Showing posts with label Ross MacDonald. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Ross MacDonald. Show all posts

Tuesday, December 29, 2020

Meanwhile There Are Letters – Eudora Welty and Ross MacDonald
This decade long correspondence began when Welty was sixty-one and Kenneth Millar (Ross MacDonald was his pseudonym) was fifty-five; it ended when Millar lapsed into dementia. It was an unlikely pairing: Welty was a Southern regional writer, very much in the literary sphere, and Millar was a crime novelist. But these two found a like soul in the other. So much so that this collection reads like a love fest (after only a few letters the word “love” appears in the closings, and is never thereafter absent). Here’s a sample of the tone from Welty: “. . . our spirits have traveled very near to each other and I believe sustained each other – This will go on, dear Ken – Our friendship blesses my life and I wish life could be longer for it.” Millar could be equally gushy. You soon know what to expect: praise of each other’s writing (way over-the-top, in my estimation), concern for the other’s health and happiness, and total agreement on all matters. A constant flow of this gets monotonous. The co-editors do some campaigning for a romantic attachment, but I didn’t buy into that (Welty never married; Millar’s wife of many years was a writer of popular mysteries). The two met only a few times, briefly, and the letters divulge very little of a personal nature. The editors add supplementary notes that depict grave difficulties in the Millar marriage (he never complains about Margaret to Welty). According to eyewitnesses (including Welty) when Ken’s Alzheimer’s incapacitated him, Margaret was uncaring and abusive. I think there’s a mystery in the dynamics of that marriage, and I’d like to know the wife’s version. Last note (which adds to the mystery). Welty kept all of Ken’s letters, but there were no copies of her letters to him – until a rare book dealer who had purchased Ken’s library and papers found them in the pool house of the Millar home (by then Margaret was deceased). Apparently Ken had hidden them there. . . .

Beast in View – Margaret Millar
Millar employs a pink herring, which is that Helen Clarvoe is being victimized by Evelyn Merrick, an old school friend. But Helen is obviously bonkers, and I (and probably every other reader) knew after the first chapter that she was suffering from a repression so deep that it manifested itself in a split personality. At the end, when this is revealed, the only one surprised is Helen. Despite there being no mystery to this mystery novel, it’s pervaded by a maliciousness that gives it an unsettling strength. As Evelyn, Helen engages in all manner of destructive activities. One is an offstage murder, but most of her attacks come via phone calls, and her main targets are her mother and brother, both of whom she despises. The mother is Millar’s strongest portrayal, but also notable is the homosexual brother (the abhorrence toward homosexuality is an interesting circa 1955 attitude). The weakest character is the fifty-something lawyer who attempts to unravel the “mystery.” When he expresses feelings of love for Helen it’s ludicrous; there’s not a scintilla of a reason provided for such an emotion to arise. Helen’s plight didn’t elicit any feelings of pity in me. Some people are so far gone that they cease to be human. They’re beasts.

When the Going Was Good - Evelyn Waugh
In his Introduction Waugh notes that “The following pages comprise all that I wish to preserve of the four travel books that I wrote between the years 1929 and 1935.” The last excerpt was written when he was thirty-two and employed as a war correspondent in Abyssinia (later renamed Ethiopia); the other four were done when he was in his mid to late twenties. This going off to remote and backward lands was a young man’s undertaking; as I read about the hardships Waugh endured I wondered what it was like when the going was bad. The impression that emerges on almost every page is one of chaos and squalor. Filthy accommodations, horrendous food, hordes of aggravating (or deadly) insects – and then there were the people with whom he was constantly struggling to accomplish any goal he had in mind. As I read the first four excerpts, I found that each page was interesting (and often amusing) but there was no context or continuity in experiences that could involve me, and the unflappable Waugh remained emotionally inaccessible. The final section, devoted to the war that was about to break out with Italy, had more of a sustained characterization and plot, but I found it to be less interesting (and the prose, which had been elegant, dropped down a notch). I think Waugh was tired of traveling. In the case of the previous books, he needed the money they brought in (the Brits love their travel books), but that was no longer true after Vile Bodies came out in 1930. One plus resulting from these exploits was that he used them in two of his novels: Black Mischief takes place in Africa, and the conclusion of A Handful of Dust in the Brazilian jungle. One could categorize the inexplicable people he encounters in Going as savages; but in his novels set entirely in England the savages are just sophisticated ones, and they’ll eat you alive.

Dear Theo – Vincent Van Gogh (letters edited by Irving and Jean Stone)
Irving Stone had written a fictionalized account of the life of Van Gogh – Lust for Life – which had been a best seller. Three years later he published this selection of letters that Van Gogh wrote to his brother. The word “selection” is important. In his Preface Stone recounts how he and his wife pruned down the 1670 pages of letters he had at his disposal to the 572 pages that make up this volume. The result of that pruning is far from a complete and accurate picture of Vincent, nor of his relationship with Theo. If you want to learn more about that issue, you can click on my essay, “Reading Other People’s Mail.” In this review I’ll address what Stone chose to give us, for what he selected was, no doubt, truly the words Vincent wrote – how could he have altered that? – so they do show a side to the man. I was surprised by what a very good writer Van Gogh was; he was able to express his emotions both forcefully and with restraint (an approach employed by the best novelists). He was quite intelligent and was a reader – Zola, Hugo, Dickens, etc. When painting became his consuming passion, it was a learn-as-you-go proposition; he could view his work critically, and he strived to get better; even at the end of his life he considered only a small number of his canvasses to be successes. He was opinionated as to what art should concern itself with; for him it was nature, humble subjects, and, above all, the transference of feeling. The majority of words in this book have to do with the technical side of painting, such as the treatment of colors. Van Gogh led a troubled existence, but he found deep pleasure in his love of natural beauty and in the act of creating art. Though these letters evoke sadness, they also have a radiance about them. This may have been what Stone was striving for.

Friday, February 21, 2020

Two-Part Invention - Madeleine L’Engle
The first third of the book – which I found to be pleasant reading – deals with L’Engle’s life as a young woman. The section ends with her marriage to Hugh when she’s twenty-seven. I had expected what follows to be the story of their forty years together, but instead I got a grueling account of a seventy-year-old man being ground to an empty shell by cancer. Throughout the ordeal L’Engle often questions God, but her conclusion is always the same: “the purpose of a universe created by a loving Maker is to be trusted.” I wondered if Hugh, who was doing the suffering, would agree about a loving God. But he’s absent as a distinct personality. Even in their courting days L’Engle never makes him come alive. As a novelist she should be able to accomplish this, but we get more of what he does than what he is. For most of this book he’s just a body undergoing one medical procedure after another (including something called “platinum chemotherapy,” which uses a scorched earth policy but doesn’t do anything beneficial). I suppose we all must find ways to make it through ordeals. Besides the support of loving friends and family, L’Engle finds sustenance in her spiritual way of thinking. People who share her outlook may find the book uplifting. But I responded by asking “Where’s the anger, the cynicism? When does one give up on God and the gods of medical science and simply allow a merciful death?” I quit reading before I got to the inevitable ending.

Mutiny on the Bounty - Charles Nordhoff and James Norman Hall
Finally I got to this classic, and though I enjoyed it, I enjoyed some parts more than others. The episodes in Tahiti (in which the fictional narrator, Roger Byam, is the principal character) were too idyllic, and as a result superficial and simplistic. The authors were at their best when conveying the harsh and often brutal life of a sailor in the British navy in the late eighteenth century. It was the captain – the absolute ruler of the ship – who determined the degree of harshness and brutality. Captain Bligh comes across as a paranoid bully. He was competent and even worthy of respect as a seaman, but he alienated the men in ways that ranged from verbal abuse to an over-reliance on physical punishment. In a harrowing opening scene a man is flogged until the flesh of his back is hanging in tattered strips, revealing the bare bones. He dies before receiving the full punishment that naval law had decreed, so another two dozen strokes of the cat-o-nine-tails is applied to his corpse. This barbaric act had not been ordered by Bligh, but he watches it “as a man might watch a play indifferently performed.” Captains generally considered the unrelenting law of the sea to be a necessity. Voyages were long and arduous, and the common sailor was often of disreputable character; mutiny was always a possibility. Fletcher Christian and Captain Bligh, who play major roles in the three movie adaptations of Mutiny, are peripheral characters in the book. They will be featured in subsequent novels by Nordhoff and Hall (who obviously saw that they had struck a gold mine). Men Against the Sea follows Bligh after he’s put in an open launch overloaded with men; he somehow makes a 3600 mile voyage to the island of Timor. Pitcairn’s Island deals with what happened to Fletcher Christian. All the books are based on fact, though in the case of the third the material is scanty and dubious. I’m not interested enough in naval adventures to read the spin-offs. But the author’s considerable achievement in Mutiny was to take the raw material of events that actually happened and transform them into highly readable historical fiction.

The Galton Case - Ross MacDonald
On the left column of this blog is a list of the “most meaningful” books I’ve read, and Ross MacDonald’s Lew Archer novels are included. But what’s meaningful at one stage of your life may not hold up in another. I almost never reread a book on that list. Why subject it to reappraisal? If it meant something to me once (even if for the wrong reasons), I should respect that response. The circumstances in which I devoured one after another of MacDonald’s books – I was in my twenties – were unique: I needed escapism, and he fulfilled that need. Now, five decades later, I got the Library of America edition of his “Crime Novels of the Fifties” because I wanted to read the Chronology section. After completing that I took a look at the first chapter of Galton and thought it was near perfect writing. Characters emerged with a quick efficiency, the dialogue was smart and sharp. So I continued. I knew at the outset that my younger self had found his plots too complex to unravel, but back then I just went with the flow, waiting for Archer to fit the puzzle pieces together. Today I’m not so generous toward intentional concealment. Why can’t writers of mysteries let the reader close the net? Often they arrange it so that a person one suspects the least in the beginning turns out to be the guilty party. As the revelations pile up at the conclusion of Galton, the result is a shambles. Some of the virtues of that wonderful first chapter (especially the delineation of character) are present throughout. And there was another aspect I had originally liked and still do: the crime committed in the beginning has its roots in a violent act that took place in the past. This amounts to a theme that must have reflected something in the author’s psyche. Of the eighteen novels featuring Archer, I don’t think I read more than seven during my spree. Maybe Galton wasn’t one of them (it struck no chord of recognition, and Archer seemed more of a tough guy than I recalled). Maybe I read the later novels, and maybe they were better. Or maybe Thomas Wolfe has the last word: “You can’t go home again.” Though “The Lew Archer novels” will remain on my list of most meaningful books, I won’t be revisiting any more of them.