Wednesday, April 26, 2017

The Vagabond – Colette (French)
It was Colette’s nature to overdramatize emotions; her fiction, which is based on her life experiences, reflects this aspect of her personality, and I can usually accept her on those terms. But the problem that tarnished this novel’s virtues was my persistent feeling that her first-person narrator was misrepresenting matters. We’re to accept that Renee’s first husband was such a monster that he destroyed her ability to give herself to another man, no matter how perfect he may be. Enter Max. Though at first she keeps this rich and handsome admirer at a distance, she slowly sees him for what he is: kind, considerate, sensitive and ready to marry her and thus end forever her money worries. Finally she concedes that she loves him, but she allows nothing beyond passionate kisses (though she ardently wishes for more). Renee goes on tour with the promise that when she returns she’ll marry Max, but in her letters to him she begins to pull away: “Love is so simple, isn’t it? You never supposed it had this ambiguous, tormented face? We love and give ourselves to each other, and there we are, happy for life, isn’t that it? Ah, how young you are . . .” Of course (to the delight of Erica Jong, who considered this to be “the first and best feminist novel”) Renee chooses the shabby life of a vagabond performer; at least she will retain her independence. And though she will experience solitude, she has the proud consolation of enduring it. I simply didn’t buy any of this, starting with the monster (after all, Renee was in her twenties when she married a notorious womanizer; how naive a victim could she be?). And would a worldly thirty-three year old woman who is fearful of aging and losing her physical charms act like a virginal tease toward a man she loves? As for solitude, why does a lesbian with an “indefinable attraction” make an appearance near the end? Colette gave us not the truth but glossy romanticization. This is evident in the overblown prose: “Ah, how long shall I not thirst for you upon my road!” This comes from the final letter Renee writes to Max. Lucky fellow, Max.

A Bell for Adano –John Hersey
It took a while, but my good will toward this novel slowly ebbed, and then turned to animosity. In his Foreword Hersey states that “Major Victor Joppolo, USA, was a good man” and he closes with “We have need of him. He is our future in the world.” Joppolo is in charge of an Italian town recently liberated from Nazi control. The citizens of Adano come to love this just and compassionate man who embodies, in his decisions, the ideals of democracy. The novel is written in a simple, clear style and is cinematic in that scenes are presented with the minimum of words (often in the form of dialogue). I was on board – until some problems began nagging at me. The Italians are persistently portrayed as childish and overly emotional. The worst example comes in a mass panic over a false “gas attack,” when only Joppolo’s calm intervention stops the flight of the fearful mob. Hersey is treating these people – war survivors – as comic figures. And, in a roundabout way, he allows free rein to a contemptuous attitude. Joppolo is always respectful in his speech and actions, but the other American soldiers are a foul-mouthed bunch who consider the young women of Adano to be subjects of lewd speculation, and they routinely refer to the Italians (often in their presence) as “wop” and “dago.” The straw that broke it for me came in the chapter in which we get the story of how Giorgio died. It was so mishandled, so overwrought, so damn false that I abandoned the book in mid-sentence. Bell would win the Pulitzer Prize in 1945. Apparently Hersey gave the judges – and the American public – the stereotypes and platitudes they wanted at the time.

Unaccustomed Earth – Jhumpa Lahiri
The title story of this collection is by far the best (at least of those I read). A recently widowed father visits his married daughter in Seattle. She has one child and is expecting another. She’s quite willing for her father to move in with her (a tradition in Indian households) and her non-Indian husband (who is away on a business trip) is fine with that idea. But the father is satisfied with his life in a condo in Pennsylvania; he enjoys taking package tours to Europe, and on one he met a woman he starts a relationship with (something he doesn’t want to disclose to Ruma). We’re in the minds of daughter and father, switching between them, and it turns out that Ruma is the one who is lost, needy, dissatisfied; there’s no specific reason given for her discontent, but it comes across as real. During his stay her father asserts his independence; he prepares his own meals and he starts a garden; when he leaves he drives himself to the airport in a rental car. Lahiri has presented us with two character studies in which she gets the feelings of both people right, and she doesn’t try to expand the story beyond its natural limits – it’s complete unto itself. These virtues are missing to some degree in the other four I read. “A Choice of Accommodations” was the worst of the lot. Two unappealing and uninteresting characters meander about emotionally and wind up nowhere (actually, on a bed in a vacant dorm room, in a ridiculous scene). The prose in all these long and ambitious pieces is precise and complete in a dutiful way. I think Lahiri tries very hard, in a dutiful way, to be a great writer. But, for me, her problem has to do with conception – knowing her characters and recognizing where they’re going. That accounts for why I left three stories unread.

Stones for Ibarra – Harriet Doerr
It came as no surprise that the events depicted in these interconnected stories closely parallel those of the author and her husband. In a way, this is a book about death: in the second sentence we learn that doctors have given Richard Everton six more years to live. He has decided to spend that time reviving the fortunes of his grandparents, who owned a copper mine in a remote part of Mexico. He and his wife (from whose point of view we get the story) give up their life in San Francisco and head into the unknown. What they find are the ramshackle remains of a once-grand house. They are resourceful and determined and slowly the house is made into a pleasant place and the mine is again producing. So life in Ibarra works out for the Overtons. But the bulk of the book is not devoted to them. What we get is an honest portrayal of a town and its people, especially their way of thinking and their world view. Chapters are devoted to various characters (such as the unscrupulous Chuy Santos and his red taxi). When Doerr turns to personal issues she does so in an understated, muted way. The major emotion Sara deals with is her sense of doom as she watches the deteriorating condition of her husband. When Sara goes to a nearby town and waits her turn to make a phone call to a doctor in the states, her anxiety is effectively conveyed by having her sit, observe others and count off the minutes. The restraint works here because we’re in Sara’s mind, so intimacy is built in. But it extends to Richard, and as a result he seems to be partially in the shadows. Maybe too much in this book is left unrevealed. What we do get is a mood: the hushed stillness of loss.

The Chequer Board – Nevil Shute
Shute was a born storyteller. Despite all sorts of problems with this novel, it held my attention for almost four hundred pages (and there was even a kick at the end). As for those problems: clumsy construction, overly-long episodes, a somewhat saccharine message. The prose is workmanlike, but that’s okay with me as long as an author gets the emotions right, which Shute does. John Turner is beginning to experience neurological problems stemming from a WWII wound (a shard of metal was embedded in his brain). The doctor’s prognosis is grim: he has less than a year to live. Turner, who takes things impassively, says, “It’ll all be the same in a hundred years.” But he does give thought to how to spend his last months; he tells his wife that there are a few things he needs to clean up. He recalls being in a hospital ward with three other men whose plane was strafed by a German Jerry. The copilot was the only one who wasn’t in trouble with the authorities. Turner was wanted for black market dealings, a paratrooper was up for murder outside a London pub, and an American Negro soldier was to be tried for rape. Since Turner’s eyes are bandaged, the other three are told to read to him, or just talk, and a relationship of sorts develops. It’s these three men that Turner sets out to find – to see how they got on. And how they got on makes up the novel. One character is given the lion’s share of attention – Shute can’t seem to let go of any detail of the pilot’s story. That leaves much less space for the other two (the paratrooper gets the short shrift). As for the message, it’s that one’s color doesn’t matter. But Shute’s approach is simplistic in that all the black soldiers stationed in an English town are noble souls while the Southern whites are virulent racists. When a writer stacks the deck, I resist being pushed in one direction. Still, I liked Turner; I liked the other two men (I never got to know the paratrooper); I liked how Turner and his wife renew their feelings for one another. And I liked the ending, which deftly brings it all full circle.

Wednesday, March 22, 2017

Angela’s Ashes – Frank McCourt
On the opening page McCourt claims that of miserable childhoods (the only ones worth writing about) none can equal the misery of an Irish Catholic childhood: “the poverty, the shiftless loquacious alcoholic father, the pious defeated mother moaning by the fire; pompous priests; bullying schoolmasters.” This is a despairing book, filled with death and suffering and filth; only a bitter humor ameliorates the heaviness. A character, in speaking of the English “quality” (those with money), says that they wouldn’t give the likes of him “the steam off their piss.” But even family members are mean and grudging toward one another, and city officials exhibit a callous indifference to the needy. As for Catholicism, all it breeds is a prejudicial hatred. Frank’s memories begin when he’s three, and his main concerns are getting food in his stomach and staying warm; these concerns will hold sway over his entire childhood. One sea change in his attitude occurs, and it involves his father. The boy loves him for his inherent kindness; but when Malachy gets paid for his intermittent periods of work he heads directly to a pub, where he drinks the money away. Meanwhile his wife and children live on the verge of starvation; it comes to the point where Frank finds this unforgivable, and his heart hardens toward the man. McCourt’s depiction of life in Limerick has a sensationalistic aspect, and I sometimes wondered if he was leaning heavily on exaggeration. That I didn’t pause to give my skepticism much attention was due to the book’s entertainment value. Unfortunately, McCourt moves us far past the point where his story should have ended. Most likely an editor saw a gold mine in these ashes and wanted to set things up for a sequel. So we follow Frank into his late teens, skipping years along the way; I found the young man who occupies these pages (in which we’re subjected to his sexual awakening) to be unappealing. And the final scene served to revive my doubts about the memoir’s authenticity. Immediately after Frank arrives in New York he and some companions go to a party where five bored American housewives (their husbands are off hunting) are ready for an orgy. Maybe McCourt was trying to express the freedom he’d find in the new world as compared to that in repressive Ireland. But, whatever, it’s never a good thing for a reader to finish a memoir thinking, “Yeah, right, in your dreams.”

A Hazard of New Fortunes – William Dean Howells
Reading this, I could visualize an author who’s aware of his preeminent position in American letters and is carefully, and with confidence, plying his craft. Trouble is, a reader should never see the author behind the words. For all its expertise in individual scenes, and its good depiction of life in New York in the 1890s, this novel is overpopulated and unfocused. Howell posits an interesting premise: a new literary magazine will take a different approach to submissions: “Look at the way the periodicals are carried on now! Names! names! names! In a country that’s just boiling over with literary and artistic ability of every kind the new fellows have no chance. I don’t believe there are fifty volunteer contributions printed in a year in all the New York magazines. It’s all wrong; it’s suicidal. Every Other Week is going back to the good old anonymous system, the only fair system.” So the “fellows” who don’t have impressive “names” are to be given a chance. But near the end of the book (when I abandoned it) the magazine exists and is doing quite well, yet not one word has been expended regarding its content and quality. Like everything else, Howell introduces a situation and leaves it undeveloped. And his efforts at recreating vernacular became ridiculous. We get ignorant country folk (“Then what are we goun’ to do? She might ’a’ knowed we couldn’t ’a’ come alone, in New York.”), Southerners (“Ah’m so much oblahged. Ah jost know it’s all you’ doing, and it will give papa a chance to toak to some new people.”) and a German (“I ton’t tink we are all cuilty or gorrupt, and efen among the rich there are goodt men.”).

The Moviegoer – Walker Percy
The first person narrator’s voice – the way he thinks, his observations of people – gives this novel a sharply-etched noonday brightness that’s as fresh and and original as it was when I first read it, decades ago. Binx begins by describing his uneventful existence in Gentilly, a suburb of New Orleans. He’s quite happy in a movie, even a bad one: “Other people, so I have read, treasure memorable moments in their lives,” but what he remembers is “the time John Wayne killed three men with a carbine as he was falling to the dusty street in Stagecoach, and the time the kitten found Orson Welles in the doorway in The Third Man.” Binx gets mild pleasure from making money as a stock and bond broker; his affairs are uncomplicated by emotional entanglements. He has carefully structured his life in such a way as to avoid being engulfed by despair (a feeling that he is intimately acquainted with). His cousin Kate does not fare so well; she has no defenses to the onslaught of her emotions. Though Percy suggests the acrid whiff of desolation and emptiness which can creep upon us in the most mundane situations, we never plunge into gloom. What keeps us afloat is the artfulness of the writing: “At last I spy Kate; her stiff little Plymouth comes nosing into my bus stop. There she sits like a bomber pilot, resting on her wheel and looking sideways at the children and not seeing, and she could be I myself, sooty-eyed and nowhere.” *

On Leave – Daniel Anselme (French)
France’s war in Algeria was a quagmire that dragged on for eight years and involved, at its height, a half million young men. In this novel there are no battle scenes, just brief flashbacks – images of a heap of bodies, a burned village. It opens with three soldiers on a train; they have a highly-anticipated week’s leave in Paris. Though we follow Lachaume (a sergeant), he meets up with the other two men. For all of them the leave turns out to be devoid of pleasure. They’re unable to slough off their anger at being asked to fight a war they don’t believe in; they can’t express how they feel to anyone who hasn’t experienced what they have; they know they can’t change things politically. They’re isolated souls in the midst of a city that has turned its back on them. Their only release is in getting drunk. This makes for glum reading, but that mood is the only honest one to convey. The book ends with the men again on a train, this one taking them back to the front. Anselme’s depiction of the state of mind of soldiers in such a situation is one that our Vietnam vets could surely commiserate with.

Wednesday, January 11, 2017

Hear the Wind Sing – Haruki Murakami (Japanese)
This will be a short review for two reasons: the novel was short and reading it was as easy as eating a bag of potato chips. The unnamed narrator is spending his last eighteen days before returning to college. He talks with his friend Rat, he gets halfheartedly involved with a girl who has four fingers, he drinks a lot of beer. Though his aimlessness may depict youthful ennui, it could also reflect an author with no purpose in mind. Supporting the latter theory are the many pages devoted to filler: long spiels from a radio DJ, lyrics of American pop tunes (“I wish they all could be California girls”), the life story of a dead novelist. In a two page “sequel” the narrator jumps ahead in time: at age twenty-nine he’s married, and he and his wife like Sam Peckinpah movies. And that’s about it. He says, “If someone asked me if I was happy, I guess I would have to say yes. Dreams are like that in the end.” I guess they are (whatever that means). This was Murakami’s first novel; he would go on to have international success. Though I haven’t been able to get into his more ambitious work, I enjoyed this. But if you put a bag of potato chips in front of me, I’d enjoy that too. Both are made up of empty calories, and though the novel has a sprinkling of ambiguity (to suggest deep mysteries hidden beneath the surface), that doesn’t slow down consumption. In his Introduction Murakami notes how “very easy” the novel had been to write and how little it meant to him; after he sent it out, he completely forgot about it. If it hadn’t been short-listed for a prize, he “most likely would have never written another novel. Life is strange.” Yes, it is strange. Some writers are committed, work extremely hard, and care deeply about getting even a shred of recognition.

Home Is the Hunter – Gontran de Poncins (French)
That this book fails is a shame, because it has a unique main character and a story that was worth telling. Jean is a cook on an estate; he sees his purpose in life as serving, and that includes keeping up the entire house and the grounds. This is an endless task, but he does it both lovingly and with vigor (he attacks a staircase with steel wool and wax, not content until each step glows). He can show love and kindness to the Monsieur and Madame, but to others (even his wife) he has no feelings. Jean is fecund, earthy, more of a creature (a hare, a carp, a beetle) or a thing (the waters of the lake, leaves, moss) than a man. His bond with nature is spiritual; that he’s an expert hunter is no contradiction, for do not all creatures kill in order to live? When Poncins presents these ideas simply, he’s effective: “For him, to Serve was everything. For forty years he had lived, magnified, lifted above himself by this one idea. There are people who in order to realize their greatness need a battlefield. He had found it in a kitchen.” Good, right? With a deft touch, Poncins said what was needed. But far too often he unloads a mass of verbiage that buries his point; the death of the Madame takes up seven pages, and becomes a meditation involving Nobility, Eternity, God. I won’t go into the plot; suffice to say it’s a tragic one and involves the loss of the old values. If Poncins had stuck to people and events this could have been excellent; instead, his ponderous etudes made it an ordeal to read. I continued to the end because I had admired two books by him. Kabloona is an account of his stay with the Eskimoes; Father Sets the Pace is a biography. In both he found the perfect approach which would serve his subject. But with Home Is the Hunter he uses his inarticulate main character, a man the color of the earth, to philosophize, and he does it in prose that is purple.

Polyglots – William Gerhardie
I liked this author’s first novel, Futility, but it had its faults, the major one being that it was futile to wait for something to happen. I hoped that in his second outing he would offer more than aimless people carrying on aimlessly. But – alas! – early on the narrator describes the book we are reading: “The next story I write will be a tragedy of people who imagine that certain things will happen: they imagine, and their drama is a drama of imagining. Actually, nothing happens.” This is a youthful affectation, and it has its pitfalls. Without a coherent plot Gerhardie needed a constant influx of new blood; midway through an already overpopulated novel we come to a chapter entitled “More Polyglots,” followed by “And Still More Polyglots” and then “A Nest of Polyglots.” I was reminded of a scene in a Marx Brothers film where people crowd into a closet until it’s stuffed to the point where it bursts and everyone comes spilling out. But there’s no bursting in this book; the continuous idiosyncratic chatter of eccentrics became tiresome, and when I quit reading it was with no regrets. The Neversink Library edition has rave reviews from the likes of Anthony Powell, Evelyn Waugh, Graham Greene, and C. P. Snow. In 1925, at the age of twenty-nine, the author became the toast of London’s literary world; in his introduction Michael Holroyd writes that “At Oxford, the book became the young man’s bible.” Yet, in Gerhardie’s words, it brought in “something equivalent, in terms of royalties, to nothing.” He would live to age eighty-two; at his death in 1977 he was impoverished and seldom left his apartment. One wonders where his band of admirers were. Gerhardie has a streak of cynicism that, it turns out, was justified. A characters in Polyglots muses, “ How strange: people meet, and then part, then write letters, grow tired of that, forget – and then die.”

The Tenth Man – Graham Greene
In his Introduction Greene describes how, in 1983, he learned of the existence of what he recalled to be an outline for a film he had written in 1948 (the same year he did The Third Man). In going through an old diary he came across a synopsis of the plot: “A decimation order. Ten men in prison draw lots with matches. A rich man draws the longest match. Offers all his money to anyone who will take his place. One, for the sake of his family, agrees. Later, when he is released, the former rich man visits anonymously the family who possess his money, he without anything but his life. . . .” When Greene was sent the script he was surprised to receive “not two pages of outline but a complete short novel of 30,000 words.” He found this forgotten story to be “very readable.” It is, despite a few problems. In the prison section there’s much ado about a cheap alarm clock and an expensive watch; they show differing times, and the owners have a dispute about which is accurate; in the second section the watches play no part. Also, after those four dots in the original synopsis, Greene waffled on where to take his premise. His tendency to delve into moral conundrums is out-of-place, and the villain who makes a late arrival is weak. If Greene recognized these defects, at age eighty he couldn’t be expected to rework something he had done thirty-five years ago. So the book stands as an intriguing idea that doesn’t quite come off.

Wednesday, December 28, 2016

Framley Parsonage – Anthony Trollope
Trollope understood his audience. They were the educated upper class of Victorian society, and they had no interest in the brutish lives of those in the lower classes. They wanted to read about lords and ladies, vicars and bishops. They wanted romantic entanglements, money matters and political maneuvering; they wanted virtue and villainy. And since reading was their main form of entertainment (imagine that!) they wanted a story that would go on at length. A bit about the genesis of Framley Parsonage shows how well Trollope gave them all they desired. Thackeray asked him to contribute to Cornhill Magazine, which he was editing. Trollope produced monthly installments of three chapters (the complete book consists of forty-eight). During this run the circulation of the magazine stayed around the 120,000 mark; after the last chapter was completed the sales dropped off sharply. Trollope was highly readable then, and he still is. His enduring strength is his insight into human nature (which hasn’t changed over time). He avoided one-dimensional characters or treacly sentimentalizing. And despite his benevolent attitude, he was a cynic; thus we get observations like this: “If I want to get anything from my old friend Jones, I like to see him shoved up into a high place. But if Jones, even in his high place, can do nothing for me, then his exaltation above my head is an insult and an injury.” And, for a novel populated largely by clerics, Trollope chooses to exclude God; what his religious hierarchy care about are money, position and prestige. If a barb can be gently applied, Trollope was a master at it. He did believe in some things, one being that man and woman weren’t meant to live alone. Marriage was a wonderful institution – if the couple are united by love and respect. Fanny is generous and forgiving toward her errant husband; without her, he would have crumbled. Though I enjoyed my five hundred page stay in Barsetshire, I was more interested in some characters than others. Nathaniel Sowerby has lived for over fifty years indulging in every luxury without doing a lick of work. He’s a manipulator, a man who uses others for financial gain. But he operates so smoothly, with such charm, that he resists being dismissed as a mere scoundrel. I also had strong feelings for Lucy Robarts, a girl that the imperious Lady Lufton condemns as too “insignificant” to be a proper match for her son. But Lucy is very significant – not in beauty or how she carries herself, but in how she thinks and in her actions. Lucy does marry Lord Lufton, with his mother’s blessing. And they lived happily ever after? Trollope seems to imply that things may not be all that rosy.

Chalky – Matthew Vaughan
This resolutely idiosyncratic novel was written by a twentieth century author, but the setting is the Victorian England that Victorian English writers don’t concern themselves with. The opening sentence: “Chalky sat in the corner of the room and chewed his piece of rag while the snake-swallower vomited into a battered bucket over by the bed.” Three-year-old Chalky is abandoned by his prostitute mother and is taken to a Church orphanage whose manager is a sadist and a pederast. When Chalky emerges as a distinct personality he’s a thirteen-year-old who is physically strong, intelligent, and determined; his first act is to bring about the downfall of the manager. The reverend who had taken Chalky to the orphanage sees potential in the boy, and he educates him (how to speak correctly, what books to read, etc.). But though Chalky absorbs, his ideas and personality are set. The most important element in his makeup is his reserve: he’s composed, stoical. He has two sexual encounters in his entire life (described in a detail that would make D. H. blush); they’re releases from his self-imposed repression, but are followed by a resumption of defenses against such release. As a profession, Chalky selects the military; he’s perfectly suited for that life, and he rises in the ranks. When Vaughan stuck to factual episodes, the book flowed, was very readable. But he clutters things up with long, erudite asides about religion, metaphysics, etc. And too many events are contrived. Most significant is the ending, which involves an encounter in Africa with a sect of “snake-men” (yes, more snakes). Chalky’s plan to have his platoon captured and then rescued is just plain dumb. The scene that ensues is as nightmarish as the opening one – purposely so. It exists only so Vaughan can have Chalky relive childhood terrors. This is a novel that fails in some ways, but which is endowed with an inner conviction. Ultimately I cared about Chalky. Or, rather I felt sympathy for the fact of his isolation, and that may have been what Vaughan was aiming for.

The Silence in the Garden – William Trevor
Trevor always approaches his stories from an oblique angle; I’ve come to expect this, and to wait for characters and events to take shape and become meaningful. In this case, I waited to the end, largely in vain. I’ve also long admired his ability to evoke emotions, but with this book I felt little to nothing. So what went wrong? For starters, there were too many characters, some who matter and many who don’t – one’s attention gets diluted. And telling the story in part through a diary doesn’t work when the diary writer has no defined personality. Trevor is good with muted people, but Sarah is almost non-existent. At the heart of the matter there’s a long-ago tragedy that has lasting repercussions; the revealing of what happened is done in such a vague and disjointed way that it had no impact. Characters, too, are handled in a desultory fashion. Villana marries a much older man – there’s a lot about wedding preparations – but we never learn how this oddly-matched couple get along. What we do get are pages devoted to young, illegitimate Tom walking around town. In the final chapter Trevor jumps ahead decades, to when everybody except two players are dead (and unaccounted for). Tom contemplates the downfall of the once-idyllic Carriglas. But since Trevor had never created a sense of the idyll, its downfall had no resonance. The writing is good, there are patches that are stand out, such as John James’ affair with a fat, fifty-ish owner of a boarding-house (he despises himself for his weakness, she’s desperate for his love). And the deeply religious Holy Mullihan is really creepy (“There’s a thing called contamination, Tom.”). But beyond these effective odds and ends, there’s not much life stirring in this garden. One wonders, when an author falls far short of his own standards, if he realizes it. I think Trevor did. What he delivered to his publishers was a very short novel with an aborted ending.

Monday, December 12, 2016

Krapp’s Last Tape – Samuel Beckett
I’ve had a rocky relationship with Beckett. When I finished high school I took an evening class at San Francisco State University. We read short novels and one play: Waiting for Godot. The man teaching the class came across not as a professor but as a bearded prophet preaching the gospel of literature. He would go deep into the meaning of the works he selected, and Godot provided a mother lode of ambiguity. I responded; now, looking back, I wonder if the teacher’s charisma influenced me, or if I felt proud of myself for being able to explore mysteries. I’ve never reread the play, but I started watching a film of it being performed on stage (Zero Mostel was in it). I didn’t last long before switching it off; the buffoonery didn’t work for me. After finishing Krapp’s Last Tape, I was moved to try once more to read one of Beckett’s novels. Molloy, this time, and sheer determination took me to page forty before I abandoned it. It seemed like so much nonsensical indulgence in oddity and obscurity. But – and here’s the final point – anybody who could write something as good as Krapp’s Last Tape deserves my lasting respect. Because of the play’s brevity, it doesn’t warrant a review (it would be like reviewing a single story). But it packs such an emotional wallop that I wrote an essay on it (which I subtitled “Samuel Beckett’s nightmare”). It can be found at Tapping on the Wall. *

The Dangling Man – Saul Bellow
With only seventy pages left I had all I could take of long descriptive passages, of pontificating, of a main character I couldn’t relate to. My misgivings began with the opening premise. The novel purports to be a journal (the first entry is dated December 15, 1942) in which Joseph declares his solitude and inertia and inability to focus. Yet this solitary, inert man goes on to recount a series of social encounters: lunches, parties, etc. Also, he’s married (though his wife comes across as no more than an object, like a table or lamp). And despite his inability to focus he gives us richly detailed scenes and philosophical musings about morality, values: “Out of my own strength it was necessary for me to return to the verdict of reason, in its partial inadequacy, and against the advantages of surrender.” This type of thing, constantly. But who is this guy and what is his problem? He takes it upon himself to spank the bottom of his brother’s nubile teenager (she had been rude to him); since he believes this action to be perfectly justified, I had an Aha! moment: he’s nuts. But Bellow lets this incident slide away without repercussions. What we get is more deep thinking. My reading came to an abrupt end at a paragraph that began: “Great pressure is brought to bear to make us undervalue ourselves. On the other hand, civilization teaches that each of us is an inestimable prize. There are, then, these two preparations: one for life and the other for death.” I chose death for this book, which was Bellow’s first. He would go on to win the Nobel Prize. At least he was more deserving than Bob Dylan.

Fast One – Paul Cain
I was in the mood for a hard-boiled crime novel, and that’s what Cain delivers. I had quit this book previously because I couldn’t keep the many names attached to people; also, I found the events to be confusing. This time I didn’t let those things bother me; I just kept my attention focused on the main character as he cuts a bloody swath through the corrupt world of Los Angeles during the Depression (the novel came out in 1933). In this brand of fiction authenticity is all-important, and I believed in how tough Kells was. He has a trace of softness (a woman), and he has a code of honor (he sticks by his few friends). But he’s out to make a killing, and if that involves killing, so be it. Besides, the people he’s dealing with are as amoral as he is. What was interesting to me – the element that gave this novel an added dimension – is that in Kells we get a study of a man with an ingrained recklessness. Money is important to him – he accumulates it and loses it and accepts both stoically – but what really spurs on this risk-taker is the ultimate risk: to put your life at stake against dangerous men (and, as it turns out, dangerous women). At several points he has misgivings – he makes plans to get out of LA and return to the comparative safety of New York, where he knows the game better. But he doesn’t leave; he always has some unfinished business – money to collect, revenge to be doled out. In the end he stays too long. The novel is written in a rapid fire, choppy, bare bones prose. Action propels it forward; it has no rest stops until the final one.

Travels with a Donkey – Robert Louis Stevenson
In 1878, when Stevenson was twenty-eight, he took a twelve day trek through a mountainous region of France. He needed a beast of burden to carry his supplies, so he bought a she-ass, “not much bigger than a dog, the colour of a mouse.” If you expect some bond to develop between Stevenson and Modestine (for that’s the donkey’s name), you’ll be disappointed. You might even be appalled by his resorting to liberal use of a goad (a stick with a nail at the end) to get her to move at a satisfactory pace. The first part of the journey is full of hardships, which Stevenson recounts with a labored humor. The area he travels in is bleak, the weather is bad (cold, rain, wind), the many of the people he meets are surly. He stays for a few days at a Trappist monastery; the monks, who have taken a vow of silence, are allowed to speak to travelers. Stevenson is impressed with the life they lead, though he knows it’s not for him; he values female companionship too highly. The monks’ days, which begin at two AM, are filled with religious duties, work and selected pastimes (one man keeps rabbits). Their meals are meager, yet they seem brimming with health and good spirits. After he leaves Our Lady of the Snows he enters a more southernly area where the landscape is pretty and the people more open and lively. But at this point a tendency that was present throughout the book became more pronounced. There’s too much deep thinking about man and God. Also, we get a long account of the bloody revolt that raged between the Protestant Camisards and their Catholic oppressors. All this (including lyrical descriptions of nature) seemed like padding. To read a travelogue one must have an interesting companion. I want someone observant of people, of their homes and occupations and meals, etc. Except for the monastery stay, there wasn’t much of this, and I grew impatient for the journey to be over. It culminated on a note of falsity. In the last chapter Stevenson sells Modestine. Through he hadn’t shown the least bit of affection for this dumb beast, in the closing sentence he’s openly weeping about their parting.

Tuesday, November 22, 2016

A Summer Bird-Cage – Margaret Drabble
I’ve enjoyed some of Drabble’s novels, so I decided to check out her first one, which was written when she was twenty-three. The enthusiasm of an author with an assured future is evident (her family was well-established in Britain’s cultural hierarchy, she had her English degree from Oxford, and her older sister is the novelist A.S. Byatt). She displays talent: her prose is smooth and clear, and the voice of the first-person narrator is engaging. Sarah is recently graduated from Oxford, she has a boring job with the BBC, her love interest is in America. She goes to parties where bright young things engage in bright young chatter, and she has conflicts and moods, but it’s all unsubstantial. The person Drabble turns to for a plot is Sarah’s older sister, the glamorous, self-assured and aloof Louise. The novel opens with Louise’s marriage to Stephen. Sarah can’t fathom what her sister sees in this pedantic bore; yet, because the sisters were never close, she’s merely an uninformed bystander. In a long chapter called “The Information,” which comes after the halfway point in the book, she has dinner with a friend and gets the whole scoop (their dialogue begins after they have minestrone and continues without a break for fifteen pages, which made me wonder when they had a chance to chew their food). Anyway, it seems that Louise is having an affair with a handsome and virile actor named John (who was Stephen’s best man at the wedding); this is causing unstable Stephen great pain. We find out where all this leads in the last chapter, called “The Collision.” Stephen catches Louise and John enjoying a bath together; Louise, who relates the scene to her sister (the only instance of semi-intimacy between the two), is very upset at how monstrously Stephen acts; he even kicks her out of the house. Can you imagine that? Louise, we must assume, is the most obtuse mortal walking the face of the earth. The novel ends with more news about her: she’s living with John, who wants to marry her, but she . . . Oh, who cares, it’s all silly and illogical, with no point in sight. This is a tyro effort. The older and wiser Drabble won’t create characters who have labels pinned on them (glamorous, virile, unstable) and she won’t base her plot entirely on secondhand accounts. Lastly, she won’t give someone the moniker of Sappho Hinchcliffe (you know, the actress).

The Spanish Farm – R. H. Mottram
This is a war novel in which war is relegated to the background. It’s set mostly in Flanders, some twenty kilometers behind the trenches. The troops who occupy the town are English (later Australian), and they abide by French law as to what they can and cannot do; they pay for their lodging and the food they eat. There are no battle scenes and no atrocities are committed, though the fact of war is made to seem both atrocious and a colossal waste. What we get is primarily a character study of Madeleine. This young woman’s purpose in life is to make her father’s farm profitable; she doesn’t care about anything else (except love). She’s somewhat hard-hearted; only once does she shed tears. She’s tenacious, and she uses her practical intelligence to get what she wants. Her beauty comes from the health and strength of her body; she’s like a splendid animal. She’s competent, unimaginative, possessive, calculating and proud. That’s Madeleine, and the plainness of the prose, its ordered simplicity, is unwaveringly in accord with what she is. Besides managing the farm and dealing with troops, her major preoccupation is the Baron’s son. Georges had taken her as if it was his right to take the daughter of his father’s gamekeeper. She was quite willing: “Careful, even grudging, when she gave she gave generously, no half measures.” But her giving is devoid of any romantic notions; instead there’s a maternal aspect to her sensuality. When the war breaks out Georges goes off to fight; in an effort to see him, she conspires to be sent to Paris, where she works in a government office. Before briefly reuniting with Georges she has an affair with an English lieutenant. Skene needs her, and she responds to that; but they have nothing in common. She considers him to be her good child, but her “spoiled, imperious one was what she needed.” The novel closes with the war over and Madeleine back at the farm. Only ghosts remain: Georges dead, both of her brothers dead, her father an apparition. She accesses her losses with bitterness, and then turns stoically to the work at hand. How (and why) could Mottram capture so completely the sensibilities of Madeleine? I felt there must be some connection between the two. A bit of research revealed that the author served in France from 1914 to 1918. I’m convinced that Mottram was Lieutenant Skene. Skene is the only other character whose mind we’re in; he knew Madeleine at the farm; later he spent a week with her at a hotel in Paris (a respite from the “obliteration of his individuality in the dark mud of Flemish trenches”); she had given her body to him as one bestows a gift. When Skene stops by the farm after the war Mottram has her think that he “was just one of the things the War, the cursed War, had brought on her, and now it, and they, were going. Good riddance.” But Mottram couldn’t rid her from his thoughts and emotions. Thus this deeply felt and artfully executed novel. It’s the first of a trilogy. I have absolutely no desire to read more. I’ll leave Madeleine forever as she is at the end of this book.

Tuesday, November 8, 2016

White Mule – William Carlos Williams
Ezra Pound said, “Make it new,” and Williams does, but without resorting to obscurity. He immediately put me on intimate footing with his characters, and that association never slackened. His straightforward prose relies heavily on the spoken word; in a single paragraph two or three characters talk (without one quotation mark getting in the way), but each voice is so distinctive there’s no difficulty in sorting them out. His subject matter is unique; on the first page an infant enters the world. The mother’s reaction to learning that it’s a girl: What? A girl. But I wanted a boy. Look again. It’s a girl, Mam. No! Take it away. I don’t want it. All this trouble for another girl. The father enters the room: Are you all right, Mama? Oh, leave me alone. What kind of man are you? As he didn’t exactly know what she meant he thought it better to close the door. So he did. If you’ve formed any preconceptions about the parents, they’ll prove to be wrong; as we follow Flossie in her first year, they’ll take good care of their sickly, underweight, squalling child. Williams, a pediatrician by profession, has a matter-of-fact attitude toward Flossie and every other character; he gives us a realism stripped bare of sentimentality. While Flossie struggles To Be (the title of the first chapter), the adults have to deal with practical matters. A major one is money. The novel is set in the early 1900s, a time of turbulent growth. Joe steadily emerges as a man whose intelligence and determination make him someone to reckon with. He’s reserved in his words and feelings; his wife, Gurlie, is his opposite; she’s emotionally volatile. In the book’s closing section she takes their two children to the mountains of Vermont to stay with an immigrant Norwegian family; they do this to get Flossie out of New York’s oppressive summertime heat. Gurlie is invigorated by the beauty and peace of nature, which she had last known in her childhood. As we see this dimension of her come to light, the novel is complete. Williams, a poet, wrote a book that contains no poetic language; but there’s a sort of poetry in the down-to-earth way he depicts human beings in the midst of life.

In the Money – William Carlos Williams
This second installment of the trilogy is more conventional in form than White Mule (I was disappointed when I saw the first quotation mark). And much of the plot concerns Joe’s efforts to get a contract to print government money orders. Though he submitted the low bid, the firm he had previously worked for is determined to beat him by whatever means necessary; they have a band of high paid lawyers and political connections. Williams is able to make this long struggle engrossing; he even builds tension, because we’re never sure whether Joe will prevail against the cutthroat tactics thrown at him. He does, and is “in the money.” But the stamina, the resolve – was it worth it? Is money that important? For Gurlie, the answer is a resounding “Yes!” She also believes that she should get credit for Joe’s success because it’s her ambition and drive that is pushing him forward. But she’s giving herself too much credit; Joe isn’t oblivious to her demands, but he remains his own man. The two have different values. When Gurlie is asked why she wants to be rich, she answers, “Why do I want to be rich for! What do you want to live for? Of course I’m not satisfied with what I’ve got. I want to go places. I want to see everything there is to see that I’m interested in.” She jerks her head at her husband. “He doesn’t want anything, that’s why he needs me. He’d be satisfied to walk around in the woods by himself, he never sees anything. What do you mean, why do I want to be rich?” Gurlie’s combativeness often turns abusive; Joe can handle her – in his quiet way he’s as tough as she is – but she’s taking on ominous dimensions. When her mother comes to stay with them the two are constantly at odds; their final fight turns venomous. During this argument Flossie begins to scream like she had never done before. The crying goes on and on, unstoppable. An odd old doctor (“I should have been a writer”) had given Gurlie a pamphlet in which he proposes that influences in the second year of a child’s life can determine their personality. Had the voices of her mother and grandmother, raised in such anger, shaken the foundations of Flossie’s security? Maybe we’ll see a darkness emerge in her, but for now she’s a cheerful child, eager to learn (language, in particular) and to do (such as to climb stairs like an adult, one step at a time). At the end of the book she and her sister Lottie return to the Vermont mountains, this time without their mother. They’re in the bosom of a family, in the embrace of nature; it’s clear, in these idyllic scenes, which way of life Williams values. But they return to New York, and what awaits them there?

The Build-Up – William Carlos Williams
This should have been called The Let-Down. Williams fails to bring a satisfying (or even coherent) close to his trilogy; worst of all, he abandons characters that I had come to care about. The book begins five years after the previous one, and we swiftly cover the next dozen years. Joe is hardly present; when he makes brief appearances he’s usually in a pissed-off mood. Gurlie is at the forefront, moving heaven and earth; she’s a swaggering bully getting her way. Lottie, the older child (who had been a shadowy figure) plays a major role; at age fourteen she goes to a conservatory in Leipzig to study to be a concert pianist. (Really? – I had no idea she had talent.) She comes across as a nasty, selfish person, and the attention paid to her was wasted on me. And then there’s Flossie, who entered the world on page one of White Mule. If you gathered together all the text devoted to her it might come to ten pages. She’s a vapid, colorless presence, and for Williams to present her like this amounts to a literary betrayal. If taken as a separate novel, without antecedents, The Build-Up has some good individual scenes, but there’s no overall structure; it’s meandering and full of loose ends. Why such a drop-off in quality? The publication dates may provide an answer. White Mule came out when Williams was fifty-four, In the Money three years later. Then there’s a span of twelve years before The Build-Up. In that interval the inspiration that produced the first novel was lost. Maybe the downward arc of this trilogy reflects a sad truth about life.

Tuesday, October 18, 2016

The Merciless Ladies – Winston Graham
Two flesh and blood ladies in Paul Stafford’s life are merciless, but Success (or his pursuit of it) can be seen as another. All make unreasonable demands. In the end he winds up a winner; he gets the woman he loves and he achieves lasting importance as an artist. The person who tells Paul’s story is Bill Grant, a friend from boyhood. This character sacrifices much in the interests of Paul (even, possibly, in the up-in-the-air ending, his freedom). He also has feelings for both of the women Paul marries. There’s a hint of something incestuous (though not in a sexual way) in Bill’s dedication – a dedication of which Paul is oblivious. In stiff upper lip fashion Bill withholds his feelings, so we never understand what motivates him. Other than that odd undercurrent, Ladies is a solid, well-constructed, intelligent novel. But I read it because I liked Graham’s The Walking Stick so much, and Ladies isn’t nearly as good. It’s more worldly – there’s an ocean voyage, courtroom scenes, a variety of locales, from posh London clubs to an isolated cottage on the moors – but the intimacy with a character is missing. Nor does the prose have the flow of the earlier work. This book seems the product of a good writer dutifully plying his trade. Deborah in Walking Stick obviously meant more to Graham than anybody in Ladies. With one exception: Paul’s second wife is similar to Deborah in a number of ways. Most striking is that both have a limp caused by a youthful tubercular condition. One of Paul’s merciless ladies – his ex-wife Olive – refers to Holly as a “one-legged, bespectacled creature.” But she has an inherent goodness. Paul was fortunate to get her before Bill does. Some people have all the breaks. And don’t you, deep down, hate them?

Dark Bridwell – Vardis Fisher
Idaho in the late 1800s – a primitive world populated by primitive people. In telling his tale, Fisher’s prose is primitive; if you want sophistication, this is not the book for you. Charley Bridwell takes his wife and their two young boys to live in the most remote plot of land he can find. He believes that civilization (the mining camps he knew all too well) are festering holes of corruption. Charley is a study in contrasts. He’s gives expression to an exceedingly brutish side of his nature in acts of cruelty to animals, and he subjects his sons to vicious beatings. But for his wife he shows unerring devotion; toward her he’s always thoughtful, tender, kind. And though he delights in cheating people, he can show great generosity to those in need. Charley has a carefully worked out philosophy of life; he doesn’t believe in work, in striving to get ahead; he embraces irresponsibility. As time goes by, Lela grows increasingly discontent. She’s oppressed by their isolation: the mountains surrounding them, the roaring river that plummets near their cabin. She was fifteen when Charley married her; he was more than twice her age, and she respected and looked up to him. But when their sons leave home in their mid-teens – out of hatred for their father – she falls into a deep depression. When she rouses herself she goes onto a full-scale rebellion against Charley. She will work, try to get ahead and make a better life for the two children who were born in the cabin; they won’t become savages like Jed and Thiel. For Charley Lela feels two strong emotions simultaneously: love and hate. The most laudatory thing I can say about this novel is that Fisher makes her conflict into a tragedy. At the end all the principals disappear, moving in directions that will never converge. We know what lies in wait for them: Charley will wallow and die in the degradation he despised, Lela will be haunted by her abandonment of a man who loved and needed her.

The Paradise Below the Stairs – Andre Brincourt (French)
Thirteen-year-old Francoise is manipulative and deceitful; he can also be unrepentantly malicious. In his search for a role in life he decides on being a tough guy. But he’s still a boy, and, as events reveal, he’s not ready to become involved in sex. Though authors have explored this issue with girls, in this case the girl is the experienced instigator; at age fourteen Myriam wields the power of her sexuality. The hidden cellar the boys discover at their school would have been a sort of club, but when Myriam becomes its “savage queen” it takes on a perverse purpose. She begins to have two boys enter the room where her bed is. Though Francoise resists Myriam’s efforts to get him to go all the way, he claims to the other boys that he does; he even gets Myriam to promise that she will never tell anyone that they do not “make love.” Basson, older and experienced – he considers himself a man – is the other person who shares Myriam, and he does go all the way with her. The outcome is pregnancy, then a crude attempt at an abortion. The griminess of all this is distasteful, partly because none of the young people elicit sympathy. If Brincourt was trying to portray the illogical turmoil of adolescence, he undermines that purpose by the luridness of his plot. Francoise’s “paradise” is actually a hellish place.

Friday, September 16, 2016

The Finkler Question – Howard Jacobson
Jacobson’s main character is besieged by emotional woes; the second sentence of the novel is, “His life had been one mishap after another.” Unfortunately, Julian Treslove and his mishaps (particularly those involving women) were too doggedly offbeat to be credible. For example, Julian is employed by a theatrical agency as a double for famous people at parties, conferences, etc. “Treslove didn’t look like anybody famous in particular, but looked like many famous people in general, and so was in demand if not by virtue of verisimilitude, at least by virtue of versatility.” (Of course, we never see Treslove plying his trade.) The crucial event comes early, when Treslove is robbed on a London street. The person who mugs him is a woman, and she says something Treslove finds unintelligible. At first he thinks her words were “Your jewels,” but after interminable contemplation he becomes convinced that she said, “You Jew.” This is used as a jumping off point: Treslove (who isn’t Jewish) begins to think of himself as being a Jew. The Finkler Question is really the Jewish Question. When Finkler and his wife argue (which is all they do) it’s over his ASHamed Jews movement; Jacobson even manages to make Treslove’s affair with Finkler’s wife revolve around Jewishness. I’m not interested in that subject per se (and per se was all there was), and what was left? Only one of the characters was appealing (an old fellow named Libor Sevcik, who is relegated to the sidelines); I found nothing humorous in a book that was (I suppose) meant to be a comic romp; the bluntness of the sex scenes made me yearn for women who have a modicum of modesty in words and actions (something mighty hard to find in today’s fiction). After I quit this Booker Prize-winner I did a bit of research on Jacobson and found that through a long and successful career his bread and butter issue has been Jewishness (his latest novel is entitled J). As an experiment I glanced through the half of The Finkler Question that I hadn’t read, opening it twenty times at random, and not once did I come across a page without references to you-know-what. I’ll do it again, right now. Okay, page 220 of the hardback edition: “He doesn’t say, the Jews misleading the world again, but only an uncomplaining fool, happy to be unforeskinned, could miss the implication.” This excerpt conveniently brings up something else that I wasn’t interested in but that gets a lot of attention: the state of penises.

Look at the Harlequins! – Vladimir Nabokov
If you’re not a Nabokov afficionado, don’t bother with this book; I am, and I found it enjoyable. It’s framed as an autobiography of a emigre Russian writer named Vadim; his novels are listed, and all of them are Nabokov’s novels assigned new names (it was fun to figure out which was which). Nabokov is playing a game with the reader; he mixes similarities in his own life with differences. Vadim is married three times before he meets the right woman; Vladimir married the right woman when he was twenty-six. What do these other wives represent? Mistakes he managed to avoid? Vadim states that “madness has been lying in wait for me behind this or that alder or boulder since infancy.” One wonders if Vladimir suffered from the same “incipient insanity.” And then there’s the Lolita connection . . . Coming from an author who some accused of having pederastic tendencies, Nabokov’s assigning that abnormality to Vadim seems like either an admission or an act of defiance. When Vadim’s eleven-year-old daughter Bel comes to live with him after a separation of many years, we get scenes like this: “She could not stop shivering, though, and I had to thrust my hands under her skirt and rub her thin body, till it glowed, so as to ward off ‘pneumonia’ which she said, laughing jerkily, was a ‘new,’ was a ‘moon,’ a ‘new moon’ and a ‘moan,’ a ‘new moan,’ thank you.” Later he claims to see “Nothing wrong or dangerous, or absurd or downright cretinous in my relationship between my daughter and me. Save for a few insignificant lapses – a few hot drops of tenderness, a gasp masked by a cough and that sort of stuff – my relations with her remained essentially innocent.” Yet Bel takes to walking around the house naked; when she appears wearing only slippers and a necklace, the woman who would be Vadim’s third wife is “flabbergasted” and has her sent away to a boarding school. Vera appears late in Vadim’s life, and is referred to only as “you” (Vera was Nabokov’s first reader, and he dedicated all his books to her). For him she represented no-nonsense Reality; I believe that she kept him stable, able to avoid the nightmare world to which he exiled so many of his fictional creations. But I may have given the impression that this is a dark and depressing work when it’s actually rather a lark. I believe that the act of writing well about even deplorable things gave Nabokov pleasure. At any rate, after suffering through half of Ada, I was grateful that my long association with him would end on a bright note; his last sentence has, appropriately, no period: “I had been promised some rum with my tea – Ceylon and Jamaica, the sibling islands (mumbling comfortably, dropping off, mumble dying away) –” Before he died Nabokov asked that the book he was working on (or, rather, doodling around with) be destroyed. But thirty years later his son Dmitri had The Original of Laura published, something which I consider an act of betrayal. I’ll close with a quote from Harlequins that describes what his craft meant to Nabokov; Vadim remembers Paris “merely as the chance setting for the most authentic and faithful joys of my life: the colored phrase in my mind under the drizzle, the white page under the desk lamp awaiting me in my humble home.”

Monday, August 29, 2016

The Walking Stick – Winston Graham
The walking stick is used by Deborah; when she was eleven she contracted polio and was left with a withered leg. At age twenty-six she holds a respected position in a high-end London auction house. She’s fairly content; romantic love has been denied her, but she’s resigned to that fact. And then, at a party, she meets Leigh. . . . This book has elements of a thriller, but it’s primarily a psychological study in which love plays a dominant role. “I love you, Leigh,” are the last words Deborah speaks to the man who brought her out of her shell, broke down her resistance and insecurities, made her feel wanted and valued, gave her sexual pleasure. And then she walks off and does something that will shatter his life and that of others – including her own. For Leigh had made Deborah vulnerable to pain; the corrosive emotions that surface in her are entirely credible. I found her willful destructiveness both exhilarating and poignant. To generate a visceral response in a reader is a goal most sought by all artists. Art is another subject that Graham addresses, for Leigh’s passionate desire is to be a painter. But when he shows his work to an expert he’s dismissed as no more than an illustrator: “They are – pictures, if you know what I mean. They’re no better and no worse than hundreds of others about. But they’re not really – forgive me – paintings, as I understand the word.” Leigh accepts this evaluation; but his dreams have been crushed. And what’s left? As I felt for Deborah, I also felt for Leigh; they both suffer a devastating loss. The mystery element in the novel involves motivations – why a person does something. The truth of the matter always dawned on me before it was fully revealed on the page. This isn’t a criticism; Graham was writing about real people, so the reader was provided with everything he needed to discern how things would go. I even knew what would be on the last page, but that was because it was the only way to end the book. It had the impact of the inevitable. *

The Memorial – Christopher Isherwood
The book is subtitled “Portrait of a Family,” and the approach is to give characters a section in which we get a stream-of-consciousness view of their thoughts and feelings. It’s done lucidly – the prose is good. But we go from one person to another and then to another, and far into the book I was having trouble figuring out who was related to whom, and how they felt about each other. Someone of no apparent significance would make a brief appearance, but later it would turn out that he or she had an important role. And I’d wonder what this person had said and done on page six. To further muddle things the narrative skips back and forth in time. Book One is set in 1928; Book Two in 1920; Book Three 1925. Isherwood made an ambitious attempt to write a novel that, despite its modest length (it’s under three hundred pages), warranted the use of the word “Book.” That struck me as pretentious, as did the structural intricacies. But the most serious shortcoming was that, at age twenty-eight, the author simply didn’t know enough about people; everybody was walking and with a label. When the scene shifted to College, and sensitive Eric and irresponsible Maurice took center stage, I decided, with a sense of relief, that I had enough of this family.

The Soul of Kindness – Elizabeth Taylor
With simplicity and clarity Taylor goes deep into the emotional lives of nine diverse characters. Flora, the lovely centerpiece, has led an unruffled existence; by nature she’s a happy person who wants everyone else to be happy. None of them are, to varying degrees; a few are enveloped in an incurable state of loneliness. Elinor is married to a man who doesn’t care about her: “He could leave me in the morning lying stretched dead on the floor. And if anyone later in the day asked him how I was, he’d say, ‘Fine. Fine. Thank you’; and then he might suddenly remember and say, ‘Well, no, as a matter of fact, she’s dead.’ ” She tells this to Flora’s husband; Richard finds Elinor interesting, but he withdraws his companionship when he sees that it disturbs his wife; he feels a responsibility to keep her face free of concern: “. . . it would surely be his fault if it was altered, if the Botticelli calm were broken, or the appealing gaze veiled.” That calm is broken when Kit (who, since he was a boy, has been in love with Flora) attempts suicide. Flora receives an anonymous letter (it’s from Liz, the only malicious character in the novel) blaming her for what happened. But how is Flora to blame? She does nothing to encourage Kit’s feelings for her. He has dreams of being an actor, and in this she does encourage him, which is a mistake. When he’s ill with the flu she comes to his apartment to tend to him, and she turns to his dreams, which he has wisely discarded: “I know you have this gift.” He feels euphoria at her words, but after she leaves he sees clearly that he has no gift, no glowing future, and he sinks into a deep depression. Flora had acted out of kindness; her only failing is obliviousness to life’s harsh facts. All the others must face those facts; perhaps that’s why they either resent her or feel obligated to protect her (as one protects a child). This novel moves in a straight line, and it ends with no resolutions – it’s likely that some characters will accept compromises, but for others the problems they face are unsolvable. Even Flora’s continuing insularity is not assured.

Wednesday, August 17, 2016

Nobody Move – Denis Johnson
On the inside flap of the hardback edition is a ridiculous claim that this novel is “touched by echoes of Raymond Chandler and Dashiell Hammett.” And the blurbs on the back compare Johnson to Twain, Whitman and God (the last by Jonathan Franzen). We get a snippet from a Jim Lewis review in The New York Times – “Good morning and please listen to me: Denis Johnson is a true American artist.” This quote is incomplete; it actually continues with “and Tree of Smoke is a tremendous book.” Lewis was referring to the novel that won a National Book Award, not to Nobody Move. If comparisons are to be made, I found Elmore Leonard’s influence in the fast-moving, sassy, street smart dialogue. Then we descend into the dark and twisted territory staked out by Cormac McCarthy. Maybe DJ was aiming for the type of lucrative movie deals garnered by those two authors. Serve up plenty of sex, vulgarity, violence and – this is important if you want to emulate Cormac – creepiness. There’s an ominous Tall Man who, it turns out, is five foot seven; no reason is given for how he got his name, though something is wrong with him: “He stood under the ceiling light with his hat tipped forward and his face in a shadow and a hooked pinky traveling toward one of his nostrils, if he had nostrils.” We never learn more. Yes, I read the whole thing (it’s very short – a novella, at best – and it was serialized in Playboy, that citadel of good taste). For me this became a study revealing how low the literary world has sunk. Because – Please listen to me – no true American artist would sink so low as to produce a smarmy bit of pandering like Nobody Move. I’ll go straight to the text to prove my point. “I didn’t say I’m killing you,” Juarez told him. “What’s happening is I’m about to cut off your balls. If you die of it, that’s your personal decision.” What Juarez and Gambol are going to do, as Jimmy watches, is to eat his balls (they’ve done this with previous victims). Later there’s an encounter with a wheelchair-bound judge who’s wearing a colostomy bag: “With both her hands she grasped the bag under his armpit and jerked it free and struck him across the face with it, putting half a pirouette behind the blow, and Gambol leapt aside as feces erupted down the man’s neck and chest and behind his back, so that he was wearing it and sitting in it.” Actually, Denis Johnson is wearing it and sitting in it. And so are you, if this kind of stuff appeals to you. To conclude my study I checked out what reviewers at the top publications had to say. I couldn’t find one objection to the book’s ugliness; in fact many found much to praise in Nobody Move. Heaven help us.

Elizabeth and Her German Garden – Elizabeth von Arnim
To my surprise (and it was a pleasant one) this is a subversive book. It pricks and deflates conventional beliefs with a light, graceful touch; all is serene, there’s not an iota of stridency. The opening words are “I love my garden.” What Elizabeth doesn’t love are her fellow human beings. On the final page she strolls the green paths and thinks “It makes one very humble to see one’s self surrounded by such a wealth of beauty and perfection anonymously lavished and to think of the infinite meanness of our own grudging charities, and how displeased we are if they are not promptly and properly appreciated.” The word the author chooses to italicize is significant because nature’s beauty is usually attributed to God. And she uses “we” and “our” in referring to meanness; Elizabeth is as selfish as others. She feels no pity or duty toward the poor; entertaining guests is a chore, and when “great friends” depart she wishes “not to see them again for at least ten years.” One of the book’s many virtues is its humor; characters and episodes are gently slanted to show their comic side. Her husband is referred to only as the Man of Wrath. Though mostly silent (or absent altogether) he occasionally launches into long speeches; some express a misogynistic point of view. “Do you suppose that the intellectual husband, wrestling intellectually with the chaotic yearnings of his intellectual wife, ever achieves the result aimed at?” Of those women of the lower class who get a prompt clout, he says, “I consider they are to be envied rather than not since they are early taught, by the impossibility of argument with marital muscle, the impotence of female endeavor and the blessings of content.” An iconoclast herself, Elizabeth seems to respect (and to be amused by) the opinions that the Man of Wrath devilishly advocates; at any rate, she gives him full rein. Garden was a huge success when it came out in 1898; I think it was passed along by its female audience much as a banned book might be. Women probably admired the author’s freedom – not just to say what she pleases, but her escape from the duties and responsibilities of caring for family and household. Though Elizabeth had three children in rapid succession, these “babies” play a mostly decorative role; a governess does the heavy lifting. For many years the identity of the author was a mystery; in the volume I have (which came out in 1900) there’s a Forward in which it’s attributed to Her Highness Princess Henry of Pless. This Forward also describes Garden as a “gem among the world’s prose poems.” I agree with the gem part, but I didn’t find the language to be poetic. So what is the book – a diary, a memoir, a novel, a journal of musings, an idyll in which nature and solitude are the objects of desire? Actually, it can’t be confined to any category. It’s much like the flowers and plants and trees that, in their season of freedom, run rampant, but do it quietly, and are lovely. *

Friday, July 29, 2016

The Secret History – Donna Tartt
Binky Urban. I keep seeing her name in the Acknowledgments section of books by young authors. She’s an agent, a mover and shaker in the literary world (I can hear “Binky darling!” being called out across crowded rooms at a thousand New York parties). But here’s the thing: why didn’t she tell Donna Tartt that her novel was twice as long as it needed to be? Because it is, and after the halfway point I found myself laboring along in desultory fashion until I ground to a halt at page 350 (with over two hundred pages to go). I did read the ending (hysteria, culminating in a suicide) and the Epilogue (Purple Prose). The hysteria and Purple Prose were a surprise, because for the first half things were under control. I diagnosed Tartt as an obsessive-compulsive. She constructed History carefully; part of its length is due to how complete everything is (except the murder of the farmer during the Bacchanalian revel, which is left hazy due to its improbability). I’m okay with OCD writing as long as things don’t get stagnant. A lot of the credit for the book’s readability goes to the first person narrator; I was smoothly persuaded to accept the premise of an assemblage of oddball college geniuses studying Greek under the tutelage of the enigmatic Julian. A few minor glitches. For so careful as writer, there are gaps in logic (which I won’t go into). And the Edenesque world of privilege Tartt creates was marred by the occasional intrusion of Bret Easton Ellis’s brand of ennui (he was her classmate at Bennington and she dedicated the book to him). Part One ends with the murder that was foretold in the Prologue; the scene is done with admirable restraint, so I entered Part Two in a good frame of mind. It’s here that Binky should have intervened: “Donna, girl, is all this necessary? I mean the investigation, the tactics to avoid detection. It goes on and on, and it’s really not that interesting. We just need to know what effects their deed has on the principals. Maybe you could close with a chance meeting between Richard and Camilla years later?” Instead I think Tartt was encouraged to go on and on (maybe Binky saw a blockbuster as more marketable). It also seems as if, in true OCD fashion, Tartt couldn’t let go of characters she had become enraptured with. Indiscriminate encouragement and rapture are a bad combo, especially for a young writer, and would account for the book’s nosedive in the second half. And so it is that yet another meteor in the literary firmament fizzles out in the aboveground backyard pool. In closing, I want to thank Binky Urban for making this review possible.

The House of Mirth – Edith Wharton
For much of this book I didn’t like or sympathize with Lily Bart. Wharton constantly lavishes praise on her social skills, composure and, most of all, her beauty. In a two page stretch she’s described as “tall and noble” and having a “slender majesty.” The words “noble” and “majesty” don’t seem appropriate for a woman who is pursuing marriage to a man she has absolutely no feelings for simply because his wealth can enable her to live in the gilded world she’s accustomed to. It’s a world in which possessions and parties and knowing the right people are what counts; morally, ethically and intellectually it’s a wasteland. Selden tries to convince Lily that there’s a more worthwhile way of life. Lily perceives that he’s right, but that doesn’t sway her. Lily and Selden could be in love; but, for Lily, he doesn’t have money; and, in Selden’s case, he’s always ready to retreat from a true commitment. The convoluted prose in which the story is told shows the pernicious influence of Henry James. Still, it was an active book, with much social maneuvering, and it held my attention. Then, near the end, an emotional sea change took place. Lily descends into the dinginess she had always feared: a boarding house, a job in a workroom making hats. And she can’t do that competently: “Since she was brought up to be ornamental, she could hardly blame herself for failing to serve any practical purpose; but her discovery put an end to her consoling sense of universal efficiency.” There’s a solution to her money woes, but it would involve blackmail; though the victim eminently deserves it, Lily can’t save herself by this means. She finally took shape for me: a flawed person, but not a bad or hurtful one. I felt the sympathy I had long withheld. Felt it fully. I was moved by the paragraphs in which she takes too much chloral; this perfectly-executed presentation of a state of mind is given to us with no convolutions. Just the straight truth of a woman who desires above all the oblivion offered by sleep. She welcomes the sense of subjugation the drug brings to her; before she yields to the warm abyss of unconsciousness she thinks, languidly, “Tomorrow would not be so difficult after all: she felt sure she would have the strength to meet it. She did not quite remember what she had been afraid to meet, but the uncertainty no longer troubled her.”

May Flavin – Myron Brinig
Up to the halfway point this had been a grounded, naturalistic novel about the lives of uneducated slum-dwellers. Then, abruptly, the plot introduces a sultry prostitute, a knife fight, etc. What had been realistic became garishly ludicrous. Maybe Brinig decided that the joys and travails of his characters were lacking in interest and that he needed to spice things up. But there’s drama to be found in any life; what’s needed is an author with the imagination and empathy to see the uniqueness and importance of so-called “common” people. Brinig committed the cardinal sin in fiction: he resorted to melodrama. I quit reading when the knives came out, though I did peek at the ending; and, sure enough, two of May and Mike’s children become world-famous movie stars. Yeah, right, and I’m the Queen of Sheba.

Saturday, July 9, 2016

Indignation – Philip Roth
About a quarter of the way through this novel the narrator makes the following statement: “And even dead, as I am and have been for I don’t know how long, I try to reconstruct the mores that reigned over that campus and to recapitulate the troubled efforts to elude those mores that fostered the series of mishaps ending in my death at the age of nineteen.” A few things to note: Is the voice right? Would a boy talk in such a formal, stilted way? As for his declaration, “mores” are not Marcus’s problem. His troubled efforts are directed at coping with people whose actions are hurtful and inexplicable. When he calls out, “If only my father, if only Flusser, if only Elwyn, if only Olivia – !” he’s identifying his real dilemma. It’s a complex one that Roth never addresses; he simply lets characters do their damage and then disposes of them. This seemed especially evasive in the case of Olivia. Instead of dealing with the emotional quandary this appealing and deeply disturbed young woman presents for Marcus, Roth gets rid of Olivia by shipping her off to a mental hospital. What Roth does turn his attention to are unlikely and somewhat ridiculous events (an epic panty raid, etc.). As for those “mores that reigned over that campus,” Marcus chose to go to a conservative, religious college (where he’s one of a handful of Jews), so why would he go into a long rant in the dean’s office espousing his atheistic beliefs? Actually, he wouldn’t; his words come “almost verbatim” from a Bertrand Russell lecture entitled “Why I Am Not a Christian.” Roth acknowledges this source; but a question arises: why would he use his main character as a mere mouthpiece? In the short final chapter, which is told in the third person, we learn that Marcus was expelled from Winesburg College and was drafted; he winds up on Massacre Mountain in Korea, wounded beyond recovery; to put him out of his physical suffering he’s given a heavy dose of morphine; the only thing functioning is his mind, and what we’ve been reading are his last thoughts (as if his last thoughts would be “to reconstruct” and “to recapitulate”). Fact is, by steadily reducing Marcus to a shadow of what he had once been, Roth had killed him off before the Chinese forces do the job. In the closing two page “Historical Note” we learn that in the seventies Winesburg was forced by student protests to change course: “ . . . the chapel requirement was abolished along with virtually all the strictures and parietal rules regulating student conduct . . .” Is this a summing up of Marcus’s story? Was the indignation all about the unfair conservative mores of a Midwestern college? What a copout.

The Humbling – Philip Roth
What gets humbled is Philip Roth. The novel begins with a once-great stage actor, now in his sixties, agonizing over his inability to perform. He becomes suicidal, but he can’t pull the trigger; he checks himself into a mental hospital; there he meets a woman who asks him to kill her husband; he declines. In the second chapter (called “The Transformation”) Pegeen enters his life. Axler had been friends with her parents, and had known her from infancy. He also knew that since age twenty-three she had lived as a lesbian. When her previous lover had decided to undergo a sex change – something which Pegeen considered to be a betrayal – she had left her and taken a job at the university near where Axler lives. There she carried on – and abruptly terminated – an affair with the female dean, who goes bonkers over this. (Don’t we have a lot of people acting oddly?) Anyway, Axler and Pegeen become lovers, and he’s transformed into a happy man. But he has misgivings, mainly about their twenty-five year age difference; his worries are reinforced when Pegeen gives him a verbatim account (in a seven page long paragraph) of a conversation she has with her mother; regarding her affair with Axler she says, “I’ve been very surprised by how much I’ve enjoyed it. But I couldn’t yet declare it’s definitely the permutation I will always want.” (Is this how real people talk?) Up to this point the novel was a bit staid, so I wasn’t prepared when, on the first page of the last chapter (“The Final Act”), Roth abruptly plunged me knee deep in kinky sex. It was both explicit and clinical, a distasteful combination, but I kept reading so that I could witness a famous author flushing himself down the toilet. He achieves this when describing, in ugh-inducing detail, a threesome (“Your turn. Defile her,”orders Pegeen). As things turn out, Pegeen decides it’s over with Axler; she takes her bag of sex toys and moves on to her next permutation (probably with the defiled woman). Axler is again in suicidal despair over the loss of this gem (he wanted her to be the mother of his child). Since everybody in this novel is a robot, I could care less. Roth resurrects the woman in the mental hospital (I knew she had to be in the story for some reason); he learns that she had killed her husband with two shotgun blasts, and in this act Axler finds inspiration: “If she can do that, I can do this.” Still, he hesitates, shotgun in hand, until he gets a great idea: he can “pretend he was committing suicide in a play.” Chekhov, it is, The Seagull. And he brings it off, his final act. Thankfully, this demeaning book wasn’t Roth’s final act – there would be one more before he called it quits.

See Philip Roth's Final Quartet for more.

Wednesday, June 29, 2016

Little House on the Prairie – Laura Ingalls Wilder
The author writes about her childhood – the experiences and feelings of her six-year-old self – with a simplicity that gives this book its appeal. The story she has to tell is one of a pioneer family’s life. What comes across forcefully is the resourcefulness needed to survive. Pa can build a house from scratch, dig a well, shoot game, plant a crop. When a prairie fire comes sweeping toward them, he knows exactly what he and Ma must do to save themselves. On those occasions when he goes to Independence for supplies, or is late to come home, apprehension sets in; Pa is the linchpin of the family. Ma is the glue; she does her full share of work, but she also imposes orderliness; despite the fact that they have a dirt floor, the house must be clean and tidy, and Laura and her older sister must be well-mannered young ladies. These people are strong in spirit, resilient, upbeat; pioneers must be or they would crumble in the face of the many hardships and dangers they encounter. In one chapter a huge pack of wolves surrounds the house. The entire Wilder family is felled by what they call “fever ’n’ ague” (it’s actually malaria). A neighbor tends to them; though separated by miles, people come to the aid of each other when needed. As for Indians, they’re not seen in today’s politically correct terms; Pa believes that, since he developed the land into a farm, it should be his. The Indians are hostile, sometimes threatening, though never violent. In the end the government orders the settlers off the land, so the Wilder family pack their wagon and leave all they worked so hard to make. They move on to their next home, and many young readers followed. Why the huge success of this series? The overriding feeling this book imparts is one of warmth, and this warmth comes from love. The Wilders loved one another, and therefore Laura’s childhood was idyllic.

One Flew over the Cuckoo’s Nest – Ken Kesey
Initially I was impressed by this novel, especially when I learned that the author was in his mid-twenties when he wrote it. Kesey’s two antagonists are archetypes: McMurphy is the unconditioned, untamed male, Nurse Ratched the emasculating female; in the confines of a mental hospital they become engaged in a deadly battle of wills. The narrator is a broom-wielding Indian inmate who relates what he witnesses and also conveys his vision of a world controlled by an inhuman Combine. But when I passed the halfway point an array of nagging problems set in, mostly involving the Chief (McMurphy’s name for the narrator). The accumulation of things he sees and hears becomes unlikely (he’s everywhere). Then he begins to enter the minds of other characters; the switch to third-person omniscient is jarring. The Chief becomes a participator in events, but he was more interesting when he was a shadowy observer. Also, I felt that Kesey inspiration and drive had petered out, and he was groping around for ways to move his story forward; what he comes up with too often are juvenile hijinks. Would the fishing trip, which is to be chaperoned by “two sweet old aunts,” be allowed by the hospital staff, especially when one of the aunts shows up and is young, pretty and scantily clothed? A problem for the novel is that the movie version was better. Being more compact, it eliminated most of the meandering, and the Chief doesn’t carry the burden of narrator. As I read the final pages I realized that I was seeing the closing scenes from the film, and it was those remembered scenes that moved me. Though one thing the book did at the end that the movie didn’t. When the lobotomized McMurphy is returned to the ward – now a vegetable which Nurse Ratched puts on display – the men dismiss him as a fake. “Aaah, what’s the old bitch tryin’ to pull over on us anyhow, for crap sakes. That ain’t him.” In this statement Kesey returns to his original theme: men need the untamed McMurphys to roam the world.

The Wine of Solitude – Irene Nemirovsky (French)
In Helene’s highly dysfunctional family her mother is a selfish, amoral beauty who treats her daughter with aggressive disdain and her father is an amiable absentee, compelled to go out gambling nightly. At age twelve cynical, world-weary Helene wants her father’s love and harbors a hatred for her mother; at age twenty-one cynical, world-weary Helene wants her father’s love and harbors a hatred for her mother (and gloatingly watches the woman’s beauty erode as her own grows). She decides to get revenge by stealing the affections of her mother’s layabout lover. She succeeds, though she never allows him more than kisses; he departs in disgust (can’t blame him). Nemirovsky severely exaggerates emotions while failing to develop the personalities who are feeling those emotions; as a result her characters turn into caricatures striking dramatic poses (the father’s deathbed scene was so overwrought that it became silly). And I started to have practical questions about our heroine. Why, as a grown woman, doesn’t she have a life outside her family? Why hasn’t she developed intellectually or morally? Can’t she do something more constructive with her days than plot? The author obviously recognized this flaw, so in the ending she lets Helene soar, free as the wind: “ ‘I’m not afraid of life,’ she thought. ‘The past has given me the first experiences of the world. They have been exceptionally difficult, but they have forged my courage and my pride. And that immutable treasure is mine, and belongs to me. I may be alone, but my solitude is powerful and intoxicating.’ ” Right, sure. A novel like this has a perverse appeal: its faults are entertaining (“forged my courage” – that kind of thing). And Nemirovsky can write well; the atmospheres of the various places the Karol family flee to in the wake of the Russian Revolution (Kiev, St Petersburg, Finland, Paris) are evoked nicely (though, through Helene’s eyes, all except Finland are grim and joyless). In the beginning I found her negativity to be bracing; as a thirteen-year-old she looks at a picture of a happy family in her textbook and thinks, “Good Lord! What imbeciles . . .” The picture may depict a lie, but the author of this book doesn’t come up with any truths either.

Thursday, May 26, 2016

The Wager – Machado de Assis (Portuguese)
The novel takes the form of a journal kept by Aires, a sixty-three-year-old widower living in Rio de Janeiro. The wager is whether a young widow will marry again. (She does.) I’m giving away the outcome because it doesn’t matter. With the exception of Aires, no character is developed and the plot has no tension. This is a mood piece by a sixty-eight-year-old author who died months after the book was published. Though thoughts of death are pervasive, the mood isn’t dark. Aires/Assis accepts with calm resignation how life works, and he’s only mildly moved by anything, including his own demise. He still retains an interest in human nature and he can still find people to be a source of humor. But the absence of passion gives the novel a muted quality. To Aires the two young people who marry “have the right to live and to love, and to leave the dead and the aged behind with no regrets.” Fidelia must leave the memories of her dead husband behind, and both she and Tristao must leave their aged foster parents behind. There is no tragedy in this.

A Place in Time – Wendell Berry
These are crafted stories, in the sense that a master carpenter can make joints fit flush. I’m not referring just to the prose. Crafting in fiction is about how characters and situations are developed, and how the ending is handled. In “The Requirement” a man is dying; we go over Big’s life, as seen from the memories of a friend. We get to know Big. At the end he asks, from his bed, for the narrator to get his revolver from the closet. It’s what happens after that request that shows Berry’s gift; the ending is unexpected, perfectly right, and moving. In this story, as in many others, Berry imparts a philosophy about life and values. Mostly it blends in with the fabric of the narrative, but at times the philosophical and contemplative aspects are too overt (and belong, properly, in essays). What does consistently work is Berry’s waggish sense of humor. A woman recalls how she and her husband-to-be woke up a preacher to perform the marriage ceremony: “When he asked Grover to promise all those things ‘to death,’ Grover said, ‘Would you go over that a little slower?’ ” The pace throughout this collection is leisurely, which is appropriate for stories that dwell in the past, before mechanical efficiency sped everything up. I found it pleasurable to go back to a simpler time, when work was physically difficult but the fruits of one’s labor were clear to see. Also, people had an intimate connection with nature and animals and tools. Despite all the virtues to be found in this book – rare ones – I felt I was missing a lot. The setting is a small farming community on the banks of the Kentucky River. Kinship is important, but I couldn’t keep the relationships straight. Characters appear in one story, then reappear in another, and I couldn’t remember them as they had been. These are interconnected stories, but I often didn’t get the connections. What I intend to do is go back to the first novel in the series. Because I want to spend more time with the people of Port William.

The Enchanted April – Elizabeth von Arnim
A woman lunching in her London club reads an ad in The Times addressed “To Those who Appreciate Wisteria and Sunshine.” An Italian castle is to be let for the month of April. Mrs. Wilkins (Lottie) notices another woman staring at the same page. Eventually the two – strangers, both unhappily married and dissatisfied with their lives – decide to take the plunge. To defray expenses, they recruit an elderly widow, cranky and stuck in the past, and a young woman who is so gorgeous that men are mesmerized by her. (Caroline yearns to get away from all the “grabbers” in the world.) In Italy the four women are immersed in the stunning natural beauty. For Lottie it’s transforming: she sees life in an altogether different light (a rose-colored one), and the force of her feelings affects the others. Well into this novel I was caught up by an invigorating sense of escapism. But when men (the two husbands and the owner of the castle) enter the picture, reality set in. At least it did for me; the author tries to keep up the fantasy that Lottie Love can induce a radical change in everybody. I couldn’t accept that Mr. Wilkins will cease to be a tyrant, nor that Caroline would warm up to a grabber like Mr. Briggs. Unlikely complications proliferate, and the gentle humor is replaced by slapstick. What had been quietly uplifting becomes doggedly instructive; to assert the primacy of Love makes it seem simplistic and sappy. When you like a book, then it falls apart, one feels betrayed. So I was in a bad mood when I read the introduction by Cathleen Schine. She raises the possibility that some characters are based on real people from the author’s life: “The Enchanted April’s sweetly ardent Mr. Biggs, owner of the castello, is, in his search for a mothering sort of love, based on Frere.” For one thing, the man’s name is Briggs, and he’s so smitten with young Caroline that he’s hardly able to function; he’s certainly not after any mothering.

Friday, May 13, 2016

My Struggle: Book One – Karl Ove Knausgaard (Norwegian)
This is the first of six autobiographical novels. The word “addictive” applies. For over four hundred pages I was absorbed in a narrative that, for the most part, consists of ordinary daily events (the parts where the author goes into deep thinking mode were less engaging). The prose is unadorned and straightforward, the dialogue naturalistic, and the secondary characters strong. Most important, I felt that a sincere effort was being made to tell the truth; Karl presents himself to the reader, warts and all. The main focus in this volume is his relationship with his father. As a boy he senses that the man disapproves of him, so he becomes fearful of any contact. As an adult he watches from a distance as his father’s life deteriorates. After his death (the result of a long bout of suicidal drinking) Karl and his brother clean a house that has descended, over the years, into a disgusting state; that a man could sink so low is appalling. Karl has no answers as to what tormented his father; regarding his own struggles, he’s aware of personal inadequacies but seems unwilling to take steps to resolve them. This isn’t a memoir; it is, as advertised, a novel, and it attains the stature of literature in an unusual way. By an accumulation of events, some showing Knausgaard as a boy and some as an adult, we live segments of a man’s life and feel what he feels. But do I want to read more? Not soon; maybe later I’ll pick up the second volume. At this point, I need a break from being Karl Ove.

Norwood – Charles Portis
Dear Mr. Portis. This is the only time I’ve ever written an author. I don’t read many books. Most are long and complicated and I don’t care about the people. They’re not like me. But your book was short and simple to read, and I knew Norwood. He was a good old boy like me. He has some wild adventures and it was fun going along with him. I’ve never been twenty miles from where I was born and I never met a midget. I wonder if that midget will send him his fifty dollars. I doubt it, not the way he hightailed it after he got the money. Will Norwood marry Rita Lee and will they be happy? I’d say yes, because neither expects a whole lot out of life. And both are goodnatured. Norwood thinks he can play the guitar and sing, but I was glad you didn’t have him wind up on the Louisiana Hayride and be a big hit. Because that kind of stuff doesn’t happen in real life. It’s just stuff we dream about happening. I saw in the back of the book that you wrote this other book called True Grit. Now I seen that as a movie, the one starring John Wayne. I expect you got paid plenty for that. So I was wondering, could you send me $50? It’s for a good cause, to bail Granny out of jail. She’s in for battery on a police officer, but there’s two sides to what happened that night. Anyway, the hoosgow ain’t no place for a 67 year old lady. I think from your book that you got a good heart. I promise I’ll pay you back soon as I get my disability check. I’m not like that midget. Just send the money to me at the Tickfaw, Louisiana post office, general delivery. I get all my mail there. Thanks. And keep writing them good books.

The Lieutenant – Andre Dubus
This is a military novel, but the battles fought are over moral choices. Lieutenant Dan Tierney is in command of a Marine contingent aboard an aircraft carrier. Trouble arises among his men; it emerges, gradually, that some of the soldiers are engaging in homosexual bullying. Ted Freeman is their main victim; the role of victim is one he has endured all his life; it was out of a need to gain self-esteem that he joined the Marines. Lieutenant Tierney, though only twenty-five, believes fervently in the old school values of the Corps (he even carries a swagger stick). He takes action to end what’s going on – which he considers repugnant and shameful – while trying to keep it hidden from his naval superiors; his decisions are irresolute and make matters worse. There’s a saying that’s relevant: “The career of a Marine officer is living the lie and making the lie come true.” Tierney lives the lie – that the Marine Corp is an honorable institution – but he cannot make it come true. In a prose as compact as a bullet Dubus relates a series of events that will ultimately crush Freeman. In trying to help the boy Tierney locks horns with the ship’s captain, and as a result his career is derailed from what he believes is his true calling – to lead men in combat. Tierney’s emotional makeup is an amalgam of passion and stoicism. When he gets a Dear John letter from the woman he loves and needs (she’s the daughter of a Marine Colonel and she doesn’t want to live the life of a Marine wife), he writes her, in block letters: “AS THE SAYING GOES, IF THE MARINE CORPS WANTED ME TO HAVE A WIFE THEY WOULD HAVE ISSUED ME ONE.” Andre Dubus was a Marine for six years; he was thirty-one when this novel (his only one) was published. In 1967 the taboo nature of the subject matter – homosexuality in the military – may have contributed to its lack of recognition. The 1986 edition I have was put out by The Green Street Press; it’s beautifully done, obviously an act of respect. The novel deserves respect. *