Many of Steven Millhauser's stories tell of a peculiarly obsessive artist, often a practitioner of anachronistic art (building mechanical figures, knife-throwing, fully hand-drawn cartoons) whose creative process leads him further and further from the “real” world into what I believe Millhauser thinks of as a more real-than-”real” world. There is a fascination with magic, illusion, the fantastic. Not a reversal of “reality” with the the imaginary and the impossible, more a declaration that “reality” gives way under intense, honest scrutiny, to something beyond. And whether or not this review is sensible, I don't anticipate much argument on two points: 1) Millhauser is one of the most exceptionally gifted writers for vivid recollection of the most pertinent details of childhood (real or imagined or perhaps researched, it doesn't matter), and 2) the point of his stories is to not to revel in that beauty, but to use those details as a springboard into a meta-reality.
Consider this excerpt from The Little Kingdom of J. Franklin Payne, the first of three novellas in Little Kingdoms, p. 72, describing Franklin's evolving technique in drawing his “fantasy” cartoons: “As the violations of the real became more marked, the perspective backgrounds became fuller and more detailed; and as he gave way to impulses of wild, sweet freedom, he found himself paying close attention to the look of things in the actual world: the exact unfolding of metal steps at the top of a down escalator, the precise pattern of reflections in the panes of a revolving door seen from inside.” (Surely there's significance in the choice of the metaphor of the descent, and of reflection, but we don't even have to go there to get the point.)
The Little Kingdom of J. Franklin Payne is an escalating sequence, a bridge from our world to another, from the real to the unreal, a succession of: three cartoons of increasing detail, length and complexity; of the arrival of three uninvited parties to a private event, the unlikelihood of whose appearance increases exponentially with each arrival, from yet deeper past. Or is it only the recounting of a descent into madness, or at the least, into an intensely private existence, as Franklin loses contact with the adult world as a result of his increasingly obsessive imaginative work?
The narrator of the story who is not quite Franklin, but perhaps the voice of Franklin's own inner narrator, puts it like this (p. 107): “The animated cartoon was a far more honest expression of the cinematic illusion than the so-called realistic film, because the cartoon reveled in its own illusory nature, exulted in the impossible – indeed it claimed the impossible as its own, exalted it as its own highest end, found in impossibility, in the negation of the actual, its profoundest reason for being. The animated cartoon was nothing but the poetry of the impossible – therein lay its exhilaration and its secret melancholy.”
These observations lead naturally to the question of what Millhauser's own artistic pursuit is doing for and to him. Of course, all artists are altered by their work, but Millhauser's work is often explicitly about that topic. I'm not saying that he is actually attempting to perform real magic through his writing. Or maybe I am suggesting that he is – or at least a sort of personal transformation – that his aims are as much to transform reality as to depict it.
Of the other two novellas in Little Kingdoms, The Princess, the Dwarf, and the Dungeon is the more interesting. It is told in first person plural, as the collective or editorial voice of common people living in a town across the river from a brooding castle. Millhauser has several castle stories, perhaps the most similar being Cathay. Castles being magical places, in which objects and people are built and bred to their most ingrown extremes, and about which there is always much speculation and invention. But I need to return to my own magical realms, so we'll rely on others to continue this review.