEY: Tha t ' s not merely an act of t r a n s c r i p t i o n . MR. BORGES: No, i t i s n ' t , but the s t rugg le makes f o r enjoyment. MR. BUCKLEY: Do you know at the outset that you are going to succeed, i f you know the f i r s t and l a s t l i n e s ? MR. BORGES: Yes , I know. But I wonder i f I have succeeded. People say I have now and then. MR. BUCKLEY: I th ink there i s a l o t of agreement on that po in t . MR. BORGES: We l l , i f I don ' t be l ieve in democracy, why should I be l ieve in a l o t of agreement? A f te r a l l , those are mere s t a t i s t i c s . MR. BUCKLEY: I s there a c r i t i c a l democracy in which you do be l i e ve , or do you f i n d that the op in ion of the c r i t i c s i s often mistaken so that very l i t t l e expert i se l i e s in the f i e l d ?

MR. BORGES: Having been a c r i t i c I know that t h e i r op in ions are genera l l y m i s ­taken. In f a c t , I have been mistaken many t imes. MR. BUCKLEY: Can you g ive an example of someone whose reputat ion was f o r years mistaken? I s M e l v i l l e a good example? MR. BORGES: M e l v i l l e might be. M e l v i l l e , now, I th ink holds h i s own, no? And he shou ld. But not i n a l l h i s books. MR. BUCKLEY: I s there a l i v i n g wr i t e r who i s v a s t l y under-appreciated? MR. BORGES: I know very l i t t l e about l i v i n g w r i t e r s . In my case I would say that I am over rated, g rea t l y overrated. My s t u f f i s g rea t l y overrated. MR. BUCKLEY: We l l , what about Neruda? MR. BORGES: Neruda, when he was a sentimental poet, was qu i te bad. When he was a Communist he wrote very f ine poetry. That means that communism was the kind o f food he needed, even as Walt Whitman needed democracy, no? But I th ink Neruda i s a f ine poet. In f a c t , I was in Stockholm once upon a time fo r a f a i r — t h i s was more or l e s s on the eve of the judgment— MR. BUCKLEY: Yes. MR. BORGES: And I s a i d , w e l l , i f they choose me they make a mistake. Of course, I would grab the p r i ze i f I can. But I th ink the true candidates—those two candidates would be Pablo Neruda and Jorge G u i l l e n , at l e a s t in the Spanish language. MR. BUCKLEY: What about Gabriel Marquez? MR. BORGES: Gabriel Marquez? I th ink he wrote but one book. I th ink the book f a l l s o f f , no? I th ink i t begins w e l l , but then at the end the wr i t e r i s the s t y l e of the reader, perhaps. MR. BUCKLEY: What about Cortazar? MR. BORGES: I know very l i t t l e about him. I was ed i t i n g a l i t e r a r y magazine, and a young man came to see me. He brought a manuscript and he came back w i th in 10 days and I t o l d him the s to r y was go ing to be pub l i shed , and I s a i d , "Would you i l l u s t r a t e i t ? " That s t o r y was "La Casa Tomar" by J u l i o Cortazar. And then I met him in Par i s and I reminded him of the inc ident . But I haven ' t read h i s other books. That s to ry i s a very f i ne s t o r y , y e s , I should say so. MR. BUCKLEY: Are there any of these w r i t e r s , Mr. Borges , whose work s imply r e s i s t s t r a n s l a t i o n s into Span i sh , fo r i n s t ance , Nabokov? MR. BORGES: I wonder i f he has been t r an s l a ted . MR. BUCKLEY: I d on ' t know. MR. BORGES: I d on ' t th ink so. MR. BUCKLEY: Wel l , then, he does r e s i s t , I guess . MR. BORGES: We l l , in the case o f Joyce, o f cour se , w e l l , he c a n ' t be t r a n s ­l a ted . I d on ' t th ink James Joyce could be t r a n s l a t e d , unless you invent i t . Of course, in the case of James Joyce, h i s c r a f t i s part o f the language. I mean that k ind of th ing c a n ' t be t r an s l a ted . For example, "the r i v e r i n g waters o f — t h e h i t h e r i n g , t h i t he r i n g waters o f n i g h t . " How can you t r an s l a t e that ? How do you t r an s l a te " r i v e r i n g waters o f " ? MR. BUCKLEY: I t ' s l i k e t r a n s l a t i n g Lewis C a r r o l l . MR. BORGES: We l l , i t c a n ' t be done. MR. BUCKLEY: No. MR. BORGES: I t can be done in German, because German i s more or l e s s akin to E n g l i s h , but not in Span i sh . Span i s h , the whole th ing i s rather lame, you know? MR. BUCKLEY: I s Shakespeare s u c c e s s f u l l y t rans l a ted in to Spanish? MR. BORGES: No. Shakespeare a l s o , I mean he was involved in music, in word-c r a f t . That k ind of th ing c a n ' t be t r an s l a ted . I attempted a t r a n s l a t i o n of Macbeth, and then a f te r a scene or two I f e l t I c o u l d n ' t do i t and I l e f t i t . But Macbeth would be my f a vo r i t e Shakespearian tragedy. I t ' s so in tense. I t begins at f u l l speed and then goes on t i l l the end, no? MR. BUCKLEY: Yes , r i g h t . Are you one of the l a s t admirers of K i p l i n g ? MR. BORGES: I hope I am not one o f the l a s t . I th ink K i p l i n g was a very great man.

MR. BUCKLEY: I know you do. But h e ' s not very widely apprec iated, or even read, i s he? MR. BORGES: No, because h e ' s judged by h i s p o l i t i c a l op in ions . I suppose op in ions are on the sur face. I don ' t th ink a wr i te r should be judged by h i s op in ions . I th ink when you wr i te you should be judged by what you w r i t e , and you don ' t wr i te your op in i on s . Op in ions , a f te r a l l , are on the sur face. They come and go. People hold many d i f f e ren t op in ions dur ing t h e i r l i f e t i m e . In the case o f K i p l i n g , he was a very wise man a l s o , and h i s word-craft i s won­de r f u l . I remember, f o r example, "Harp Song o f the Dane Women." You see how s ta rk the t i t l e o f the poem i s . I t doesn ' t even sound l i k e Eng l i s h . I t might be Old E n g l i s h , or Old Norse. "Harp Song o f the Dane Women," and then " S i c k ­en again fo r the shouts and the s l a u g h t e r s . " There you get the Old Eng l i sh rhyme and a l l i t e r a t i o n . "S icken again fo r the shouts and the s l a u g h t e r s . " Yes, ye s . He was a very f ine w r i t e r . MR. BUCKLEY: Was he appreciated in your chi ldhood in Span i sh , or not? MR. BORGES: Yes, he was. But people th ink of h i m — I th ink i f a wr i te r wr i tes f o r ch i ldren he makes a mistake. I mean, as concerns h i s own fame, because people th ink o f him as w r i t i n g only f o r ch i l d ren . The case of Stevenson, fo r example. Why do people look down on Stevenson? Because they th ink only of Treasure Island, a very f ine book, but a book meant f o r boys. But had they read h i s other books they would see he was a very f i ne wr i te r a l s o . So perhaps he made a mistake. For a wr i t e r to attempt, l e t ' s say, boys ' f i c t i o n , or to attempt detect ive f i c t i o n — b e c a u s e people tend to th ink o f him in terms of that p a r t i c u l a r k ind o f c r a f t . And I suppose in the case of Chester ton, people know that he was a ve r y . f i ne w r i t e r , but i f people th ink of the Father Brown s t o r i e s then they are apt to c l a s s him w i th—what ?—w i th E l l e r y Queen, or with even Ph i l l p o t t s — MR. BUCKLEY: Agatha C h r i s t i e . MR. BORGES: Or Agatha C h r i s t i e , ye s . But o f course h e ' s f a r above them. MR. BUCKLEY: I s i t a m i s t ake— MR. BORGES: I t would be a mistake f o r the fame of a w r i t e r , not f o r the wr i te r h imse l f , because, a f te r a l l , i f the Father Brown s t o r i e s d i d n ' t e x i s t I would feel i t was a great l o s s , at l e a s t to me. But at the same time i t has done no good to h i s reputat ion. MR. BUCKLEY: Would you go so f a r as to say that a wr i te r who seeks fame ought not to wr i te books that ch i ldren can enjoyably read? MR. BORGES: No. MR. BUCKLEY: What about To l k i en , f o r ins tance? MR. BORGES: Wel l , T o l k i e n — I have only found him utter boredom. I have never got i n s ide h i s books. I have always been an ou t s i de r . I attempted that "B rotherhood- - " I s i t the "Brotherhood of the R i n g s " ? MR. BUCKLEY: Yes. The "Lordsh ip of the R i n g s , " i s n ' t i t ? MR. BORGES: The "Lordsh ip o f the R i ng . " I d on ' t know. But in any case no r i ng s were awarded me. I t r i ed to enjoy him; I d id my best. I was in Scotland at the time, was doing American theater , read him, laughed very l oud l y , but at the same time I f e l t I got nothing out of reading. To compare him to Lewis Car ro l l i s blasphemy. I 'm so fond of Lewis C a r r o l l . No, but I th ink a wr i te r should not wr i te j u s t f o r c h i l d r e n , because that may harm h i s r epu ta t i on , and a f te r a l l , reputat ions are worthwhile. I t ' s more than j u s t the work i t s e l f , i t ' s the enjoyment of what you are doing. I only th ink o f reading and of w r i t i n g in terms of happiness. I f you don ' t feel happy when y o u ' r e reading or when y o u ' r e w r i t i n g , or i f you don ' t feel g rea t l y moved, then you are not r e a l l y reading or w r i t i n g . The whole th ing i s merely read ing , I mean fo r examination marks, and t h a t , o f c o u r s e — I won ' t say that way madness l i e s , but t h a t ' s the way du l lnes s l i e s . MR. BUCKLEY: Are you say ing that wr i t e r s should enjoy w r i t i n g ? MR. BORGES: Of course they shou ld. At l ea s t I do. I mean i t . I have to t o i l , I have to work, but at the same time I am enjoying i t . A f te r a l l , I have

chosen that l i t e r a r y fate f o r myself. MR. BUCKLEY: We l l , do you think that gymnasts should en j o y— MR. BORGES: I know nothing whatever of gymnasts, so whatever I s a y — MR. BUCKLEY: We l l , ought they to enjoy t h e i r e x e r c i s e s , would you say ? Are you making a un iversa l statement that a l l people should enjoy t h e i r work? MR. BORGES: No, I suppose sweeping statements should be avo ided, and t h a t ' s a sweeping statement a l s o . Maybe when one t a l k s one f a l l s in to sweeping s t a t e ­ments, no? In f a c t , i f y o u ' r e t a l k i n g you are making a sweeping statement. To say A i s B i s a sweeping statement. I t may not be always B; i t may be something e l se . But I enjoy w r i t i n g . I t ' s one o f the few enjoyments l e f t . MR. BUCKLEY: So as you put i t , you would wr i te even i f you were Robinson Crusoe and there was no p o s s i b i l i t y — MR. BORGES: We l l , t h a t ' s the only th ing I could do would be to wr i te . MR. BUCKLEY: You could bu i l d canoes. MR. BORGES: No, my canoes would be hardly worth the b u i l d i n g . I d on ' t th ink I ' d be any good at that kind of c r a f t or any other. MR. BUCKLEY: You 'd rather wr i te a book about how to bu i l d a canoe than bu i l d a canoe, r i g h t ? MR. BORGES: Oh, y e s , of course I would. Or maybe I would choose another subject. MR. BUCKLEY: What in your judgment i s the new P h i l i s t i n i s m about which there i s a lot o f t a l k these days ? MR. BORGES: I d on ' t know. There are so many P h i l i s t i n i s m s invo lved. MR. BUCKLEY: Which i s the one to which you have a specia l a l l e r g y ? MR. BORGES: I hate nat iona l i sm. MR. BUCKLEY: As d i s t i n gu i s hed from pa t r i o t i sm? MR. BORGES: Yes. I th ink nat iona l i sm i s a mistake. I th ink that we are a l l more or l e s s n a t i o n a l i s t i c . Maybe I am. When you say " A r gen t i n i an " I am very angry. There i s no such word. The word should be " A r gen t i ne . " " A r gen t i n i an " i s an i nven t i on , a word that rhymes with Bo l i v i a n or Peruv ian. There ' s no such word, s ince "A rgent ine " i s an adject i ve . MR. BUCKLEY: "A rgent ine " i s an ad ject i ve . MR. BORGES: Of course. The Argent ine Republ ic. Yes, Argentine i s s i l v e r , because of the Rio de la P la ta . S i l v e r R iver. S i l v e r R i ve r , ye s . Argen­t i n i a n — n o such word. MR. BUCKLEY: In E n g l i s h , you mean? MR. BORGES: No, I d on ' t th ink there i s such a word. In Spanish t h e r e ' s no such word. You would say Republioa Argentiniana, instead of Republioa Argentina. I f you sa id Argentiniana, people would s t a re at you. MR. BUCKLEY: How common i s that e r r o r ? MR. BORGES: Yes. I was asked a l l the time when I was in the S ta te s—peop le asked me "Are you A r gen t i n i an ? " And I s a i d , "No, t h e r e ' s no such t h i n g . " "Are you Span ia rd ? " We l l , I l e f t o f f being a Spaniard 150 years ago. "Are you Lat in American?" Wel l , no. Who knows what a Lat in American i s ? There ' s no such th ing . I mean a man i s a Colombian, a Peruv ian, a Bo l i v i a n or a Uruguayan, but hard ly a La t i n American. There ' s no such th i ng . MR. BUCKLEY: Or an Argent ine. MR. BORGES: Or an Argent ine , why not? I do my best to be a good Argent ine. MR. BUCKLEY: And you say you detect t h i s nat iona l i sm even in y o u r s e l f ? Do you detect a l o t of i t in current l i t e r a t u r e ? MR. BORGES: I detect i t in myself. MR. BUCKLEY: You do? MR. BORGES: I don ' t know why, fo r example, I wr i te so much about such an i n ­v i s i b l e , such a dul l c i t y as Buenos A i r e s , and yet I love i t . Why wr i te so much about mysel f ? I 'm not an i n t e r e s t i n g character. And yet I keep on being in teres ted in Jorge Lu i s Borges. I don ' t know why. S t i l l i t ' s a l i f e l o n g hab i t . MR. BUCKLEY: One of the books about you says that your most intense e x p e r i -

ences are autob iog raph ica l . MR. BORGES: I suppose they are. MR. BUCKLEY: But that doe sn ' t mean e i the r that you are n a r c i s s i s t i c or that you are n a t i o n a l i s t i c , does i t ? MR. BORGES: I don ' t th ink so. I suppose i t means more e s sen t i a l t h i n g s . I t means, w e l l , i t might be in th ink ing or l ov ing or f a l l i n g in love or being crossed in l o ve , or being now and then happy in love. Those th ings are e s sen ­t i a l to man. MR. BUCKLEY: But t hey ' r e u n i v e r s a l s , too. MR. BORGES: They are u n i v e r s a l s , o f course. Happi ly. MR. BUCKLEY: So therefore y o u ' r e not committing the s i n o f nat iona l i sm or n a r c i s s i sm , are you? MR. BORGES: No, I 'm not. No, I 'm not. No, I d on ' t th ink I 'm a n a r c i s s i s t or a n a t i o n a l i s t , f o r that matter. Nat ional i sm I th ink i s wrong in a l l c oun t r i e s , expec i a l l y in a new country l i k e mine. I mean, f o r example, l e t ' s say you ' r e a Chinaman, or a Japanese or even a European, or even i f y o u ' r e American you might be a n a t i o n a l i s t . But here our h i s t o r y i s , l e t ' s s a y , some hundred and odd years o l d , a country with no local co l o r l i k e t h i s , w e l l , we have had quite a f i ne h i s t o r y in the l a s t century, and now I th ink that we are bet te r , more or l e s s improving. I mean we went through a very sad pe r i od , and now th ings are bet te r , at l ea s t we should hope they are bet te r , because our hope i s part of the betterment, no? MR. BUCKLEY: Yes. We l l , i t d i d n ' t undermine your apprec iat ion of K i p l i n g — h i s nat iona l i sm. MR. BORGES: No, I th ink the B r i t i s h Empire made fo r good. I th ink they were r i g h t , there. Maybe i t d id no good to Eng land— MR. BUCKLEY: So i t ' s bad nat iona l i sm you object t o , not j u s t na t iona l i sm. MR. BORGES: But in the case of K i p l i n g , I t h i n k — I not only th ink the B r i t i s h Empire made for good, but I th ink that K i p l i n g needed that f a i t h in order to wr i te h i s books, even as Walt Whitman needed democracy and Neruda needed communism, or Dante needed the Roman Catho l i c Church. MR. BUCKLEY: I t was a c a t a l y s t o f h i s t a len t . MR. BORGES: Yes , i t was. But why not? Tha t ' s a l lowable. Not only a l lowab le , but i t i s to be wished fo r . MR. BUCKLEY: We l l , why don ' t we have any good l i t e r a t u r e coming out of the Sov iet Union ce lebrat ing communism? Why i s n ' t i t a c a t a l y s t of anything beau t i f u l ? MR. BORGES: Because people are bu l l i ed into i t . MR. BUCKLEY: As d i s t i n c t from Neruda, who was not? MR. BORGES: No, he was not. As to the s i n c e r i t y o f Neruda, I know nothing whatever. But s t i l l , i t made h im- - I mean he wrote some bad sentimental poetry. His love poetry was quite bad. He thought so too. And then that p o l i t i c a l f a i t h came to him and saved him. I only met Neruda once in my l i f e . He thought that nothing would be done with the Spanish language. And then I s a i d to him, "Something might be done with E n g l i s h . " And he s a i d , "We l l , something has been done." And then I s a i d , " I n Spanish nothing has been done as y e t . " And he s a i d , "No, I suppose no t . " And I s a i d , "We l l , w e ' l l have to do something fo r that God-forsaken language. " We l l , we d i d , or at l e a s t he d i d . MR. BUCKLEY: Now, how many books ago was that conver sat ion? MR. BORGES: That must have been way back in 1920-odd, eh? MR. BUCKLEY: He was already a Communist, was he? MR. BORGES: I don ' t know, because we never spoke about p o l i t i c s . But he loved the Eng l i sh language. I suppose he always d i d . MR. BUCKLEY: You say i f you are b u l l i e d that you s t i f l e the muse? MR. BORGES: I th ink you do. You s t i f l e everyth ing. MR. BUCKLEY: We l l , but Dante was b u l l i e d . MR. BORGES: I don ' t th ink he was b u l l i e d , no. I don ' t th ink he was b u l l i e d . I th ink he bel ieved in i t .

MR. BUCKLEY: But he l i v ed in an age in which i t was dangerous not to be l i e ve , d i d n ' t he? MR. BORGES: We l l , I suppose he was i n tense ly r e l i g i o u s . For example, I c an ' t th ink of myself being a Roman Ca tho l i c , or even a C h r i s t i a n . And yet I t ho r ­oughly enjoyed the Divine Comedy, without enjoying the framework, of course. I don ' t l i k e the framework of the three i n s t i t u t i o n s of h e l l , purgatory, and heaven, or paradise. I c a n ' t bel ieve that kind of th ing . But s t i l l , i f I ac ­cept that framework, then i t ' s a wonderful poem, perhaps the greatest poem ever wr i t ten . MR. BUCKLEY: Why i s i t that there i s no intense love o f communism that has brought out an equiva lent masterwork. Of course, I suppose you c a n ' t have an equiva lent masterwork, but a masterwork. How do you account fo r the a r i d i t y of the en t i re Sov iet experience in the l a s t 50 y ea r s , 60 yea r s ? MR. BORGES: I th ink a r i d i t y has been explained away. I th ink i t ' s quite com­mon. For example, l e t ' s say--maybe I 'm i n s u l t i n g people by say ing t h i s - - y o u take the United S ta tes . You have at l ea s t h a l f a dozen men of gen iu s , from the l i t e r a r y point of view. MR. BUCKLEY: You mean in 200 yea r s ? MR. BORGES: You have, fo r example, you have Poe, you have M e l v i l l e , you have Whitman, you have Hawthorne, you have Henry James. R ight ? You have F ros t . MR. BUCKLEY: Tha t ' s about i t . MR. BORGES: What? MR. BUCKLEY: Pound. MR. BORGES: We l l , Pound. We l l , I d on ' t want to rope him i n , but i f you do i t ' s not my funeral as we l l . But at the same t ime, i f you think o f Canada and A u s t r a l i a , they have produced noth ing , produced p r a c t i c a l l y noth ing. So maybe the American Revolut ion made for good from a l i t e r a r y point o f view. MR. BUCKLEY: In other words, you cons ider s i x people in 200 years a profus ion of gen iu s , and a r i d i t y the ru le of thumb? MR. BORGES: Yes, I should say so. What I mean to say i s t ha t , w e l l , you may l i k e or d i s l i k e Poe; I d on ' t th ink much of him as a poet. But I th ink of him as being a man of gen ius . You may l i k e or d i s l i k e Whitman; you can f i nd good and bad l i ne s in him. But he c a n ' t be thought away. You c a n ' t th ink of con ­temporary l i t e r a t u r e and- -MR. BUCKLEY: Dismiss Whitman. MR. BORGES: Yes, and d i smi s s them. They c an ' t be thought away. While other wr i te r s may be thought away. For example, South America has produced nobody worthwhi le, I mean to the whole world. I suppose we have some f ine w r i t e r s . They are f i ne w r i t e r s , l e t ' s s a y , f o r A rgent ines , or f o r Ch i l eans , or fo r Peruv ians , and so on, but they mean nothing whatever to the world. MR. BUCKLEY: We l l , you do. Neruda d i d . Neruda d id . MR. BORGES: We l l , i n my case I th ink that what y o u ' r e say ing i s a form of pess imism, to say that I ' v e - - Or of optimism. MR. BUCKLEY: I gather you are t e l l i n g me that there i s no reason to expect that in Russ ia there should be a huge f i g u r e . Of course there i s , and t h a t ' s S o l zhen i t s yn , and h e ' s a d i s s en te r . MR. BORGES: Do you expect anything from A u s t r a l i a , f o r example? I d on ' t suppose you do. MR. BUCKLEY: Pat r i ck White. MR. BORGES: We l l , I don ' t know him, I 'm sor ry to say. I must plead my i g ­norance. MR. BUCKLEY: He won a Nobel P r i z e , I be l i e ve , d i d n ' t he? MR. BORGES: We l l , i f that means anyth ing. MR. BUCKLEY: No. Doesn ' t nece s s a r i l y mean anyth ing , does i t ? MR. BORGES: I suppose I s hou l dn ' t say t ha t , not having won i t . But maybe they needed an A u s t r a l i a n , or they needed a kangaroo, and so they - -MR. BUCKLEY: You have then no t he s i s that would exp la in why over a per iod of 50 years in Russ ia there was the b iggest s p i r i t u a l con f l ag ra t i on in l i t e r a r y

h i s t o r y , and then nothing. MR. BORGES: I must say that in that case the czars were bet te r , because they gave us To l s to i and Dostoevski and Gogol. They made fo r good. MR. BUCKLEY: Cor rect , but what was i t that a l l o f a sudden brought that whole movement—destroyed the momentum? Or i s genius too rare to make i t po s s i b l e to formulate any ru le s about the incidence of i t ? MR. BORGES: I suppose i t i s ra re . Then we have to f a l l back on Wh i s t le r . Art happens or i t doe sn ' t . Nothing can be expected. MR. BUCKLEY: But there are p rop i t i ou s and nonprop i t ious c i rcumstances, a r e n ' t there? MR. BORGES: P rop i t i ou s c o u n t r i e s , a l s o . For example, England. I g rea t l y love England. I worship England. But England, f o r example, i f you th ink of i t in terms of music or of pa int ing i t ' s not a very important country. But in terms of l i t e r a t u r e , i t i s , in terms of poetry, e s p e c i a l l y . In terms of prose, a l s o . I don ' t suppose England produced any musician important or of matter to the whole world. I d on ' t suppose they have. Though I love Turner, but s t i l l that may be a p r i va te b ias or a hobby of mine on ly . B lake, a l s o , but of course in Blake what I admire i s rather the poet and the myst i c . MR. BUCKLEY: We l l , are you making r e a l l y a genet ic observat ion or a cu l tu ra l observat ion that people with Eng l i s h blood w i l l g r a v i t a te to l e t t e r s but not so much to a r t or music? MR. BORGES: I suppose i t might be t rans l a ted into t ha t , but I wouldn ' t care to make such a sweeping statement. In f a c t , I wonder i f I 'm capable of ab­s t r a c t th ink ing . I d on ' t th ink I am. I only th ink in terms of p a r t i c u l a r s , of i n d i v i d u a l s . That may be my Eng l i sh s i d e , a l s o , putt ing th ings in terms of nominal ism, of i n d i v i d u a l s . MR. BUCKLEY: In France would you make any g e n e r a l i t i e s o f the Eng l i s h nature? MR. BORGES: France has produced many men of gen ius . I th ink we should a l l feel very gratefu l to France. I th ink I ' v e been ungrateful to France because I 'm always look ing at England, and a l s o at the Scandinavian count r i e s . But no, France c a n ' t be thought away. I t c a n ' t be done. Spain has produced per­haps the one man of gen iu s , Cervantes, and the o the r s , I suppose, may be sa fe l y fo rgo t ten . At l e a s t , I s a f e l y or unsafe ly fo rget them. I have Span i sh , Portugese, and Eng l i s h b lood, and maybe everybody has a l i t t l e Jewish b lood, a l s o , no? MR. BUCKLEY: Have the Portugese produced a wr i t e r o f the f i r s t rank, by your rather severe s tandards ? MR. BORGES: Yes, I th ink they have produced two. Eca de Que i ros , a 19th century n o v e l i s t , and Camoes, who wrote one, the great ep ic poem, the huaiadas, where you have f e e l i n g f o r the sea. You never get that i n Spanish poetry. They have no f ee l i n g whatever f o r the sea. MR. BUCKLEY: Why? MR. BORGES: The C a s t i l i a n s were an in land people. That may exp la in the f a i l u r e of the Armada, a l s o . MR. BUCKLEY: I s i t i n your experience po s s i b l e to s t imulate a love of l i t e r a ­t u re , or i s i t something that a l s o j u s t happens or doe sn ' t happen? I s i t pos ­s i b l e to take 20 people and make them love l i t e r a t u r e more? MR. BORGES: Of course, I have been a professor of Eng l i s h and American l i t e r a ­ture dur ing some 20 y e a r s , at the Un i ve r s i t y of Buenos A i r e s . MR. BUCKLEY: Tha t ' s why I asked you. MR. BORGES: And I have t r i e d to teach my students not l i t e r a t u r e — t h a t c a n ' t be taught—but the love o f l i t e r a t u r e . And I have sometimes succeeded, and f a i l e d many times over, of course. I f the course has to be done in four months, I can do very l i t t l e . But s t i l l I know there are many young men in Buenos Aires—maybe t hey ' r e not so young now—young men and young women, who have t he i r memories f u l l of Eng l i s h verse. And I have been study ing Old Eng l i sh and Old Norse f o r the l a s t 20 yea r s . And I have a l s o taught many people the love of Old E n g l i s h .

MR. BUCKLEY: And so there i s a pedagogical a r t . I t i s n ' t s imply a matter o f — MR. BORGES: But I th ink l i t e r a t u r e i s being taught i n the wrong way a l l the time. I t ' s being taught in terms o f h i s t o r y and of soc io logy . And I wouldn ' t do that . I have seen many teachers who are always f a l l i n g back on dates, on place names. MR. BUCKLEY: You don ' t do tha t ? MR. BORGES: I do my best to avoid i t . MR. BUCKLEY: On the grounds that i t i s d i s t r a c t i n g ? MR. BORGES: Yes , of course. Yes, I feel that i t ' s i r r e l e v a n t . For example, i f I g ive you a beaut i fu l l i n e o f ve r se , that verse should be as beaut i fu l today as i t was centur ies ago. Or had i t been wr i t ten today, i t should be beaut i fu l a l s o . MR. BUCKLEY: Wel l , doesn ' t the context in which you read i t attach a cer ta in meaning to i t ? MR. BORGES: Yes, but I suppose i f a l i n e i s beaut i fu l the context can be s a fe l y f o r go t ten , no? I f I s ay , f o r example, that "the moon i s the mir ror o f t ime, " t h a t ' s a f i ne metaphor, don ' t you t h i n k ? MR. BUCKLEY: Yes. MR. BORGES: A mirror as being something round; i t can be e a s i l y broken, and yet somehow the moon i s as o ld as t ime, or ha l f as o ld as time. Now, were I to add that that comes from Pers ian poetry, i t wouldn ' t r e a l l y add to the beauty. Perhaps i t might add in a cer ta in way. But s t i l l , had that metaphor been invented t h i s morning i t would be a f i ne metaphor, no? The moon, the mir ror of time. I t happens to be a Pers ian metaphor. MR. BUCKLEY: : We l l , but c e r t a i n l y ce r ta in th ing s are accepted as beaut i fu l in part depending on the p reva i l i n g s t y l e . The kind of enthus iasm, fo r i n s tance , that was shown fo r Restorat ion comedy. Some of that s t u f f i s n ' t very funny now. Some o f the romantic excesses o f the 19th century a r e n ' t — MR. BORGES: But I suppose a l l t h a t ' s rather a r t i f i c i a l , no? Tha t ' s one o f the reasons why I 'm so fond o f Old Eng l i s h poetry , that nobody knows anything whatever about the poets besides the century they wrote i n , and yet I f i n d something very s t i r r i n g about Old Eng l i s h poetry. MR. BUCKLEY: I t has to stand on i t s own two f e e t , you mean? MR. BORGES: I t has to . Or maybe because I l i k e the sounds of i t . "Maeg io be me sylfum sothgied wreoan, I Sithas seogan"—now, those sounds have a r i n g to them. MR. BUCKLEY: What does that say? What i s that in d o l l a r s ? MR. BORGES: That would s a y—wa i t a b i t . In do l l a r s that would be: " I can utter a true song about myself. I can t e l l of my t r a v e l s . " That sounds l i k e Walt Whitman, no? That was wr i t ten i n the 9th century i n Northumberland. "Maeg io be me sylfum sothgeid wreoan, I Sithas seogan"—and Ezra Pound t r a n s ­lated i t as t h i s — I th ink i t ' s a rather uncouth t r a n s l a t i o n — " M a y I f o r my own sake s o n g ' s t ruth reckon, j ou rney ' s j a r g o n . " Wel l , t h a t ' s too much of a j a r ­gon to me, no? Of cour se , he ' s t r a n s l a t i n g the sounds. "Maeg io be me sylfum sothgied wreoan, I Sithas seogan"--"May I f o r my sake s o n g ' s t ruth reckon, " — "sothgied wreoan"--he's t r a n s l a t i n g the sounds more than the sense. And then "Sithas seogan"--"tell o f my t r a v e l s , " he t r an s l a te s " j o u r n e y ' s j a r g o n , " which i s rather uncouth, at l e a s t to me. MR. BUCKLEY: Whose t r a n s l a t i o n d id you say? MR. BORGES: I t ' s Ezra Pound 's t r a n s l a t i o n . MR. BUCKLEY: Oh, I see. MR. BORGES: I t ' s Ezra Pound's t r a n s l a t i o n from the Ang lo-Saxon, ye s . MR. BUCKELY: How would you have t rans la ted that word? MR. BORGES: I would t r an s l a t e i t l i t e r a l l y . " I can u t t e r , I can say a true song about myself. I can t e l l my t r a v e l s . " I th ink that should be enough, no? I t was a p l a i n statement, a s t ra i ght fo rward statement. MR. BUCKLEY: But in any case t h i s would be an example of something that c a n ' t be inf luenced by a change in f a sh i on ?

MR. BORGES: I d on ' t th ink so . MR. BUCKLEY: I t ' s beaut i fu l then and now. MR. BORGES: I th ink i f th ings are b e a u t i f u l , w e l l , Keats s a i d i t . He sa id i t in too flowery a way, perhaps, but I th ink i t was t rue. "A thing of beauty i s a joy fo reve r . " I suppose he meant tha t , no? I f he meant anyth ing. MR. BUCKLEY: Now, when you say " too flowery a way," you were intending what kind of c r i t i c i s m ? MR. BORGES: We l l , "A th ing of beauty i s a joy f o reve r . " There i s something f lowery about i t , don ' t you th ink s o ? MR. BUCKLEY: We l l , I do, but I 'm not sure that the perspect ive by which we are permitted that observat ion was ava i l ab le to him. MR. BORGES: But i f you have to take perspect ives into account, th ings a r e n ' t too good, no? For example, I was reading Bur ton ' s t r a n s l a t i o n o f the Arabian Nights. I th ink the Arabian Nights i s a very f ine work. I t would be f i ne i f i t were wr i t ten t h i s morning. I t ' s a very f ine work. MR. BUCKLEY: And would read well anytime? . MR. BORGES: I th ink i t would. I th ink t h a t ' s the t e s t , that a book should ' read well at anytime. Of cour se , when wr i t e r s go in fo r word -c ra f t , word-music, then of course i t ' s very d i f f i c u l t to t r an s l a t e them. In the case of Shakespeare, fo r example, I suppose that ha l f the beauty l i e s in the language, and therefore i t c a n ' t be t r an s l a t ed . MR. BUCKLEY: We l l , i s there a co r re l a t i on between the se l f -esteem of a wr i t e r and h i s permanence, or i s there no ru le on the subject ? Do some modest wr i te r s l i v e and some vain wr i t e r s d ie ? MR. BORGES: I d o n ' t th ink I could say anything valuable on that subject. MR. BUCKLEY: Did Dante know he had wr i t ten a masterpiece? MR. BORGES: He was f u l l y aware of i t . You can see that he knew very well what he was do ing, un l i ke Shakespeare, who was unconscious o f what he was doing. Or l e t ' s take a l e s s e r example. Did Mark Twain know how good a book he was wr i t i n g when he wrote Huok Finn! I don ' t th ink so . You see that the end of the book f a l l s to p ieces . Tom Sawyer i s allowed to spo i l the book. And yet he wrote the book, the one book, I should s a y - - We l l , the other books he wrote were quite good, I mean Roughing It, Life on the Mississippi, First Days in California. Those were f i ne books, but those a r e n ' t as good. Of course, he had to be making jokes a l l the t ime, and tha t , I suppose, hampered him. MR. BUCKLEY: We l l , Cervantes thought of h imsel f as a poet p r i m a r i l y , d i d n ' t he? MR. BORGES: As a poet he was nowhere. MR. BUCKLEY: So that was s imply a mistake in judgment? MR. BORGES: But what I mean to say i s he was a poet when he was w r i t i n g prose, not when he was attempting verse. MR. BUCKLEY: Yes , y e s . MR. BORGES: I t i s s a i d that the one good verse h e ' s wr i t ten in Spanish was "La graoia que no supo darme el oielo"--\ mean being a poet, not? T h a t ' s the one l i n e of good verse he ever wrote. MR. BUCKLEY: Do you want to t r an s l a te that ? MR. BORGES MR. BUCKLEY: Could not g ive me. MR. BORGES MR. BUCKLEY: Thank you very much,Mr. Borges. I ' v e enjoyed our-MR. BORGES

MR. BORGES

MR. BORGES

"The g i f t that heaven d id not g ive me."

Yes, could not--que no quiso—no, would no t , did not care to .

No, I have to thank you fo r your ext raord inary pat ience. MR. BUCKLEY: You can have my patience anytime you want.

Thank y o u , s i r . MR. BUCKLEY: And thank you very much,ladies and gentlemen.

Thank y o u , s i r .

Transc r ip t s are ava i l ab le from the Southern Educational Communica­t i ons A s s oc i a t i on f o r the 250 Firing Line programs produced dur ing the l a s t f i ve y e a r s . I f you would l i k e to order back i s sue s of the Firing Line t r a n s c r i p t s , please f i l l out the attached order form and mail i t with your check or money order (p lease , no cash) t o :

F i r i n g Line P.O. Box 5966 Columbia, South Caro l ina 29250

and ind ica te the t r a n s c r i p t number(s) from the l i s t on the f o l ­lowing pages. Each t r a n s c r i p t i s $1.25. Special d i scount fo r an order of 10 or more t r a n s c r i p t s : $1.00 each.

Name

Address

Ci tv State Z ip

T ran sc r i p t number(s):

# # # 1

1 1 I 1

# # f #

_ c h e c k enclosed MAIL TO:

money order enclosed

F i r i n g L ine P.O. Box 5966 Columbia, S .C. 29250

Please al low three weeks de l i ve r y time.

I.Dump N ixon; Paul McCloskey, A l l a r d Lowenstein 2.Free Medic ine; E l l i o t Richardson 3.Separat ion o f Church and S t a te ; Madalyn Murray 0 ' 4 . S t r i k e s i n Defiance o f the Law; V i c to r Gotbaum,

Malcolm Wilson 5.The Black Caucus; Ronald Dellums 6.The Lawyer ' s Ro le ; Wi l l i am Kunst le r 7.War Crimes, Part I ; Ernest van den Haag, Seymour

Hersh 8.Revenue Sha r i ng ; Wilbur M i l l s 9.War Crimes, Part I I ; Three Marines

1 0 . I s I t Po s s i b l e to Be a Good Governor?; Ronald Reagan l l . I s S t . August ine Re levant ? ; Fulton J . Sheen, Sherwood

W i r t , Gerhart Niemeyer 12.1s America a T e r r i b l e Letdown?; Mary McCarthy 13.The Problems of a Conservat ive L e g i s l a t o r ; James

Buckley 14.What Has Happened to the American S p i r i t ? ; James

Dickey 15 . I n Defense o f P o l i c y ; Walt W. Rostow 16.Law and Order in England; S i r Peter Rawlinson 17 .P re s ident i a l Hopeful; Senator Fred Har r i s 1 8 . P o l i t i c s of Wi l l i am Proxmire; Senator Wm. Proxmire 1 9 . I s America Hosp i tab le to the Negro?; Jesse Jackson 20.Pornography Eng l i sh S t y l e ; Renee Sho r t , John Selwyn

Gummer 21.The Case Aga ins t Freedom; B.F. Sk inner , Donald

MacKay 22.Marijuana Reconsidered; Lester Gr inspoon, Lawrence

McKinney 23»The Meaning o f the China Vote; George Bush, I-Cheng

Loh n 24.Why A r e n ' t Good Bu i l d i n g s Being B u i l t ? ; Ada Louise ~f Huxtable, James Rossant o 25.The Place of the Treaty i n I n te rnat iona l A f f a i r s ;

John Kerry ° - 26.The News Tw i s te r s ; Ed ith E f r on , Andrew Rooney 2. 27.Nixon i n the White House—The F ru s t r a t i on o f Power; H Rowland Evans, Robert Novak c

28.The American Conservat ive and Mr. N ixon; C D . W i l l i ams , Moderator; J . Anthony Lukas, Nick Thimmesch, W. Carey

i r McWill iams 29.The Edgar Smith S t o r y , Part I ; Edgar Smith 30.The Edgar Smith S t o r y , Part I I ; Edgar Smith, Ronald

S u l l i v a n , Geoffrey Norman, Hans Kn igh t , John Car ley 31.The A s s au l t on P r i vacy ; Prof . Ar thur R. M i l l e r 32.Who Owns America?; Walter Hickel 33.The 18- to 21-Year-01d Vote; Marsha Ma r t i n , La r r y

Seidman, Steven C o r t r i g h t , Yvonne Westbrook, Steve Morgan, Lar ry Diamond, Dave Gerber, Meta Mendel

34.V ietnamizat ion; E l l swor th Bunker 3 5 . I s r a e l : War or Peace?; Shimon Peres 36.Vietnam—Looking Back; Peter Osnos, Stan C loud, George

McArthur 37 . I n s i de I s r a e l ; Amnon Rub i n s t e i n , Mrs. Leah Ben Dor,

Mahmoud Abass i 38.The New Hampshire Pr imary; John Ashbrook, Paul McCloskey 39.The Meaning of Ch ina; Dr. Ross T e r r i l l 40.Genocide; Robert Conquest 41.The I r i s h Problem; Bernadette Dev l in 42 .Fa sc i sm—Pas t and Present; S i r Oswald Mosley 43.An Eng l i s h I nqu i r y I n to American Conservat ism; Three

Cambridge Graduates: Evans, R i d d e l ! , Middleweek 44.Government Secrecy; Jack Anderson 45.The Greek Dilemma; Andreas Papandreou 46 .E l ec t i on Reform; Robert Finch 47.The Imp l i ca t ions of the China T r i p ; Dr. Richard Walker,

Prof David Mozingo 48.Alcohol i sm; Father Peter Sweisgood, Dr. Joseph H i r sh 49.A Popular Man i fe s to ; J e f f G reen f i e ld , Jack Newfield 50.The Arab S i de ; Abdul Hamid Sharaf 51.Does Subvers ion Work?; Laurence Be i l en son , Alan Barth 52.R ichard Nixon and Young Conservat i ves ; J . Br ian Smith,

Mark Ha r ro f f , Dana Rohrabacher, Harvey H. Hakar i , J r . 53.No-Fault Insurance; Marvin E. Lewis , Harry A. Lansman 54.Music and Modernism; Fernando Valent i 55.Three McGovern Delegates—The Ga lbra i th Family; John

Kenneth Ga l b r a i t h , Peter Ga l b r a i t h , James Ga lbra i th

81 82

Should the SALT Pacts Be Approved?; Senator Henry 84 Jackson, Senator Frank Church 85

Afternoon on the Potomac?; Roy Jenkins 86 The Pentagon Papers; Dr. Daniel E l l s be r g 87 On the Concorde; Anthony Wedgwood Benn 88 The McGovern Phenomenon; Frank Mankiewicz James R. Hof fa; James R. Hoffa The Jewish Vote; Dr. Wi l l iam A. Wexler, Nathan G lazer , Nathan Perl mutter

Sex Educat ion; Dr. Joel F o r t , Dr. Mary Calderone, Prof . Ernest van den Haag

Hate America; Dotson Rader, Arno ld Beichman The U.S. E lec t ion Viewed from Abroad; Andre

Fonta ine, Raymond Aron, Michel Gordey Abort ion Laws--Pro and Con; John T. Noonan,Roy Lucas Harold Macmil lan; Harold Macmi11 an C h r i s t i a n i t y and Cap i ta l i sm;Lord Soper o f Kingsway The Free Market and America; Va lery G i scard

d ' E s t a i n g , Evan Ga lbra i th P o l i t i c a l F inanc ing ; Robert S t rauss The Old and the New Fore ign P o l i c y ; Walt W. Rostow,

Eugene D. Rostow Looking Back on the C i v i l R ights Laws; Hodding Carter I I I , Clarke Reed

The Southern Imag inat ion; Eudora Weity,Walker Percy 104 The Young; Anthony Burgess A Conservat ive Look at Mar i juana; Thomas E. B ryant , 105

John Greenway The Catho l i c C r i s i s ; Garry W i l l s The CIA and Fdreign P o l i c y ; Howard Hunt The Future of Conservat ive Va lues ; Daniel Pat r i ck Moynihan

What Are the Chal lenges f o r Conservat ives i n 1973?; Gabe Pressman, Richard Reeves, Mary Perot N icho l s

How Does I t Go With the Black Movement?;Huey P. Newton

The White House and the Media; Clay T. Whitehead Texas P o l i t i c s ; Ronnie Dugger, Frances Farenthold,

Beryl Mi l burn The U . S . I . A . ; Frank Shakespeare

89 90 91 92

93. 94. 95.

96.

97. 98. 99.

100. 101 . 102 103

106 107 108

109 110 111 112

113

114

The I r i s h Problem, 1973; Lord Terence O ' N e i l l The Welfare S t a t e ? ; S h i r l e y W i l l i ams , M.P. Corporal Punishment; C.C. Kuper, Peter Newell Women's L i b ; Germaine Greer The Federal Government and Educat ion; Caspar Weinberger The Equal R ights Amendment; P h y l l i s S c h l a f l y , Ann Scott Proposals f o r Welfare; Governor Jimmy Carter What to Do About the Post O f f i ce ; Sen. Ernest F. Ho l l i n g s The Impl i cat ions o f Watergate; James Powel l , Reg Murphy,

Robert P. Clark L im i ta t i ons of P re s ident i a l Power; Sen. Hubert Humphrey Meat P r i ces and Ag r i cu l t u r a l P o l i c y ; Earl Butz Conservat ives View Watergate; Ernest van den Haag,

Wi l l iam Rusher How Much Protect ion f o r the P re s s ; Charles Rembar, C. Dicerman Wi l l iams

Legal Aspects o f Abor t i on ; John T. Noonan, Har r ie t Pi 1 pel .Drugs and Freedom; Dr. Thomas S. Szasz . I s There an Eco log ica l C r i s i s ? ; Barry Commoner .Was I t Worth I t ? ; Rear Admiral Alan Shepard .What Now for the Ghetto?; Thomas Bradley .World Federal ism Today; Norman Cousins .Russ ian Jewry and American Foreign P o l i c y ; Dmitri and

Natasha Simes .Questions About America; Anthony Howard, Louis Heren, Dee

Wel ls .Democracy and P o l i t i c a l Scandal ; Michael Foot .Are Unions the Enemy of the Working C l a s s ? ; Hugh Scanlon .Has America Had I t ? ; Malcolm Muggeridge .The Energy C r i s i s and Energy P o l i c y ; M.A. Adelman, Jock

R i t ch ie .Amnesty; Henry Schwarzschi Id .The Secur i t y o f Europe; S i r Alec Douglas-Home .Nixon Pres idency; Samuel Lubell .Mechanism of Moral Development; B.F. Sk inner , Leon

Fes t inger Hered i ty , I.Q. and Soc ia l I s s u e s ; Dr. Thomas Bever, Dr. R ichard Herrnste in

.Can We Have an Independent P ro secuto r ? ; Wi l l iam Ruckelshaus

57. 58. 59, 60. 61 . 62.

63.

64. 6.5.

66. 67. 68. 69.

70. 71.

72

73, 74, 75,

76, 77 78,

79,

115.The Middle East Exp los ion and American Detente; Hans J . Morgenthau

116.L imits o f Behavioral Con t ro l ; David Premack, Dr. Nathan Az r i n

117.Psychosurgery and Bra in Cont ro l ; Dr. E l l i o t Va l en s te i n , Dr. D i e t r i ch Blumer

118.Have We Learned Anything from Watergate?; A l l a r d Lowenstein

119.The Jesus Movement; Malachi Mart in 120.The Future o f the GOP; E l l i o t Richardson 121.The Views o f a N i xon i t e ; Pat r i ck Buchanan 122.Penal Reform; Je s s i c a M i t f o rd 123.The R e v i s i o n i s t H i s t o r i a n s ; Dean Rusk 124.Mr. Buckley Defends His Four Reforms; Joe R u s s i n ,

Kate Coleman, Michael Brown 125.Government and Pub l i c Confidence; Sen. Edmund Muskie 126.The B r i t i s h C r i s i s ; Anthony Lejuene, Bernard Levin 127.Enoch Powell and the B r i t i s h C r i s i s ; Enoch Powell 128.Tax Reform; Stanley Surrey 1 2 9 . P o l i t i c s and Black P rog re s s ; J u l i a n Bond, John Lewis 1 30 .U l s t e r—1974 ; John Hume 131.Catho l ic i sm and Soc i a l i sm i n I r e l a n d ; Noel Browne 132.The Question of South A f r i c a ; John Vor s te r 133.The Question o f Rhodes ia; Ian Smith 134.The Republican Party and Mr. N ixon; George Bush 135.The B lackmai l ing o f the P re s iden t ; E. Howard Hunt 136.Where Do We Go From Here i n the Middle E a s t ? ; Dr.

Fayez A. Sayegh 137.Should the United States D i sarm?; Les Asp in 138.How Strong Should the Pres idency Be? ; Eugene

McCarthy 139 .Jus t i ce and the5th Amendment; Ed. Bennett Wi l l iams 140.Amnesty; Ramsey C lark 141.Government and the A r t s ; Ronald Berman 142.The Future of the GOP; V.P. Gerald Ford 143.The Kidnapper, the V i c t im, the Soc i e t y ; Reg Murphy 144.The L imit s o f J o u r n a l i s t i c I n v e s t i g a t i o n ; Carl

Be rn s te i n , Bob Woodward 145.Shock!ey ' s T h e s i s ; Dr. Wi l l i am Shockley

146.What Do We Want from SALT 11?; Elmo Zumwalt, Paul N i tze 147.Publ ic Medic ine? ; Max F ine, Dr. Rus se l l Roth 148.Leadership in America-; Joe McGinnis , Murray Kempton 149.Looking Back on George Jackson; Gregory Armstrong,

A lber t H a r r i s , J r . 150.The P o l i t i c a l R e s p o n s i b i l i t y of A r t i s t s ; Hugh Kenner 151.Buckley as UN Delegate; Paul ine Freder ick , John S ca l i 152.The Nixon Experience and American Conservat ism; James

Buckley !53.The P r e s i d e n t ' s Pardon; Rep. Thorn F. Ra i l sback , Rep.

Jerome R. Waldie 154.Ch i le and the C IA ; Edward M. Korry 155.England at the B r i nk ; Edward Heath 156.The Economy; Dr. P ie r re R i n f r e t 157.Recognize Cuba?; Jorge Mas, Tad Szu lc 158.Can You S t r i k e Aga in s t the S t a te ? ; Jerry Wurf 159.E lect ion Rhetor ic 1974; Ben J . Wattenberg, Lanny Davis 160.Russ ia and the Food C r i s i s ; Morton I . Sos land 161.The Po s t -E l ec t i on South; Rep. John Jenret te , R e p . E l l i o t t

L e v i t a s , Rep. Trent Lott 162.Democratic Cu l tu re ; L e s l i e F ied le r 163.Jews and American P o l i t i c s ; Stephen I s a a c s , John Murray

Cuddihy 164.The Energy C r i s i s and the Economy; Wi l l i am Simon 165.The Prospects f o r Democratic Moderat ion; Mor r i s Udall 166.Government by Consensus; Rep. John Rhodes 167.Food and the C h r i s t i a n Conscience; Father Theodore

Hesburgh 168.The Problem of the PL0; Dr. M.T. Mehdi 169.Where Do We Go Now fo r E q u a l i t y ? ; Vernon Jordan, J r . 170.0i1:The I s sue of American In tervent ion;Robert Tucker 171.How To Speak the L o r d ' s Language; Rev. Leo Malam'a,

P rof . Harold L. Weatherby 172.Legal R ights o f Teen-agers; Ha r r i e t Pi 1 p e l , C. Dickerman

Wi11i ams 173.Three B r i t i s h M.P.s Aga in s t Wi l l i am F. Buckley, J r . ;

Neil Kinnock, Helene Middleweek Hayman, Norman Lamont 174.The Communist Party and B r i t i s h P o l i c y ; Jimmy Reid

3" <a r~ 2. SB 3 Q. CO

af o —1

Q. C_ C 3 <•

« w ><

175.The I n t e l l e c t u a l ' s R e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s i n an Age of T o t a l i t a r i a n i s m ; Stephen Spender

176.Wil l iam F. Buckley, J r . , Malcolm Muggeridge and the World; Malcolm Muggeridge

1 7 7 . I n t e r g r i t y and Journa l i sm; Tom Wicker, Wi l l iam S a f i r e

178.Do We Have Cont inuing R e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s in Indo­ch i na ? ; Anthony Lewis

179.Feminism; Clare Boothe Luce 180.The F i r s t Republican Governor of South Caro l ina in

100 Year s ; James B. Edwards 181.Who K i l l e d Bobby Kennedy?;Al lard Lowenstein 182.Abort ion; Norman S t . John-Stevas, Margot Hentoff,

Fr. Joseph O'Rourke 183.American P re s t i ge i n Europe?; Peter Jay, Bernard

Lev i n , Peter Jenkins 184.The Economic quandary?; Andrew Knight 185.Was I s r ae l Respons ible f o r K i s s i n g e r ' s F a i l u r e ? ;

Yitzhak Rabin 186.Hawk and Dove Within I s r a e l ; Shalom Rosenfe ld,

Shlomo A v i n e r i , Meyer Weisgal 187.U.S.-Greek Re l a t i on s ; Helen V l a cho l s , Panay io t i s

Lambrias, George Alexander Manqakis 188.1s Detente Work ing?; Senator Henry Jackson 189.Oi l and the Arab Cause; Dr. Farok Akhdar 190.The Ozone Controversy; Michael B. McEl roy, Richard

S. S co re r , Rus se l l W. Peterson 191.Tom Wolfe and the Painted Word; Tom Wolfe 192.The Breach o f F a i t h ; Theodore White 193.Should the Government Have S e c r e t s ? ; Morton H.

Halper in 194.Did Jack Anderson Con the P re s i den t ? ; Jack Anderson 195.The Th i rd Par ty ; Wi l l i am Rusher, Stanton Evans 196.The Concerns o f Young Conservat ives , YAF D i rec to r s 197.Where Are We Headed With Disarmament?; Fred I k l e 198.The P o l i t i c s o f Henry K i s s i n g e r ; Henry K i s s i n ge r 199.The B r i t i s h Mess with the ' F i r s t Lady ' of B r i t i s h

P o l i t i c s ; Margaret Thatcher

200.Unemployment, I n f l a t i o n and the Economy; Walter He l le r 201.Why We Lost the War i n South Vietnam; Nguyen Cao Ky 202.The P ract i ca l L imits o f L i be ra l i sm; Edmund G. Brown, Jr . 203.1s Our M i l i t a r y Defense Adequate?; James Sch le s i nge r 204.FCC and Pub l ic Po l i c y ; Richard Wiley 205.Running the White House; Donald Rumsfeld 206.The Imp l i ca t ion o f the Manson Phenomenon;Vincent B u g l i o s i 207.The R ight to Die (or L i v e ) ; M i l ton Hei fentz, MD, Ralph

Po r z i o , Wi l l i am R. Grafe, MD 208.Crime and C r im ina l s ; James Q. W i l son , Ernest van den Haag 209.The Z i o n i s t Vote; Paul R iebenfe ld, A l f red L i l i e n t h a l 210.What Can the I n t e l l e c t u a l s Do fo r the C i t i e s ? ; Jimmy

B r e s l i n 211.The P re s ident i a l A s s a s s i n a t i o n ; David W. Be l i n 212 . I n te l l i g ence and Secu r i t y ; Rep. Ot i s Pike 213 . I s the Stock Market Honest?; Richard Ney, Chr i s Welles 214.Should We Choose our Pres idents D i f f e r e n t l y ? ; Richard

Reeves 215.The Rus s i an s ; Hedrick Smith, Robert Ka i ser 216.Are the Major Part ies Stalemated?; John Connally 217.The Concorde Conspiracy; John F. He l l ege r s , John Cos te l lo 218.What Did the M i l i t a r y Learn from Vietnam?; Gen. Wi l l iam

Westmoreland 219.The Uses of the United Nat ions ; Daniel Pa t r i ck Moynihan 220.The Educator ' s Dilemma; Wilson R i l e s 221.The Future o f Spa in ; Manuel Fraga I r i ba rne 222.Foreign Po l i cy and the Role o f Spa in ; Jose A r e i l z a 223.Buckley on an Eng l i sh F i r i n g L i ne ; Andrew Kn ight , Anthony

Howard, Richard Clements 224.What i s Their CIA Up To? ; Mi les Copeland, Mart in Walker 225.The V i s i o n of So l zhen i t s yn ; S o l zhen i t s yn , Malcolm

Muggeridge, Bernard Levin 226.American Ambassador, Anne Armstrong; Anne Armstrong 227.Should B r i t a i n Get Rid of I t s Roya l t y ? ; W i l l i e Hamilton 228.Growing (Up) at 37; Jer ry Rubin, Dotson Rader 229.The Imp l i ca t ions of the Hearst T r i a l ; Dr. Joel Fo r t , Prof .

Alan Dershowitz 230.Unemployment; Prof . Mart in Fe lds te in 231.1s There Any Sov ie t J u s t i c e ? ; Te l fo rd Tay lor

232.The New Sp i ro T. Agnew; Sp i ro Agnew 233.U.S. Defense and the P o l i t i c a l Campaign; Elmo Zumwalt 234.The Int imate Lyndon Johnson; Dor i s Kearns 235.The Peop le ' s B icentennia l as S p o i l s p o r t s ; Jeremy R i f k i n 236.Would Anarchy Work?; Roger MacBride 237.Who's More E lectab le ? (Ford or Reagan); John Sears

238.Looking at the Democratic Convention; John Kenneth Ga lbra i th

239.Hentoff, Smith and Norton v s . Wi l l iam F. Buckley, J r . ; Nat Hentoff , L i z Smith, Harold Norton

240.Free Speech v s . Fa i rnes s in Broadcast ing; Fred Fr iend ly 241.Church Schools and the 1st Amendment; Leo P f e f f e r ,

A l l a r d Lowenstein 242.Federal Hea l th ? ; F. Michael Smith, MD, Bert Seidman 243.The Economic Planks of Both P a r t i e s ; P ie r re R i n f r e t 244.Should Books L ike " L i t t l e Black Sambo" Be on L ib ra ry

She l ve s ? ; Ha r r i e t P i l p e l , June Jordan 245.Diplomacy f o r a Crowded World; George W. Ba l l 246.America in a Hos t i l e World?; Zbigniew B rzez in sk i 247.Subvers ion and the Law; W. Mark F e l t , Roy Cohn 248.The Claims o f Jimmy Carter ; Wi l l i am Shannon, Hodding

Carter I I I 249.The Problems of the Panama Canal ; Archbishop Marco

McGrath, Dr. Richard Cheve i l l e , Guil lermo Chapman 250.Panama and the U.S. ; Pres ident Demetrio Lakas

The copyright law of the United States (Title 17, U.S. Code) governs the making of photocopies or other reproductions of copyrighted material. If a user makes a request for, or later uses a photocopy or reproduction (including handwritten copies) for purposes in excess of fair use, that user may be liable for copyright infringement. Users are advised to obtain permission from the copyright owner before any re-use of this material.

Use of this material is for private, non-commercial, and educational purposes; additional reprints and further distribution is prohibited. Copies are not for resale. All other rights are reserved. For further information, contact Director, Hoover Institution Library and Archives, Stanford University, Stanford, C A 94305-6010.

© Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Jr. University.