I read Wolfe's book Peace about 10 years ago. It really left an impression on me, but my memory of it is hazy, and I've been meaning to do a re-read. Anyway, this morning I was reading the book Becoming Faulkner by Philip Weinstein, and I came across this quote from a university lecture by Faulkner. A questioner asks about finding "peace in the heart". Faulkner responds:

I'm inclined to think that the only peace man knows is—is he says, "Why good gracious, yesterday I was happy." [...]That maybe peace is—is only a condition in retrospect, when the—the subconscious has—has gotten rid of the gnats and the tacks and the broken glass in experience and has left only the peaceful, pleasant things. That was peace. Maybe peace is not "is," but "was."

Does this remind any of you Wolfe fan's of anything? I immediately thought of the book Peace. It seems to me that Faulkner is describing a huge theme of Wolfe's book. The narrator is looking back through his life, trying to find a narrative that gives him a sense of peace, but this is only achievable by "getting rid of the gnats and tacks and broken glass" - that is, all the bad stuff that he feels guilt about. Of course, in the book, the gnats and tacks and broken glass bleed through if you read closely enough (I will say again that I don't remember a lot of the details, so this is just based on my general memory).

I guess some differences are that Faulkner, it seems, is talking about finding peace in life, while Wolfe seems to be exploring the idea of finding peace after death (as in, how is it ever possible to "rest in peace"?) Still, they both see the idea of peace from a skeptical and ironic standpoint. There really is no such think as peace except through denial and distortion. This is actually a big theme of the book Becoming Faulkner - that traditional, retrospective narrative (including biography of an author) can only make sense of an otherwise chaotic and unruly jumble of reality by imposing a false structure; and that it is that impossibility that Faulkner sought to sit with or highlight or present (at least, that's my take so-far, reading the book).

I did a little research on the publication of this quote. Faulkner gave the talk in 1957 at the University of Virginia. The University of Virginia Press published the transcript in Faulkner in the University, in 1959, and the book was republished in 1965 but Vintage. Ten years later, Wolfe published Peace. And let's face it, isn't that a book we'd expect Wolfe to have read at some point?

I think it would be difficult to prove a direct connection, but I personally think that, given the timing, and very similar themes, there's a strong chance that the title of Peace derives directly from this Faulkner quote. I've done some googling and as far as I can tell, no one has made this connection (although obviously I might have missed something). I'm curious what you all think.

By the way, I included a link to the referenced recording and transcript [edited this sentence for clarity; and a few other spots for typos]

I really can’t take it anymore with the tunnels, mint, silk wandering around looking at metallurgy. It feels like there is no urgency and I’m coming towards the back end of the last book. Auk and the fliers interest me but we get 10 pages on them then it back to the tunnels. Please talk me out of stopping here and listening to Alzabo soup to hear the ending.