Evening star., 1946-02-24
The Story Of Gods Magnificent Sinner,
As Seen Through 10th Century Eyes
DAVID THE KING

On the publication OF her frs
novel, "The Gates of Aulis," Glady1
Schmitt was introduced as q younf
writer who had studiously modelled
herself after Marcel Proust anc
Thomas Mann. Obviously she hac
survived the process. "The Gate.
Of Aulis" bore the marks, but II
was a fine novel in its own right
nonetheless. 1t had a great vitality
which conveyed itself in curious
way: none Of its characters lived
for they were all mere perSonifica-
tions Of certain PHILOSOPHERS, but
the book itself blazed with life
Miss Schmitt's creative energy more
than compensated for the absence
of life in her people. 1t is a book
which you remember for the au-
thor's sake rather than for its own
Now, with the appearance of her
second novel, found myself WON
dering again about the Mann in
f1uence. David the King" was an
nounced as a retelling of the David
story and that inevitably suggested
reference to DR.. Mann's Joseph" !"
II, however, Miss Schmitt was
turned to the Biblical hero by DR..
Mann's example, she parted COM
pany with her exemplar once she
had taken up her subject. Her
treatment is her own. DR.. Mann
used his Joseph as an archtype of
Jew; in Joseph's life he saw the
full history and characteristics of
the Jewish people. Miss Schmitt
deals with David solely as an in
dividusl. Her effort, she says. has
been to interpret him in terms of
modern psychological knowledge.
David Had a Conscience.
The project offers remarkable
possibilities, certainly. In terms
Of modern conditions, of course,
David's actual life could not be
lived. He was an absolute monarch
enjoying not only absolution but
divine right. He was accountable
to nothing except from his own
conscience, and his conscience was
conditioned to the barbaric period
in which he lived. Still, he did have
the conscience. 1t is on this point
that he parts company with our
modern dictators. They have abdi-
Gated human conscience in poetic
life and they do not have divine
right either. To apply modern
psychology to David is therefore to
attempt to evaluate something very
strange-the conduct in a barbaric
environment, with all its unknown
or forgotten influences, of a man
who would be exceptional in anv
environment.
The only factor of the time which
bears familiarity to the modern
reader is the Mosaic law which. of
course, is the basis of our con-
temporary civilization. 1t defined
right and wrong and defined them
IN the terms which we recognize
today. But no one would say that
today our awareness of right and
wrong is the chief determining
principle in our behavior. A thous-
and other influences enter in. Such
was also the case in David's time.
Right and wrong, the will of Jah-
veh,. the announcements of the
prophets all lay within a frame of
contemporary barbarous realities,
estimation of the strength of which
must, to a modern writer, be large
ly the work of imagination.
A Very Different Figure.
Interpreting David then in terms
OF modern psychology Miss Schmitt
IN effect deals with him as with
modern man. Her Goth century ewes
see him as such. She has chosen
to discount the environment which
Is beyond her modern grasp, and
deals solely with characters.
David was a neurotic, she tells
us, who began his emotional de-
velopment under the handicap of
homoseXual attachment, his love
for Jonathan being his only gen.
uine love, until, in near senility, he
met Bath-Sheba He was subject
to extreme suggestibility, but
n>atched that weakness by capacity
for accepting always the suggestion
which served his own interest best.
He had delusions of grandeur and
was close to being a congenital liar
in his youth, when his poetic imag-
ination inf1amed him to see facts
as he wished, but there again his
shrewdness caused him to shape his
imaginings to his own ends. He was
profoundly self-indulgent in that he
punished injustice swiftly when he
met 1t in strangers or persons whom
he disliked, but, in his loyal friends
or himself-could countenance a
great deal of it.
The David who emerges from Miss
Schmitt's novel, in short, is a very
different figure from the heroic and
simple le-hearted shepherd king of the
biblical legend. Yet he is no con-
temptible figure. He is what Miss
Schmitt from her Goth century
vantage point feels a man must have
been to have lived through David's
life without being superhuman.
She rounds off the modern tale
Of .evasions, lies and uneven handed
JuSllCe WIFI IIlOQern conclusion,
Worn out by life, her David at last
becomes wiser and achieves the de-
tachment necessary to see his own
career. He faces his sins and con-
fesses them. He realizes that he
has followed pattern which was
implicit in his nature. But it is
only when age has broken the force
of the pattern that he can attain
repentance. Hence his repentance
Is also part of the pattern. The old
David repenting and the young Da-
vid SHINING are the same David do
ing the same thing.
The Goliath Myth.
David did not kill Goliath, OBJ
serves Miss Schmitt, quoting the
Book of Samuel to prove it. He
allied himself with the Philistines
in his exile and set out to lead an
army against his own people. He
betrayed most of the women who
loved him. He committed murder.
He sacrificed innocent men to the
mob to save his crown. He broke
his covenants with God. But he
seldom saw himself as doing an